All Trek Route of Uttarakhand in pdf

Dilliwala

If it's only to give an idea of trek-destinations, IM does a much better job.

First map of the state - Rampura? I've driven through that area often enough, never found Rampura. Maybe that's becos it's been called RUDRAPUR a long time! Serves them right for relying on Expedia, who relied on the same outdated source as LP used to.

The footnote below:
"Tibet is separated from Uttaranchal by a series of 17 high passes to the north of the State"
I'm really glad to know that, since I'm using the report for info purposes now to know where I can travel next. I've always been told that the two are separated by an entire high mountain range! Glad that there are gaps in between the passes, so I won't have to bother climbing up!
Of course if they had said "connected by 17 passes...."

"Kotdwar....Garhwal.......Hill town"
Er, WHAAAT??

"Badrinath
Location....Near Rudraprayag..
Area....Bhuyandar Valley"
Cough, cough, hack, hack, arre pani paaaniii...
I think I'd better stop, before I asphyxiate!


Raghu,
I see, however, that we can no longer blame them for plagiarism, as they have given a very good justification. On page 25:
"For this study, the known treks in Uttaranchal were inventoried based on an intensive literature search."

So that's what it's called nowadays! The next time I lift something from the web, I know what I'll call it - the result of an intensive literature search.
(Hey, search engines, to give their results in 0.0017 seconds, have to work intensively!)

nyraghu

The short answer to your question is that any public document is fair game for comment, on quality and otherwise. Here is my supplement to the long answer provided by Dilliwala.

I assume "quality" includes, apart from issues like proper attribution to sources of information, accuracy of information. Inaccurate information can lead to somewhat weird ideas about "where else you can go." For instance, the Valley of Flowers and Roopkund are both marked in the report as "Grade II Hard" treks. Someone who has trekked only to the VoF, and has no experience of difficult trekking, can end up with the wrong idea that Roopkund and VoF are of the same difficulty, and that he should go there next. It is not something I would recommend.

Further, although there is obviously some leeway in the spelling of place names, conjoining Ronti and Nanda Devi into "Runti Nanda Devi" and calling Lata Kharak "Lata Kharan" can, perhaps, aggravate the ideas one can get from the report. Travelling in the mountains can be a perilous venture, and I think it is irresponsible to provide wrong information about the subject.

Small errors? Apart from the above, Dilliwala has produced a few bizzare examples of the rampant mistakes in the report. And who's going to take up the odious task of "clarifying" these numerous nuggets of misinformation in the document? Needless to say, the consultants have pocketed their INRs and are not going to bother about the report.

Indeed, sir. YMMV.

Hilarious stuff, Dilliwala! I enjoyed reading your posting.

Reminds one of Tom Lehrer's song, `Lobachevsky:'

Raghu.

__________________
colorless green ideas sleep furiously

karnail

One thing that I can still say that they have opened a new route for me.
AND I agree that public documents should be very responsible and authentic, I was certainly looking at my purpose only. Is any such study available for Himachal also.

__________________
http://karnail.blogspot.com/