Dear Jim and All,
A vague recollection tells me that Trafalgar Square in the city of London
was surveyed as 100 m by 100 m so that it would have an area of one hectare.
I have no way of checking this. Perhaps one of our UK members could help.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
CAMS - Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist
- United States Metric Association
ASM - Accredited Speaking Member
- National Speakers Association of Australia
Member, International Federation for Professional Speakers
--
on 2002/01/09 02.01, James R. Frysinger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Harry Wyeth wrote:
> ....
>> One small problem for us is that a hectare is about 2.5 times as large and
>> therefore more difficult to get a feel for, I think. 100 m by 100 m is a
>> pretty large bit of ground, especially if it is hilly and covered by trees
>> or brush. With practice, one can estimate area in hectares as easily as
>> in old-time acres, and I can certainly do it on flat ground because I know
>> exactly what 100 m looks like (the length of a track straightaway at the
>> high school). I wonder if there is anything else that we all encounter
>> that is the size of a hectare, such as (possibly) a typical city block. I
>> can't think of one right away.
>
> We have a rather large block in Charleston, most of which is a park
> called Marion Square (after Francis Marion the Swamp Fox); this is
> Charleston's "town square", I suppose. That large block turns out to be
> very close to 4 ha and so that is the local gauge that I provide for
> people learning this unit.
>
> In hilly or densly forested country, especially, it might be easier to
> eyeball ares and then count them up, if one is visually estimating the
> area of a patch of land. One can more easily estimate 10 m by 10 m than
> 100 m by 100 m sometimes. The are (a) is not accepted for use with the
> SI, but 100 a = 1 ha.
>
> Jim
