Printed Maps for Big Sur Hikers
Updated February 10, 2020
This website provides single-page-printable Trailmap sections for users to print - but hiking a large area can require several sections and often hikers want a single large-scale
map covering the entire region.
So I'll describe here the commercially-available printed maps for the Big Sur area.
(But do note that all these maps have a larger scale, i.e. show less detail, than the 48000:1 scale of this website's printed maps.)
Focusing on maps for hikers, and in particular those with topographic information (contour lines), the choices are (newest first):
• Green Trails Maps: #1256S "Big Sur / Ventana Wilderness" (2017) Scale=63360:1
currently available locally in Big Sur at Big Sur Station
REI Marina does not
stock them (I couldn't get a reason why)
Green Trails Maps store
• Wilderness Press: "Big Sur and Ventana Wilderness" (2014) Scale=64653:1
2020 Update: new version to be released ~April 2020
available at many local stores, such as REI Marina.
Amazon - 2014 version
Amazon - pre-order 2020 version
(Wilderness Press map store is sold out of 2014 version, 2020 version not yet available)
• National Geographic: Trails Illustrated #814 "Big Sur / Ventana Wilderness" (2012) Scale=80000:1
available at many local stores, such REI Marina.
NatGeo map store
• U.S. Forest Service: "A Guide to the Ventana Wilderness & Silver Peak Wilderness" (2007) Scale=63300:1
available at USFS Monterey Ranger District Office
(406 S. Mildred Ave, King City)
USFS map store has closed - map now available at USGS Store (search for "Ventana")
Note: All of these printed maps are more accurate and complete than those in smartphone apps
which use USGS or OpenStreetMap maps.
Format-wise, different people have different preferences.
Personally I like the simpler Wilderness Press map format best,
considering it the most readable when out on the trail. Next
would be the Green Trails map, which provides additional information
yet is still clean and readable. Then the USFS map which
adds surface vegetation information, which might be useful but which
makes map reading more difficult. Last is the even more complex and
less readable National Geographic map.
But to me the most important
consideration is not format, but
accuracy and completeness. I want to be able to rely
upon my map! So accuracy and completeness for hikers guides my
Currently I consider the Wilderness Press map the least accurate and
least detailed, so it would be my last choice. Here I refer
to the "2014" map - that eliminated many of the now infamous errors found on the
"2005" map, but significant errors remain in camp and trail placement, omitting trails, and displaying non-existent trails.
(Most egregious is that no trails are shown in Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park!)
2020 version update: A new version should be released before May 2020.
I have worked with Wilderness Press to make their trails as accurate as those on the Green
Trails map, so this will be a vast improvement. It will also show the 2016
wildfire burn area, relevant since many of those trails have still not recovered.
When that map is actually available I will be changing this page to update my
rankings, since the accuracy of the new WP map equals that of the
Green Trails map (and is better than the NatGoe map).
The USFS map is
comparable in accuracy and completeness but adds vegetation cover information, so I consider it
slightly preferable - but it is not widely available.
The current National Geographic map is largely accurate for what it depicts, having
been pored over by VWA locals for errors (after the original
version was recalled due to egregious errors,
myself being the one who first notified National Geographic, who had relied solely on USFS data).
It does have two drawbacks. First, it's scale is relatively
large compared to the other maps, so can be more difficult to read
and use in the field if needing detailed information such as local
topography. (Though some might view this as a "feature", since the map
then covers a larger area and so includes trails in Pinnacles National Park
and on the Monterey peninsula.) Second is its exclusion
of almost all use trails, even though some "use trails" are more
utilized and in better condition than some "official" trails.
So my first choice is the Green Trails map. It
shows all significant local use trails and better detail than any
[Full disclosure: I
was involved in the creation of the Green Trails map and am credited
on that map - which of course is why it depicts so many locally-known use trails. But I
did not get any remuneration for that, nor do I for maps they sell.]
It's drawbacks? A personal quibble is its folded size, which is
wider than the usual map and does not fit in the hand easily.
Its biggest drawback is its limited availability and difficulty of obtaining one.
2017 version update: The new version added stipple covering the
"historic" wildfire area - but IMHO not useful since almost all the Ventana
wilderness has "historically" burned at one time or another but has since recovered.
More useful would have been showing only the recent 2016 wildfire burn area, from which
many places have still not recovered (and which the 2020 Wilderness Press map will
For the average Big Sur hiker, the
National Geographic map is "good enough" - its accuracy and
completeness for official trails is good and it is widely
available. If having more detailed topo information or a more readable map is
important to you, then consider the higher-resolution Wilderness
Press map, another widely available map - but do remember it has some significant
errors, so cannot be fully trusted. Hard-core Big Sur
hikers, though, the ones who want to go everywhere in the Big Sur
wilderness areas including places reached only by use trails, should
get a Green Trails map - it's the most complete and accurate of
any of these maps and is what I personally carry in my pack.