-and-white
ointed out,
. in tone,
istinct and a
on with diverse
e land use
ic relief and
nded to pose
s most intensive
ed analysis or
tation and
d hindered
eld borders in
egetation,
In the western,
is more frequent
e (range and
Consequently,
idden.
nt and distinct
| a regular
'ecise tone and
ly discerned.
minant. Less
| features
rns indicative
re character-
r in the
vith fewer
detectability
he K-band
idy Area II.
cultural targets
ral elements
> resolution
e nearly omni-
sraged into the
nent generaliza-
en land use
compare Figure 1
|1 environments
ale thematic
ate. For one
The modulation
] the capability
- 1551. —
of radar for even the most synoptic of land use mapping efforts.
However, before proceeding to a discussion of the visibility of specific
landscape elements a brief comment is in order comparing general
environmental characteristics.
General Environment Characteristics
An earlier study demonstrated that thematic land use regions could
be created with radar imagery using five general landscape components:
surface configuration; natural vegetation; field patterns and size;
settlement pattern; and transportation/communications network (Henderson,
1975). It is appropriate that these topics be addressed with reference
to environmental modulation between the two study areas. Surface con-
figuration, specifically topography and drainage network, was quite
diverse in Study Area II. Transition from humid to semi-arid climates
was manifest in stream frequency and complexity and readily visible on
the radar imagery. Changes in the general geomorphic characteristics,
i.e., relative relief and slope, were also apparent and corresponded to
changes in land use/land cover characteristics (Note Figures 3 and 4).
An examination of these features in Study Area I indicated their utility
is lessened as a result of environmental modulation. Several distinctive
landform and topographic features did exist within the study area but
aside from broad general types (e.g., mountains/hills versus valley/
lowland) changes were subtle and complex. An intricate pattern masked
by vegetation resulted in an absence of marked visible variation in the
physical landscape. This can be seen by comparing Figures 3 and 4 of
Study Area II with Figures 5 and 6 of Study Area I.
Natural vegetation in the form of forest, regrowth, and wetland also
supplied less correlative data in the Northeast. Forest was almost
consistently uniform as a mixture of hardwoods and softwoods and nearly
ubiquitous except where man had cleared the land (Figures 5 and 6). In
the West and Midwest trees stood out from the prairie and range in the
form of riparian location, shelter belts, field/road borders, and urban
landscaping and shade (Figure 1). Climatic change also reflected the
frequency and location of trees as land use clues. The small field
pattern and regrowth vegetation of the Northeast hindered interpretation
and presented a cluttered landscape (Figure 7). Visibility of wetlands
as identifiers was also markedly different between study areas. Almost
all wetlands in the Northeast were concealed by vegetation and abutted
by adjacent forest vegetation. Only where open water was visible was it
possible to confidently infer their presence. The environmental modula-
tion evident in Study Area II resulted in more positive identification.
Where forested, the configuration and location of wetlands was easily
detected. Non-forested wetlands appeared as light gray to white toned
areas, irregular in shape (Figure 3). Often, water was present, con-
firming identification. In summary, vegetation was an asset in classifying
and analyzing land use patterns in Study Area II, but its ubiquity in
Study Area I was a severe hinderence, not only in examining topographic
and agricultural patterns, but in detecting the following cultural components
of the landscape as well.
Fields in the Northeast were generally small in size (16 hectares or
less) and appeared in a nearly infinite arrangement of shapes and sizes
E E
