- 1556 - 
Only the Barren Land category of Strip Mines, Quarries, and Gravel 
Pits was observed in either study area. Undoubtedly, other barren land 
did exist in Study Area II but it was too small in extent to be detected 
as a distinct entity on the radar imagery. Surface mining activity was 
readily apparent in the semi-arid and arid environments owing to its 
size, configuration, and contrast with the landscape. In the more humid 
sections of the Midwest and the Northeast such activity was more difficult 
to detect. Operations were smaller in area and often concealed by the 
surrounding trees, contributing to decreased visibility. 
Map Comparisons 
A final experiment was conducted in evaluating the effects of 
environmental modulation on radar land use mapping potential. Small 
scale thematic land use regions were delimited on the radar imagery and 
compared with two of the most widely known and current land use maps of 
the United States: 'Major Land Uses' (scale 1:7,500,000) by J. R. 
Anderson (1970) and "Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas 
of the United States" (scale 1:10,000,000) by M. E. Austin (1965). In 
Study Area I it became quickly apparent that relationships could be made 
only with difficulty. Although a few instances of compatibility were 
evident, for the most part a great deal of subjectivity was requisite to 
envision commonalities. This was a marked contrast to results obtained 
in Study Area II. 
In the Midwest and West a majority of land use regions created from 
radar imagery corresponded to regions created by other methods. Eight 
of the ten land use divisions compiled by Anderson and seven of eleven 
divisions compiled by Austin were found to be similar to land use divi- 
sions created from radar. Where differences occurred the radar land use 
regions appeared to be a finer distinction in land use than that derived 
by other methods. In these situations the radar regions could be termed 
sub-regions of more generalized land use or land resource regions. 
However, this similarity should not be considered an unqualified endorse- 
ment of radar imagery. Instead, it is suggested that the imagery could 
be used to revise existing thematic land use maps by delimiting borders 
and extent of land use activities. Radar imagery should be employed in 
combination with other data sources when they are available and/or 
desirable. 
The lack of consistency between study areas and diminished detect- 
ability can be attributed to environmental modulation. The fragmented 
and complex land use pattern extant in the Northeast, in combination with 
dissected topography, extensive forest vegetation, and a more homogeneous 
climate, produced an intricate but in many ways concealed landscape. 
The Northeast simply did not contain sharp, distinct breaks in land use 
practices compounded by the fact they were neither extensive in area nor 
great in number of types. Consequently, while a rather accurate, if 
somewhat general, delimitation of land use activity and pattern could 
be generated employing radar imagery as a data base it was not possible 
to replicate results obtained by more traditional methods; it was a 
distinct entity. 
Sumnary 
Th 
modulat 
imagery 
surpris 
time, b 
the mor 
Level I 
more de 
It is b 
cation 
differe 
conceal 
arterie 
Regrowt 
cultiva 
Midwest 
masked 
tion ce 
urban 2 
and urt 
the res 
areas. 
Study / 
to cons 
area Le 
Re 
above c 
use act 
in ider 
the ef{ 
vironme 
Predic: 
exerci: 
invente 
ol 
Highly 
is man: 
in Ven: 
Indian: 
the ne: 
compos: 
Wi 
it is | 
Simone 
config 
ripari: 
of agr 
field : 
period