————e 
FIGURE 5.—A stereogram developed as a training aid 
to call detailed image characteristics to the attention 
of advanced trainees. Each subject indicated in the 
stereogram is identified and its characteristics are 
discussed in an accompanying text. 
many of the needs of multiple-use manage- 
ment. All this information is being assembled 
into a descriptive legend and is being in turn 
related to the symbolic mapping legend for 
each taxonomic unit. This legend is a perma- 
nent working document that presents the iden- 
tifying vegetational characteristics, the asso- 
ciated landforms and soils characteristics, the 
interpretations of range condition or plant suc- 
cessional relationships, the ecological potential, 
and the management implications that are 
unique to each legend unit. Thus, the descrip- 
tive legend will become essentially an opera- 
tional site guide and technical information 
source, with daily reference value to the users 
of the survey. The legend is also a document to 
which new information about each unit can be 
added as experience accumulates and as subse- 
quent studies monitor the response of the re- 
source to management. 
Because this procedure is fundamentally 
i 
FIGURE 6.—A reasonably efficient photo interpretation 
setup in operation. Binders contain the mapping 
legend, and the labeled and indexed stereograms are 
used as references in identifying difficult delinea- 
tions. The scanning board on which the photos rest 
permits the stereo model to be moved about under 
the field of view without disturbing their orientation. 
ecological and not utilitarian or focused on a 
single land use, it is truly a multiple use re- 
source analysis. It presents the inherent eco- 
logical characteristics of the landscapes exam- 
ined, not what the examiner thinks about the 
resource or is able to infer from his present 
level of knowledge and experience. We hold 
that these kinds of interpretations are more 
properly made after the resource maps are pre- 
pared and legend units assigned. By a critical 
analysis of the facts recorded in an ecological 
survey, either the examiner or a subsequent 
user can draw inferences as to ecological cli- 
max and current successional status of each de- 
lineation. If these decisions are reached sepa- 
rately from the basic mapping job, the conclu- 
sions can be graphically portrayed with a sys- 
tem of overlays or variously colored maps. 
Done this way, the decisions or interpretations 
of ecological phenomena can be updated and 
revised as knowledge and understanding grows 
without destroying the validity of the initial 
ecological survey. In cases of inadequate under- 
standing of the ecosystems, erroneous judg- 
ments as to climax, etc., are not obscured as 
“fact” in the graphic or legend presentation of 
the initial resource information. In a similar 
manner, the data can be examined and inter- 
preted for relevance to any land use or man- 
agement problem and presented in tabular 
summaries and/or by a system of overlays or 
colored maps. Thus, there is really no reason 
why these kinds of ecological resource analyses 
will not provide a useful working base for 
range management, timber management, wa- 
187 
