A survey and evaluation of land resource classification systems in the United States Public Deposited

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/4b29b933d

Descriptions

Attribute NameValues
Creator
Abstract or Summary
  • The purpose of this thesis is to examine the methods and criteria developed for rating actual and potential agricultural land in the United States. It is motivated by the apparent increasing competition for quality space created by the expanding population, and by the belief that land rating and classification are basic to an ordering of the occupance of the nation. The thesis is a literature review and begins by examining the historical trends of land classification work in the United States. The several time periods when many land resource classifications were formulated are discussed. To provide the background necessary to regroup the land resource classification themes according to criteria, it was necessary to determine to what extent regroupings and analysis of land classification schemes had been done. Two informative reviews were located, one published in 1941, and the other in 1948. In 1941 the National Resources Planning Board identified five land classification types; two of these rate the agricultural productivity of an area. The 1948 study, a Ph. D. Thesis by W. H. Pine, identified two types. The author reviewed many land resource classification systems for the United States and determined that they could be grouped into six categories according to the criteria used in classification. These are systems with a soil, climatic, biotic, physiographic, genetic, and cultural emphasis. The significance of each criteria as a basis for use in classifying the site potential for agriculture is investigated This establishes the importance of the criteria. The grouping places a series of representative schemes into one or more categories according to their criteria emphasis. From this analysis two conclusions were reached. First, there is a disproportionate emphasis on soil and genetic criteria. Second, land resource classification systems tend to be subjective rather than quantitative. The systems in use now are old and based on criteria that are not measured on comparable scales. Therefore, the relative agricultural productivity potential of widely separated areas of the United States cannot be accurately determined. Future systems should be objective and include new knowledge of environmental relationships and measures. Problems created by rapid population growth and finite spatial limitations of this nation make it imperative to evaluate correctly all land on a local, state, and national level.
Resource Type
Date Available
Date Copyright
Date Issued
Degree Level
Degree Name
Degree Field
Degree Grantor
Commencement Year
Advisor
Academic Affiliation
Non-Academic Affiliation
Subject
Rights Statement
Peer Reviewed
Language
Digitization Specifications
  • File scanned at 300 ppi using Capture Perfect 3.0 on a Canon DR-9050C in PDF format. CVista PdfCompressor 5.0 was used for pdf compression and textual OCR.
Replaces
Additional Information
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Patricia Black(patricia.black@oregonstate.edu) on 2014-04-28T21:25:18Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 AldrichFrankThatcher1967_Redacted.pdf: 1205551 bytes, checksum: 2e9b6cce1e663735e879bd1e2279b527 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Made available in DSpace on 2014-04-30T17:20:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 AldrichFrankThatcher1967_Redacted.pdf: 1205551 bytes, checksum: 2e9b6cce1e663735e879bd1e2279b527 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1966-07-29
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Alex McFerrin (amscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2014-04-28T19:52:25Z No. of bitstreams: 1 AldrichRfankThatcher1967_Redacted.pdf: 1186307 bytes, checksum: ab926afc13ee5f366e4bb38b35a8e3ba (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Rejected by Patricia Black(patricia.black@oregonstate.edu), reason: Replace on 2014-04-28T21:22:25Z (GMT)
  • description.provenance : Approved for entry into archive by Katy Davis(kdscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2014-04-30T17:20:41Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 AldrichFrankThatcher1967_Redacted.pdf: 1205551 bytes, checksum: 2e9b6cce1e663735e879bd1e2279b527 (MD5)
  • description.provenance : Submitted by Alex McFerrin (amscannerosu@gmail.com) on 2014-04-28T21:24:55Z No. of bitstreams: 1 AldrichFrankThatcher1967_Redacted.pdf: 1205551 bytes, checksum: 2e9b6cce1e663735e879bd1e2279b527 (MD5)

Relationships

In Administrative Set:
Last modified: 08/22/2017

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Citations:

EndNote | Zotero | Mendeley

Items