ABSTRACT
Establishing a meaningful, objective classification of cone karst landscapes has proven problematic, although it is clear there are, in fact, underlying morphologic patterns. The seminal morphometric studies of Williams (1971, 1972) were the first to identify organization within cone karst landscapes, in particular serving to illustrate their essential polygonal morphology and spatial organization, and the essential similarity of their hydrological function to that of other types of fluvial drainage basin. Field measurement of cone karst is arduous and time-consuming, but maps, air photographs, and satellite imagery generally do not provide sufficiently detailed information at a suitable scale to be acceptable substitutes. Comparative data on the density and spacing of residual hills is relatively easily assembled, but meaningful measurements of height and threedimensional shape, for example, are far more problematic. Where field data are available, usually for relatively restricted areas, a variety of approaches to measurement and classification have been employed. For example, in the context of general or overall landscape morphometry, surface roughness has been utilized as a discriminator of cone karst landscape styles, and wavelength variance within cone karst has been analysed by use of Fourier models. Development of more rigorous GIS models may be expected to contribute to further mathematical analysis of cone karst landscapes.
