Yeah -- or the other way 'round... Take a look at this composite image...
~~~~~~
The way I got started on "chasing old roads" was when I accepted the challenge of locating -- and putting on a modern map -- the "Y" junction where the (1813) "Trammel's Trace" joined the earlier "Spanish Trace".
I had two historical clues:
1) It was on the "Dan'l Barecroft" (actually "Barcroft") Republic of Texas land grant tract (per the little old "headright" sketch at lower right).
2) It was supposedly "about a mile SW of the old Dalton Cemetery".
After I first located the "Barecroft" Tract on a B&W aerial, I spotted Trammel's Trace. (See it going off to the upper right? The historical marker will be placed where the Trace crosses the highway...) Then I downloaded the "IRDOQQ" of the area (which is what you see as the base for the above composite.)
When we went out to "ground truth" the find, we went directly to the UTM (GPS) coordinates of the "Y" that I had derived from the overheads -- "georeferenced" to a modern topographic map. BUT -- when we reached the supposed location of the "Y", we found ourselves in the nastiest, near-impenetrable sweetgum brush thicket you can imagine! We could hardly see the ground -- much less where two faint paths came together...
Then, when we took another look at the color IR image, we had a genuine "DUH!!" moment: See that lighter yellowish "blob" surrounding the "Y"? That's clear evidence of young, deciduous growth. The southern half of that tract had obviously been "clear-cut" for its timber, not re-planted, and allowed to grow up in -- sweetgum brush.
If we had looked at the IR image for vegetation signs as well as for evidence of old trails, we would have known we were heading into a thicket! :-(
So, yes, overhead imagery can provide a lot of useful information -- if you analyze it properly! '-}
