MLRA REGION 10 NEWSLETTER--AUGUST 1, 1999 INTERNATIONAL SOILS CONFERENCE SYNOPSIS -------------------------------------------------------------- International Conference on Soil Resources: Their Inventory, Analysis, and Interpretation For Use In The 21st Century -------------------------------------------------------------- The conference was held June 10-12, 1999, at the Thunderbird Motel in Minneapolis. Over 150 participants were registered from around the world. The keynote speaker was Dr. Johan Bouma, from Wageningen Agricultural University, in the Netherlands. He emphasized "the strength of the past is the key to the future". As a part of the National celebration for the Soil Survey Centennial in 1999, the aim of this conference was to provide a vision of the potentials and needs for soil survey information in the 21st century. A wide variety of speakers from Jack Briggs (President-Fond du Lac Tribal and Community College, in Cloquet, Minnesota), to Horace Smith (Director of our National Soil Survey Division, in Washington D.C.), to Alex McBratney (University of Sydney in Australia), and 23 others, provided an excellent forum for discussions. The potential need for soil survey information in the next century and beyond was clearly documented. Symposium proceedings will be printed and provided to all participants. A banquet to honor Dr. Richard Rust of the University of Minnesota, for over 30 years of dedicated service to the National Cooperative Soil Survey, was held on Friday evening. Over 60 poster displays added to the strength of the conference. Al Giencke and Ken Matzdorf put together the Minnesota-NRCS poster which depicted 100 years of Soil Survey in Minnesota - Past - Present & Future. Sumbitted by Ken Matzdorf ######################################################################### PUBLICATION OF KEYS TO SOIL TAXONOMY The idea of publishing a hard cover "Soil Taxonomy" in support of the Soil Survey Centennial is nearing completion. The folks at the National Soil Survey Center in Lincoln have received copies from the bindery and the rest of us will shortly. ######################################################################### NASIS - NSSC PANGAEA RELEASE NOTES The following data objects were added or modified IN NASIS since the last Pangaea release on March 31, 1999. #AREA TYPES & AREAS # contact: Russ Kelsea 402-437-5878 Military Reservations ..about 350 military facilities added Non-MLRA Soil Survey Area CLAY AND QUITMAN COUNTIES, GEORGIA RANDOLPH COUNTY, GEORGIA #QUERIES no changes #REPORTS # contact: Russ Kelsea 402-437-5878 # Jim Fortner 402-437-5755 CORR - Series Extent (permanent dataset) CORR - Series Extent (selected set) MANU - Table U. Windbreak Plantings SSS - Status Map Data Dump UTIL - NASIS Groups and Users UTIL - NASIS Users and Groups UTIL - NASIS Users sorted by User Name UTIL - NASIS Users sorted by login UTIL - Property Values (L-RV-H) UTIL - Property Values (RV only) UTIL - Property Values (RV-Mapunit-Export) #GEOMORPHIC FEATURE TYPES no changes #EDIT SETUPS no changes #INTERPRETATIONS # There are many changes in Rules, Evaluations and #Properties used in interpretations. The significant #net effect of these changes is that five URB/REC #interps; two ENG interps; two FOR interps; and one #AWM interp have been modified or added. #RULES (interpretations) # contact: Bob Nielsen 402-437-4149 1Landscape Flooding Frequency at Planting or Harvest DRAFT AWM - Vermont Manure Stacking Site Acid < 3.5 Thickest Layer 10 to 60 inches CACO3 > 40% in the Thickest Layer 25 to 150cm Clayey 25 to 150cm (10 to 60 inches) Clayey 25 to 180cm (10 to 72 inches) Cobbly, Fragments 75 to 250mm Wt. Ave. 15 to 35% - 0 to 72" Depth to Water Table =<30cm ENG - Daily Cover for Landfill ENG - Sanitary Landfill (Trench) Erodes Easily Excess Humus (Unified Surface PT) FOR - Potential Fire Damage Hazard FOR - Potential Seedling Mortality Flooding (Maximum Frequency) Flooding > Occasional Frequency Flooding > Rare Frequency Fragments 2 to 75mm Wt. Ave. to 60" Hard to Pack Humus Between 25 to 150cm (10 to 60") Inorganic Silts and Clays >=15cm Thick, 0 to 150cm Landscape - Slope Crop Index Large Stones (Fragments >75mm Wt. Ave. to 60") Large Stones - Camp Areas Large Stones, Surface Layer > 75mm (25-75%) Large Stones, Surface Layer > 75mm (5-30%) Layer Thickness (40 to 60 inches) Not Aridic Organic Matter Crop Production Index Draft (Surface) Organic Silts and Clays or Peat 0 to 150cm Percolation & Tax Modified (.4 - 4 um/sec) to 40" Percolation Thickest Layer (> 14 um/sec) 10 to 60 Inches Permafrost Ponded > 4 hours Salinity (EC 8 to 16mmhos) Salinity (EC > 16mmhos) Salinity (EC > 16mmhos), not Aridic Salinity (EC >16mmhos) Within 25 to 150 cm Salt 4 to 8 mmhos/cm Sand Thickest Layer 10 to 72 inches. Seepage Bottom Layer, Not Aridic Shallow to Bedrock <50cm Shallow to Bedrock mod by Slope Shallow to Cemented Pan mod by Slope Shallow to Cemented Pan < 50 cm Slope (15 to 25%) Slope (25 to 40%) Slope 2 to > 6% Slope 8 to > 15% Slope < 1% surface Slope >30% Slope/Unified Code Limitation (1) Slope/Unified Code Limitation (2) Small Stones, Surface Layer 2-75mm (10-25%) Small Stones, Surface Layer 2-75mm (25-50%) Small Stones, Surface Layer 2-75mm (>65%) Sodium 25-150cm, Thickest Layer Sodium, Soil Max SAR > 12 Sodium, not Aridic Soil Materials for Packing, Unified and Kaolinitic Stony, Surface Layer Fragments > 25 cm (10 inches) Strength Limitation (1) Surface Condition; Crop Index; Most Restrictive Surface Reaction < 3.5 Texture, Sandy Surface Layer Texture, Surface Layer - Clayey Texture, Surface Layer - Clayey & Tax Modified Texture, Surface Layer - Silty & Tax Modified Texture, Surface Layer - Too Sandy Texture/Fragment Limitation (1) Texture/Fragment Limitation (10) Texture/Fragment Limitation (11) Texture/Fragment Limitation (12) Texture/Fragment Limitation (13) Texture/Fragment Limitation (14) Texture/Fragment Limitation (2) Texture/Fragment Limitation (3) Texture/Fragment Limitation (4) Texture/Fragment Limitation (5) Texture/Fragment Limitation (6) Texture/Fragment Limitation (7) Texture/Fragment Limitation (8) Texture/Fragment Limitation (9) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (29) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (30) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (31) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (32) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (33) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (34) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (35) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (36) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (37) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (38) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (39) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (40) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (41) Texture/Fragment/Depth Limitation (42) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (43) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (44) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (45) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (46) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (47) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (48) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (49) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (50) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (51) Texture/Fragment/Depth/Slope Limitation (52) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (15) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (16) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (17) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (18) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (19) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (20) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (21) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (22) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (23) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (24) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (25) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (26) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (27) Texture/Fragment/Slope Limitation (28) Thickest Sand Layer 10 to 72 inches. URB/REC - Camp Areas URB/REC - Off-Road Motorcycle Trails URB/REC - Paths and Trails URB/REC - Picnic Areas URB/REC - Playgrounds Wet, Ground Water Near the Surface (30 - 60cm) Wet, Ground Water Near the Surface (30 - 75cm) Wet, Ground Water Near the Surface (45 - 100cm) Wet, Ground Water Near the Surface (45 -75cm) Wetness Limitation (2) Wetness Limitation (3) Wetness Limitation (4) Wetness Limitation (5) Wetness Limitation (6) pH Minimum to a depth of 180cm (acid) #EVALUATIONS (interpretations) # contact: Bob Nielsen 402-437-4149 CTSG - Ksat >=141, Bottom Layer CTSG - Peaty and Mucky Texture in Depth 0-40cm CaCO3 >40 25-150cm Thickest Layer Clayey Surface Texture Excess Sodium SAR >13 Frag 2-75mm surface, (>50 : <25) Fragments 2mm-<75mm in 0-150cm Fragments > 75mm, 20 to 35%, Wght. Av. 0 to 50cm (0-20in) Fragments >75mm in 0-150cm Layer Thickness (40 to 60 Inches Thick) Loamy Surface Texture Low Excess Sodium 0 to 50cm (0 to 20") Mod sandy USDA Textures - thickest layer in 25-180cm Percolation (.4 - 4 um/sec) 0 to 100cm (0 to 40") Percolation (.4 - 4 um/sec) 0 to 150cm (0 to 60") Percolation (1 - 4 um/sec) 0 to 150cm (0 to 60") Percolation (10 to 40 um/sec) 0 to 150cm (0 to 60") Percolation (Layer Thickness > 30cm & ksat > 14um/sec) Percolation < 2 um/sec to 150cm (0 to 60") Percolation Layer Thickness (> 14um/sec) 25 to 150cm Ponding Duration > Very Brief SAR 25-150cm Thickest Layer SQI - Surface Sand Salinity 8 to 16 mmhos/cm Salinity > 16 mmhos/cm Salinity, EC >16mmhos, 25-150cm Sand (Bottom Layer) Sandy Surface Texture Sandy USDA Textures - thickest layer in 25-180cm Seepage (Bottom layer) Shallow to Bedrock (75 to 100cm (30 to 40")) Shallow to Bedrock (<50cm (<20")) Shallow to Cemented Pan (<50cm (<20")) Shallow to Permafrost (50 to 100cm (20 to 40")) Slope 2.9 to > 8% Slope > 2 Slope >15% to <8% Slope >30% Slopes <15 to >25% Slopes <2 to >6% Slopes <25 to >40% Slopes <8 to >15% Slopes > 8% Soil reaction 25-150cm thickest layer for daily cover Surface Fragments > 2-75mm, 10 to 25% Surface Fragments > 2-75mm, > 65% Surface Fragments > 75mm, 25 to 75% Surface K-Factor > .35 Surface Layer Thickness =<10cm Surface Organic Matter Crop Production Surface Sand Taxonomic Great Group - torr* or xer Taxonomic Great Group - torr*, ust*, or xer Taxonomic Order - oxisols Taxonomic Subgroup - torr*, aridic*, xer Taxonomic Subgroup - torr*, ust*, aridic*, xer Taxonomic Subgroup - torr*, ust*, aridic*, xer*, or oxic Taxonomic Suborder - torr*, ust*, or xer USDA Texture Classs, Surface - Clayey USDA Texture Classs, Surface - Silty USDA Texture-Mod Clayey 25-150cm, Thickest Layer USDA Texture-Very Clayey 25-150cm, Thickest Layer USDA textures-mod clayey in thickest layer in 25-180cm USDA textures-mod sandy in thickest layer in 25-150cm USDA textures-very clayey in thickest layer in 25-180cm Unified 25-150cm for packing Unified 25-150cm for seepage Unified (Gravel/Sand) Within 10cm of Surface Unified (Gravels) Within 10cm of Surface Unified (Inorganic) In Layer >=15cm Thick in Depth 0-150cm Unified (Inorganic) In Layer >=15cm Thick in Depth 0-30cm Unified (Inorganic) In Layer >=15cm Thick in Depth 0-90cm Unified (Inorganic) In Layer >=7cm Thick In Depth 0-15cm Unified (Organic 25 to 150cm (10-60")) Unified (Organic in the surface layer) Unified (Organic) In Layer >=15cm Thick In Depth 0-90cm Unified (Organic) In Layer >=15cm Thick in Depth 0-150cm Unified (Organic) In Layer >=15cm Thick in Depth 0-30cm Unified (Organic) In Layer >=7cm Thick In Depth 0-15cm Unified (Sand/Cl Gravel) Within 10cm of Surface Unified (Silt/Clay/Peat) Within 10cm of Surface Unified 25-150cm for excess humus Unified PT in surface for excess humus Wet, Ground Water Near Surface (30 - 60cm) Wet, Ground Water Near Surface (45 - 105cm) Wet, Ground Water Near Surface (60 - 120cm) Wet, Ground Water Near Surface (60 - 180cm) Wet, Ground Water within 180 cm (6 ft.) pH Maxium to a depth of 180cm (alkaline) pH Minimum to a depth of 180cm (Acid) #PROPERTIES (interpretations/reports) # contact: Bob Nielsen 402-437-4149 AWC, 0-150CM OR FIRST RESTRICTIVE LAYER AWC, 0-50CM OR FIRST RESTRICTIVE LAYER CALCIUM CARBONATE THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 25-150CM CALCIUM CARBONATE EQUIVALENT MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 25-150CM CALCIUM CARBONATE EQUIVALENT MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM CALCIUM CARBONATE EQUIVALENT MINIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM CALCIUM CARBONATE EQUIVALENT RV AVERAGE IN DEPTH 0-30CM CLAYEY SURFACE TEXTURE COMPONENT KIND DEPTH TO BEDROCK DEPTH TO BEDROCK LITHIC/PARALITHIC DEPTH TO CEMENTED PAN DEPTH TO FIRST RESTRICTION BELOW ORGANIC LAYER DEPTH TO GROWING SEASON WATER TABLE MAXIMUM DEPTH TO GROWING SEASON WATER TABLE MINIMUM DEPTH TO HIGH WATER TABLE MINIMUM DEPTH TO INDURATED LAYER DEPTH TO LITHIC, PARALITHIC, DURIPAN DEPTH TO MODERATELY CEMENTED LAYER DEPTH TO STRONGLY/VERY STRONGLY CEMENTED LAYER DEPTH TO VERY STRONGLY CEMENTED LAYER, 10-20CM THICK DEPTH TO VERY STRONGLY CEMENTED LAYER, >20CM THICK DEPTH TO VERY/EXTREMELY BOULDERY TEXTURE MODIFIER DEPTH TO VERY/EXTREMELY STONY TEXTURE MODIFIER DEPTH TO WATER TABLE AVERAGE FOR CONSECUTIVE MONTHS DEPTH TO WATER TABLE AVERAGE FOR CONSECUTIVE MONTHS OCT-FEB DEPTH TO WET LAYER MAXIMUM DEPTH TO WET LAYER MINIMUM DEPTH TO WET LAYER MINIMUM (DEFAULT 31) DEPTH TO WET LAYER MINIMUM (DEFAULT 46) DEPTH TO WET LAYER MINIMUM, MAR-SEP EROSION FACTOR SURFACE LAYER EROSION FACTOR THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 0-15CM FINE EARTH % BY VOLUME FLOODING DURATION CLASS FLOODING FREQ. MONTHS W/ FREQUENT OR VERY FREQUENT FLOODING FLOODING FREQ. MONTHS W/ OCCASIONAL FLOODING FLOODING FREQUENCY CLASS FRAGMENT KIND CODES IN SURFACE LAYER FRAGMENTS 2MM TO 75MM MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM BY VOLUME FRAGMENTS 2MM TO 75MM TOTAL IN DEPTH 0-150CM (reserved) FRAGMENTS 2MM to <75MM TOTAL IN DEPTH 0-150CM (reserved) FRAGMENTS 2MM to <75MM TOTAL IN DEPTH 0-30CM (reserved) FRAGMENTS 2MM-75mm SURFACE LAYER FRAGMENTS 2mm-<75mm WT. AVE. 0-150cm FRAGMENTS =>75MM THICKEST LAYER WI 10CM OF SURFACE(reserved) FRAGMENTS >2MM TOTAL IN SURFACE LAYER (reserved) FRAGMENTS >2MM TOTAL IN SURFACE LAYER BY VOLUME FRAGMENTS >75MM MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM BY VOLUME FRAGMENTS >75MM MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-90CM BY VOLUME FRAGMENTS >75MM THICKEST LAYER W/I 10CM OF SURFACE BY VOLUME FRAGMENTS >75MM WEIGHTED AVE. IN DEPTH 0-30CM BY VOLUME FRAGMENTS >75mm Wt. Ave. 0-150cm FRAGMENTS >=250MM & <600MM ON THE SURFACE FRAGMENTS >=250MM ON THE SURFACE FRAGMENTS >=600MM ON THE SURFACE FRAGMENTS >=75MM AND <250MM ON THE SURFACE FRAGMENTS >=75MM MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM (reserved) FRAGMENTS >=75MM MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-90CM (reserved) FRAGMENTS >=75MM ON THE SURFACE FRAGMENTS >=75MM WEIGHTED AVE. IN DEPTH 0-30CM (reserved) HORIZON TABLE ID CODES KSAT MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-20CM KSAT MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-50CM KSAT MAXIMUM IN DEPTH > 0CM KSAT MAXIMUM SURFACE HORIZON TO 20CM KSAT MAXIMUM, 0-150CM OR FIRST RESTRICTION KSAT MAXIMUM, 20-150CM OR FIRST RESTRICTION KSAT MAXIMUM, 50-150CM OR FIRST RESTRICTION KSAT MINIMUM ABOVE RESTRICTIVE LAYER (0-100cm) KSAT MINIMUM IN DEPTH 0-20CM KSAT MINIMUM IN DEPTH 0-50CM KSAT MINIMUM IN DEPTH >0CM KSAT MINIMUM SURFACE HORIZON TO 20CM KSAT MINIMUM, 0-150CM OR FIRST RESTRICTION KSAT MINIMUM, 20-150CM OR FIRST RESTICTIVE LAYER KSAT MINIMUM, 50-150CM OR FIRST RESTRICTIVE LAYER LAYER THICKNESS IN RANGE LAYER THICKNESS, KSAT >=0.42 & =<14.2, TOP DEPTH >0CM LAYER THICKNESS, KSAT >=1.4 & =<141.1, 0-50CM THICK LOAMY SURFACE TEXTURE MOISTURE SUBCLASS MONTH NAMES WITH WET SOIL MOISTURE STATUS MONTHS W/ FREQUENT FLOODING >VERY BRIEF, GROWING SEASON MONTHS W/ FREQUENT FLOODING DURING GROWING SEASON MONTHS W/ OCCASIONAL FLOODING >VERY BRIEF, GROWING SEASON MONTHS W/ OCCASIONAL FLOODING DURING GROWING SEASON MONTHS WITH FREQUENT OR OCCASIONAL PONDING MONTHS WITH WET SOIL MOISTURE STATUS MONTHS WITH WET SOIL MOISTURE STATUS DURING GROWING ORGANIC CARBON IN GRAMS/M2 ORGANIC MATTER IN THE SURFACE LAYER ORGANIC MATTER PERCENT THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 0-100CM PARTICLES COARSER VFS IN LAYERS >=15CM THICK, DEPTH 0-30CM PARTICLES COARSER VFS IN LAYERS >=15CM THICK, DEPTH 0-90CM PARTICLES COARSER VFS IN LAYERS >=7CM THICK, DEPTH 0-15CM PARTICLES COARSER VFS IN LAYERS >=7CM THICK, DEPTH 0-30CM PERMEABILITY < 1.4, Thickest Layer PERMEABILITY BOTTOM LAYER PERMEABILITY BOTTOM LAYER PERMEABILITY OF LAYER > 30CM THICK PERMEABILITY THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 25-150cm PLASTICITY INDEX IN LAYERS >=15CM THICK, DEPTH 0-30CM PLASTICITY INDEX IN LAYERS >=15CM THICK, DEPTH 0-90CM PLASTICITY INDEX MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM PLASTICITY INDEX THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 0-15CM PONDING DURATION CLASS PONDING FREQ. MONTHS W/ FREQUENT PONDING PONDING FREQ. MONTHS W/ OCCASIONAL PONDING SALINITY MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 25-150cm SALINITY MAXIMUM WITHIN 30CM SAND (#4-#200SIEVE) SURFACE LAYER SAND FRACTION ALL HORIZONS (WHOLE SOIL) SAND/GRAVEL FRACTION BOTTOM LAYER (WHOLE SOIL) SANDY SURFACE TEXTURE SANDY TEXTURE IN DEPTH 0-150CM SLOPE SLOPE PERCENT SODIUM ADSORPTION RATIO MAXIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM SOIL REACTION 0.1M CaCl2 MINIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM SOIL REACTION 1-1 WATER (Minimum) SOIL REACTION 1-1 WATER MINIMUM IN DEPTH 0-30CM SOIL REACTION 1-1 WATER THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 0-100cm SOIL REACTION 1-1 WATER THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 25-150cm SOIL SLIPPAGE POTENTIAL SURFACE LAYER THICKNESS TAXONOMIC ORDER CODE TAXONOMIC TEMPERATURE REGIME TEMPERATURE REGIME TEXTURE CODE IN SURFACE LAYER (RESERVED) TEXTURE IN-LIEU-OF FOR SURFACE LAYER TEXTURE MODIFIER CODES IN SURFACE LAYER THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 0-72 in. THICKNESS OF ORGANIC HORIZON TOTAL CLAY PERCENT SURFACE LAYER UNIFIED (GRAVEL/SAND) THICKEST LAYER W/I 10CM OF SURFACE UNIFIED (GRAVELS) THICKEST LAYER W/I 10CM OF SURFACE UNIFIED (INORGANIC) IN LAYER >=15CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-150CM UNIFIED (INORGANIC) IN LAYER >=15CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-30CM UNIFIED (INORGANIC) IN LAYER >=15CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-90CM UNIFIED (INORGANIC) IN LAYER >=7CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-15CM UNIFIED (ORGANIC) IN LAYER >=15CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-150CM UNIFIED (ORGANIC) IN LAYER >=15CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-30CM UNIFIED (ORGANIC) IN LAYER >=15CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-90CM UNIFIED (ORGANIC) IN LAYER >=7CM THICK IN DEPTH 0-15CM UNIFIED (SAND/CL GRAVEL) THICKEST LAYER W/I 10CM OF SURFACE UNIFIED (SILT/CLAY/PEAT) THICKEST LAYER W/I 10CM OF SURFACE UNIFIED SURFACE LAYER (pt) UNIFIED THICKEST LAYER (ol, oh, ch, mh) 25-150cm UNIFIED THICKEST LAYER (pt, oh, ol) 25-100cm UNIFIED THICKEST LAYER (pt, oh, ol) 25-180cm USDA TEXTURE BOTTOM LAYER USDA TEXTURE IN-LIEU-OF IN DEPTH 0-40CM USDA TEXTURE SURFACE LAYER (Sandy) USDA TEXTURE SURFACE LAYER (Silty) USDA TEXTURE THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 25-150cm USDA TEXTURE THICKEST LAYER IN DEPTH 25-180cm From: mnnet!nssc1000.nssc.nrcs.usda.gov!steve (Steve Speidel) ######################################################################### NRCS PUERTO RICO CELEBRATES SOIL SURVEY CENTENNIAL The NRCS Caribbean Area exhibited Bayamon and Victory soils, representative of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI), at the International Soil Conservation Organization Conference, Centennial of the Soil Survey at Purdue University last May. On February 12-15, the soils were officially recognized by the USVI legislature during the USVI Agri-Fair. NRCS produced a photo exhibit, fact sheet, newsletter, and a soil survey publication for the occasion. Interviews with the USVI media were scheduled. A similar activity in Puerto Rico was held during the 1999 Earth Week Celebration in April. If you would like copies of the NRCS materials for these events, please call Becky Fraticelli at 787-766-5206, ext. 236. Specify if you would like the English or Spanish versions of the material. From NRCS This Week ######################################################################### IOWA DISTRICTS PARTICIPATE IN SOIL CARBON STORAGE PROJECT Over the next year, Iowa's 100 conservation districts will play a major role in a pilot project that could lead to one of the major issues of the next century. The Iowa Carbon Storage Project will use a computer model to measure the amount of carbon stored in soil protected by conservation tillage, conservation buffers, Conservation Reserve Program land, pasture, and wetlands. On the national level, the project is administered by National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD) through a cooperative agreement with NRCS. The Department of Energy, one of NACD's new partners, is funding the project. In Iowa, a joint effort by NRCS, the Conservation Districts of Iowa, Inc. (the State association), and the Iowa Division of Soil Conservation will implement a State action plan that they developed. Under a United Nations global climate agreement, many countries face mandatory cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions over the next 10 years. Scientists say conservation practices could transform farms into carbon dioxide "sponges" that could "soak up" millions of metric tons a year of the chief greenhouse gas blamed for global warming. "We can reduce greenhouse gases through carbon sequestration by using agriculture to suck the carbon out of the air and deposit it into the soil, enriching our farmland and making our air cleaner at the same time," said Vice President Al Gore at a recent Farm Journal meeting. The Iowa project will help to answer many questions on what agriculture can do to help reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that affects the fragile ozone layer. In addition to the project in Iowa, Ohio State University soil scientist Rattan Lal recently co-authored a new book on global warming and agriculture and said farms can roll back emissions substantially just by adopting well-known conservation practices, such as the ones mentioned above. From NRCS This Week ######################################################################### QUOTE "The man forced to farm subsoil exposed by erosion has little chance for making a satisfactory living, whether prices are up or down." Hugh Hammond Bennett (1881-1960), first Chief of the Soil Conservation Service. ######################################################################### SOIL TAXONOMY/LAB DATA I spent a week with Bob Engel from the national taxonomy staff. We were looking at lab data from Region 10 in order to classify and correlate it and complete an electronic SOI-8 file. This was a very interesting experience and I wanted to share some of the things that I learned during this process. ISOTIC MINERALOGY We found that many samples from NE Minnesota and NW Wisconsin fall into the isotic mineralogy. Taxonomy has criteria for this class on page 303 of the 8th addition to the Keys to Soil Taxonomy. Essentially it is a type of clay mineralogy that does not disperse very well when running particle size analysis. One diagnostic feature is having a 15 bar moisture to clay ratio of over .6. Ratios over .6 indicate that clay has not dispersed. The reported clay will therefore be lower than the actual sample, sometimes by a great deal. Also, there will often be an increase in iron and/or aluminum. It appears as though the horizon is a spodic "wannabe". An estimate of actual clay can be made by taking the 15 bar water minus the organic carbon and multiply by 2.5. This will give a close approximation to the clay content if it were fully dispersed. SMECTITIC/CEC ACTIVITY In classifying soils we now add the cation-exchange activity class. It has been assumed that soils in the smetitic class were always superactive. This is because, of all the clays, smectite is the most active. We found numerous samples in Region 10 however where smectitic mineralogy only had an active CEC activity. This was due to the fact that, in addition to smectitic clays, the samples also had appreciable amounts of kaolinite, vermiculite, chorlite, and mica. The NSSC is thinking that a change to taxonomy is needed. For the definition of smectitic, in addition to having more smectite than any other single clay mineral, they would add "and the CEC/clay ratio is over .6. If less then .6 the mineralogy would be mixed even though smectite is the single dominant clay. SILTY SUBSTRATUM PHASES In MLRA-56 we attempted to set up some silty substratum phases of fine family soils such as Fargo and Hegne. The field descriptions of these soils showed the substratum to be silty clay loam or silt loam. However, the lab data came back as having a clay texture with 40 to 60 percent clay. This seemed odd that the field description would miss the clay content by that much. However, after looking at the clay mineralogy there was a dominance of 1:1 lattice clays, such as kaolinite, instead of 2:1 lattice clays. This was unusual as the clays in MLRA-56 are typically smectitic. In the next few weeks we will have added about 250 lab samples to the NSSL database that can be accessed over the internet. This will go along way in providing site specific data to be used in the MLRA update process. -- AL GIENCKE REGION 10 Correlator/PSS Phone=651-602-7863 USDA - NRCS Internet=al.giencke@mn.usda.gov 375 Jackson St. - Suite 600 Fax=612-602-7914 St. Paul, MN 55101 VOICE COM 1-800-602-7863 Box 7863 ######################################################################### WATCH YOUR STEP While outside messing around, how often have you been told to "watch your step...there's poison ivy." Poison ivy, poison oak or poison sumac can put an itchy hitch in your plans. Would you know what to look for? It's not easy to spot these plants, because they vary in shape and size. You may be familiar with these plants in your area, but will you recognize them in a new locale? They can be a climbing vine, ground vine or a shrub. They usually have 3 leaves, which aren't always shiny, nor always the same shape. No wonder these plants are considered the chameleons of the plant world! The oil that causes the problem is called urushiol. This is a sticky, oily resin, virtually invisible. It can adhere to almost anything, including the fur of animals, tools, clothing or even a golf ball sliced into the rough. About 50% of us believe we're immune because we've come in contact with the plant with no ill effect. It could be just a matter of time and toxic concentration before you get it. To care for poison plant contact, immediately wash the affected area thoroughly with water. If a rash or weeping sore has already begun to develop, put a paste of baking soda and water on the area several times a day to reduce the discomfort. Lotions, such as Calamine or Caladryl, may help soothe the area. If the condition gets worse and affects large areas of the body or the face, see a doctor. The majority of people will get over this without too much of a problem. Others may be seriously affected by this and require a doctors assistance. Make sure you know what plants are around you. Taken from the Amoco Traveler Magazine-Healthwise, American Red Cross ######################################################################### AVAILABLE WATER CAPACITY CALCULATIONS FOR MUG Currently the National and our Regional MUG calculates the available water capacity to 60 inches, or to a root restrictive layer. In the past, soil scientists have sometimes given some credit to the available water capacity for dense layers. The question is, Should we continue to calculate the available water capacity to a root restrictive layer, or should we consistently calculate the available water capacity to a depth of 60 inches? (This implies that a restrictive layer that completely excludes roots would have an available water capacity of 0. ) From: Henry Ferguson * * * * * Subject: Summary of AWC comments recieved. From: Henry Ferguson I received many comments (25) on this topic, so I thought that I should try to summarize them: Minority - Leave as is. A restrictive layer is restrictive. To stop calculating at the top of the restrictive layer is appropriate. Second Minority of responses (possibly not the minority opinion) - Where dense layers are common the available water capacity calculation is restricted to the upper 40 inches. This has been done in TN and VT among others. In these cases the prewritten material has been modified, and the glossary reflects a 40 inch depth for AWC. If these restrictive features completely exclude roots the mug calculations would work fine, except that mug has to be modified to stop calculating at 40 inches. Majority - Calculate to 60 inches. If the restrictive layer has no AWC list it as 0. If there are cracks then maintain the AWC as populated in SSSD and converted to NASIS. The message below implies that AWC would have to be populated for restrictive layers. In most cases the AWC is already populated from SSSD, however the type of restrictive feature has not been populated in NASIS. Once the restrictive feature table has been populated the AWC calculation would stop at the top of the restrictive feature, and would not include an estimation of the AWC for the layer which has already been made. I have tested this, and mug can handle 0 AWC in a restrictive layer. I don't think that there is a right or wrong, as long as the AWC is properly defined in the glossary, and is consistently used in the manuscript and tables. However, my recommendation would be to modify the mug to consistently calculate to 60 inches for those states that use 60 inches, and to calculate to 40 inches for those states that use 40 inches. Populate the database as best we can with the information that we have, and move on. (I am not sure how many individuals responded to all recipients, or how many responded just to sender, so I am providing a few examples of responses) Example of the minority opionion: The Region __ MUG program also calculates available water to 60 inches or depth to a restrictive layer. Calculating available water in a restrictive layer would be possible, provided we populate the restrictive layer with a figure for available water. This could be a problem. Where is the available water located in these layers? In the first few inches of the layer, since the amount of roots generally decreases in these layers with depth, or in the case of dense till in the cracks. We have had discussions on how to best define the cracks in dense till in the database. Maybe it would be possible to define a certain amount of available water in certain restrictive layers based on types of materials and restrictions and populate them consistently in the database. At the moment I think this type of population is low priority compared to other data needs in NASIS, but it may be something that we can consider in the future. Examples of the majority opinion: From: Richard Gehring Henry, I agree with some of what John Doll said regarding this subject. If the layer is restrictive the AWC in NASIS should reflect this. Therefore, the MUG calculation can be made for the entire 60 inches. With the exception of something like concrete, I have not seen a root restrictive layer that totally excludes all roots. From:"Bill Frederick" Henry: I believe we should continue to show the AWC to a depth of 60" as we have done in the past. From: Donald Franzmeier Henry: I think we should calculate AWC to 60 inches and give partial credit for restricting layers such as dense till and fragipans. This might be 1/2 of WRD for fragipans and 1/3 to 1/2 of WRD for dense till. WRD is water retention difference, 1/3 bar minus 15 bar laboratory water retention values. From: Henry Mount Henry, I have seen a lot of vegetation growing out of the cracks of bedrock in New England, Puerto Rico, and Finland. Intuition tells me that plants get water from root limiting layers since nearly all of them crack in some fashion or other. ######################################################################### MLRA REGION 11 DATABASE UPDATE--NEWSLETTER FROM INDIANAPOLIS (by Henry Ferguson, unless otherwise indicated) Part I: Comments regarding report examples Part II: .Xdefaults files (solutions to viewing problems on small monitors) Part IIb: .Xdefaults files For those of you who do not have logins on our system Part III: Report examples from Charles Love with attachement Part IV: More on Printers Part V: Update on information in Reports and Queries Part VI: Pictures in manuscripts - Why do our directions keep changing & what do we really need to keep and to send to the MO-office. Part I: Comments regarding report examples QUESTION: FROM MI: I just finished looking over the Nasis Standard Report Examples you handed out. This is really nice. I think you should suggest that all of the querys or reports in Nasis require a page like you handed out. That way somebody like me could be saved alot of time trying making a query. I think it should be required of all queries to make a sheet up explaining what is in their query. Otherwise get rid of the query - too many there. Thanks. Reply. Yes you have a good point. I will not make it manditory, but It would be helpful if each user send out a message regarding queries or reports that he/she has created. The following is a real example of each and I hope that more users make the effort to make their queries and reports public knowledge. EXAMPLE: Query Name: hydric soils by survey area and major comp flag Select Tables: Area, Mapunit and Component Supplied information: Area name imatches ex. *illinois (all surveys in illinois) or s*indiana(surveys starting in s in indiana) What is loaded: Legends, Active Mapunits, Major components with the hydric rating filled in with a yes. What reports might be good to use once this query has been run? We have been using two reports. 1. Mapunit acres from legends and rep dmuid(with totals) and 2. Mapunit acres from legends, rep dmuid (without totals) or any other legend report Why have this query/report combination? This query was developed to provide a user with a list of all the hydric mapunits by county in the state of Indiana. The report without totals provided a report that could be loaded into a spreadsheet or database. The report with totals provided additional information for the user so he/she would not have to manually calculate the totals for each county. Gliches include: If the mapunit is a complex and one component is hydric and another is not, the entire mapunit acres are calculated as hydric. QUESTION: What happens if I get 2 or three legends and I only want one of them? deselect the legends you do not want. The datamapunits can stay in the selected set and they will not affect your reports for the legends that you do want. Part II. .Xdefaults files Several of our users in MO-11 already have .Xdefaults files which define how their screen looks when they log into the HP-9000 here in Indy. However, some users are not using them. Wade Bott has provided copies of two files called .Xdefaults.big and .Xdefaults.small. I have placed these two files in the subdirectory /usr/tmp. By copying one of these files to your home directory and renaming it to .Xdefaults, it will become your default setup. Try them out and see which will make your use of NASIS easier. Additional information that has not been tested by me: Chris Kendric from Missouri has suggested that the following command can be used to change your .Xdefaults after you are already logged in. This may be helpful for a user such as myself that uses may different computers (some at the same time) with very different screen sizes and settings. xrdb -load (filename) The file name is the name of the file containing the .Xdefaults that you want implemented. Part IIb. .Xdefaults files For those of you who do not have logins on our system Message from Wade: From: Wade Bott I noticed Byrons listing of the component tables because he is unable to see the entire list on his lap top. Mike Hansen has spent a considerable amount of time on this and we have two Xdefault files available to our NASIS users. One for those who use laptops and/or have smaller monitors (allows a view of the whole list of component tables) and one for those who have systems that can accomodate the larger Xdefault settings. I posted our MO-4 Xdefault files on our ftp site. ftp://ftp.mt.nrcs.usda.gov/incoming/nasis/ The files are named: .Xdefaults.small .Xdefaults.big Grab them if you need them. __ Wade D. Bott, CPSSc/SC Soil Data Quality Specialist, Bozeman, MT Phone: 406-587-6866, FAX: 406-587-6761 E-mail: wbott@mt.nrcs.usda.gov Part III: Report examples from Charles Love with attachement Subject: NASIS Standard Report examples From: Charles Love I have compiled a NASIS Standard Report packet of examples with brief instructions. I will be providing this information to soil scientists at the MLRA 94A and 96 Steering Committee meeting (in MI). I also provided a hard copy to the SDQS, here at the office. Part IV: More on Printers In the HP9000 I have loaded a file called localfile under /usr/lib/lp/model. This file is used to allow NASIS to print a gzip postscript file to the user's home directory. I also have made a directory called doslp in the home directory of each user using dialup. Along with other irm type changes the following directions are supposed to allow you to print back to your office. I have not done this myself, but MO-10 has several sites set up this way, and Michigan requested that I make modifications to my system to allow their sites to print this way as well. To get the whole system going you may need to contact your IRM staff to help out. At this time most of our direct connect sites are printing remotely. The following directions are required for each user to perform to get this method of printing going on our system: start nasis File - Printer Setup Install... Add Printer... Define New Port... Spooler Dismiss HP laserjet IV Postscript and doslp Add Selected Dismiss Dismiss Options - select the doslp printer and save (if necessary) Part V: Update on information in Reports and Queries One new query and one new report has been added to MLRA-11. I believe that this is similar to the method used in other MLRA-NASIS computers to desseminate(sp) informaton. The query is called A a a Recent changes to queries(read desc below). At this time the description that is included reads as follows: Mo-11 data mapunit by datamapunit description has been renamed to data mapunit by data mapunit description!!! The most recent change to the queries was a modification of the hydric soil query. We have one now that queries by area and selects on the hydric interpretation being marked as yes and the major component flag marked as yes. You must point to the component table , the area table, and the legend table if you want to print out a report of mapunit names, legend name, and acres. - - - - - - - - The new Report is called 1 1 Report update from MLRA-11-- Read right The contents of the text description at this time is as follows: The first 27 reports are under review and need comment. They will be either accepted and moved into place or deleted. The UTIL reports seem very good and will be placed soon. A new report being developed is called WetForm Report Soil Import. This report will be used to export data for import into WetForm Delineation Dataform Software Version 1.2 See page 82 of the manual for expected format. Currently this report resides on the third screen down under local reports. If you are bringing reports in from other MO's, or writing your own reports, Please! delete the sequence #. This will cause the new reports to rise to the top for comment and approval. If any existing reports do not work due to changes in NASIS please let us know so we can fix or delete them. mapunit text notes without nontechnical description notes did not work for a while! apparently due to change in NASIS. This report has been fixed and works fine now. The latest reports developed are the text note reports and we have modified an areage report for use in reporting components by acreage and legend. Y This method of communication should allow our users to keep up with changes to queries and reports. Also , Please note that the names of queries and reports often reflect what is going to happen to them or how new they are. Examples: 10024 Load Mapunit by Mapunit Name(See Mo-Mapunit query) This name implies that both queries are identical. Component by name and surface depth(Tagged for deletion) This name implies that I see no reason to keep it. The users/owner need to contact me to let me know why the query should be kept. Possibly it may be a very good query but it could either use some more work or might need to be renamed. Component by component name and legend(same as below) The query listed below is identical to this one and eventually one may be eliminated. Organic matter & texture - hodges (temporary) This query is under development and is temporarily called Organic matter and texture. In the future it may be renamed/made more generic. DMU by component and state revised (does not work) This query does not work and should not be used. It will be deleted if it is not made to work within a couple of weeks. Proper naming of queries is as follows: Targeted property/field by Table names including special imbedded criteria. Component text by area & kind & category (status is also included in this query and could have been included in the name) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Proper naming of reports is as follows: We have not been as structured in the naming of reports. It is more important that the following occurs: Delete any sequence number if you have brought a report in from outside. This will cause it to rise to the top for review and comment. Check out reports as soon as possible so that you can recommend that they be kept or delete them. Use National Reports whenever possible. I make the following comments in report names and would like responses from the owner: comments include (why keep) (tagged for deletion) (do not use) (do not delete) (keep) Part VI: Pictures in manuscripts - Why do our directions keep changing and what do we really need to keep and to send to the MO-office. Technology keeps changing, and our contracts seem to lag behind. The following is what is required and what is suggested. Cover photo. 3 Color slides and 3 color prints of your final selection. The slides are required because some printers still scan slides. The prints are required for color matching and because some printers prefer to scan prints. Prints are necessary to show crop marks. Digital products for the most part are not acceptable for cover materials or other printed matter. Digital products can be used as supplemental photos within the manuscript. It is all a matter of pride. In general publishers can do a better job with traditional photographs than they can with digital products from digital cameras. (I am not referring to the scanned images) Color profiles. 3 Color slides and 3 color prints of your final selections 3x5 is fine. The reason for the slides is the same as above. The color prints are needed for color matching. Landscapes. 3 prints of each. These can either be in black and white or color but must have such good contrast that they will print fine in both color or black and white. Why? Many paper copies of the soil surveys will be published in black and white because of cost. However, if color prints are available they can be included in web products and on CD's in color since there is no additional cost to color in these formats. What would I do if I were a project leader today? If I had them, I would carry two cameras. One with color slide film and the other would be a high quality digital camera. I would reserve my slide film for the very best pictures that I thought I could use in the publication. I would be more free with the digital camera since it is cheaper to use (no developing costs) and there is a possibiltiy that I could use a product like Photoshop to enhance pictures for use on CD or on the WEB. When it got close to the end of a survey, I would make my selections and have the top three cover choices printed at 8x10 color. All other prints I would have reproduced at 5x7. If I used any black and white at all, I would have the prints developed by a professional photographer using ILFORD glossy paper. I would be very picky when it came to the developing process and I would find a lab that used high quality paper. ######################################################################### WEB SITES OF INTEREST http://www.cast.uark.edu/local/soils_atlas/index.html Digital soil survey of Woodruff County, Arkansas. http://www.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/ncg/ncg.html NRCS National Cartography and Geospatial Center home page. http://in.nrcs.usda.gov/mlra11/cent/index.htm Soil Survey Centennial Celebration slide set. ######################################################################### Last month, the following x3780 files were sent to offices having SSSD: x3780.422frig on Jul 09 (10 updated OSDs) @ x3780.423mes on Jul 15 (29 updated OSDs) * @ Sent to offices using soils in the frigid soil temperature regime. * Sent to offices using soils in the mesic soil temperature regime. # Sent to all offices. The above x3780s contained the following updated Official Series Descriptions, which can also be obtained at: http://www.statlab.iastate.edu/cgi-bin/osd/osdname.cgi frigid balaton...buhl...hibbing...hulligan...kerkhoven...lakepark...malachy... nevens...ortonville...schisler mesic aldo...barremills...bearpen...boguscreek...boplain...brice...chelsea... drammen...dunnbot...ella...epsom...farrington...forkhorn...gaphill... garne...greenbush...hersey...kevilar...komro...lacrescent...maxfield... merton...nerwoods...pepin...plumcreek...prissel...rockbluff...rusktown ...scotah ######################################################################## CHANGED ADDRESSES AND PHONE NUMBERS 1. Scott Eversoll has accepted the Project Leader position in Ontonagon, Michigan (MLRAs 93 and 92). Scott's former survey area was Jasper County, Missouri (MLRAs 112 and 116B). ######################################################################### ACTIVITY SCHEDULE (through September 15--subject to change) MLRA DATE ACTIVITY LOCATION MO 10 STAFF ---- --------- ---------------------------- ----------------- ----------- 88 Aug 02-06 Progress Review Internat'nl Falls Giencke 88 Aug 30-03 Progress Review Virginia Giencke 88 Aug 16-19 Progress Review Duluth Giencke 90 Sep 13-17 Progress Field Review Eau Claire Jahnke 92 Aug 09-13 Initial Field Review Ontonagon Jahnke 92 Aug 23-27 Progress Field Review Ironwood Jahnke 93 Aug 09-13 Initial Field Review Ontonagon Jahnke 93 Aug 09-13 Initial Field Review Gogebic Jahnke 93 Aug 16-19 Progress Review Duluth Giencke 93 Aug 23-27 Progress Field Review Ironwood Jahnke 93 Aug 30-03 Progress Review Virginia Giencke 94B Sep 13-17 Initial Field Review Munising DesLauriers 94B Sep 13-17 Progress Field Review Manistique DesLauriers 103 Sep 13-17 Progress Review St. Peter Giencke 104 Aug 16-20 Field Review Waverly Hempel 104 Aug 16-20 Field Review Waverly Hempel 105 Sep 13-17 Progress Field Review Eau Claire Jahnke all Sep 07 Iowa Partnership Meeting Des Moines McCloskey all Sep 07-10 Staff Meeting St. Paul All ######################################################################### CONTRIBUTIONS, IDEAS, SUGGESTIONS, AND QUESTIONS ARE WELCOME This newsletter is intended to be a forum to distribute information of a general nature that will benefit soil scientists in soil survey project offices. It is hoped that it will foster communications and sharing of knowledge among those soil scientists in MLRA Region 10. * * * * * Articles from other newsletters are often included to distribute ideas and comments from other areas of the country; these ideas and comments are not necessarily identical to those used in MLRA Region 10. * * * * * The format of this newsletter is intentionally simple so that it can be received, read, and printed by the project office having the least sophisticated computer and printer setup. * * * * * Thanks to those individuals who participated this month. It is your efforts that have made this newsletter a success. * * * * * Please submit your articles at least five days before the end of the month for inclusion in the following month's newsletter. Otherwise it will appear the following month. Occasionally, due to other workload demands, it may be an additional month before the article appears. Generally, articles are inserted in the order they are received. Articles in an electronic format can be submitted to: jfh@mn.nrcs.usda.gov. It is best if electronic articles are prepared in a "text only" format. Articles in a paper format can be sent or faxed to: John Handler MLRA Region 10 Office USDA - NRCS 375 Jackson Street - Suite 600 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1854 FAX: 1-651-602-7914 * * * * * Previous month's copies of this newsletter are available at: http://www.mn.nrcs.usda.gov/mo10/mo10.html #########################################################################