1

National

Cooperative

Soil

Survey Newsletter

Issue 23

May 2003

In This Issue—

Editor’s Note

Issues of this newsletter are

available on the World Wide Web

(http://soils.usda.gov/). Click on NCSS,

then on Activities & Newsletters, and

then on the desired issue number.

You are invited to submit stories for

future issues of this newsletter to

Stanley Anderson, National Soil Survey

Center, Lincoln, Nebraska. Phone—

402-437-5357; FAX—402-437-5336;

email—

stan.anderson@nssc.nrcs.usda.gov.

Terrestrial Ecosystem

Survey Provides

Ecological Information

for Natural Resource

Management

By George T. Robertson, USDA, Forest

Service, Southwestern Region, Phoenix, Arizona,

and Wayne A. Robbie and Steve H. Strenger,

USDA, Forest Service, Southwestern Region,

Albuquerque, New Mexico.

The USDA Forest Service is required to conduct

comprehensive ecological surveys that

analyze resource conditions and

determine the existing and potential

productivity of National Forest lands in

the United States. To achieve this

objective, the Forest Service uses the

Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey (TES) to

gather information about ecosystems on

National Forests in Arizona and New

Mexico and to apply this knowledge to

ecosystem analysis, planning, and

decision-making.

Definitions

Naturally occurring terrestrial

ecosystems with unique sets of

properties can be classified, mapped,

and interpreted. The methodologies

applied in describing and characterizing

a terrestrial ecosystem depend on the

interactions of soil, vegetation, and

climate.

A terrestrial ecosystem is defined as

the conceptual representation of the

obligatory relationship between soil,

vegetation, and climate. This complex

relationship is depicted in the following

diagram:

The diagram indicates that both soil

and vegetation are directly influenced

by climate; soil supports vegetation,

and vegetation acts upon the soil. The

product of these complex interactions

defines a terrestrial ecosystem.

A terrestrial ecosystem survey

consists of the systematic examination,

description, classification (soil,

vegetation, and climate), and mapping

of terrestrial ecosystems. Other

ecosystem components, such as

landform, geology, and geomorphology,

are integrated during the mapping

process and modify soil or vegetation

components. The unique combination

of terrestrial ecosystems and

appropriate phase criteria (i.e., slope,

texture of the surface layer, soil depth,

etc.) define an ecological map unit.

Classification

TES utilizes a component approach

for classification of ecosystems

(terrestrial and aquatic) and a holistic

approach for the integration of

components with climate through direct

gradient analysis. This approach to TES

is hierarchical with respect to

classification levels of terrestrial

ecosystem components and mapping

intensities. These taxonomic systems

are important as they incorporate,

within class limits, diagnostic physical,

chemical, and biological properties.

Many nonhierarchical classification

systems (rock fragment classes, texture

Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey

Provides Ecological Information

for Natural Resource

Management................................... 1

The Lewis and Clark Expedition

at Council Bluff.............................. 3

Snotel Site Installation ........................ 5

The Ohio Soil Survey: Cooperative

for 50 Years .................................... 6

Version 5.01 of Field Indicators

of Hydric Soils in the United

States Available on CD .................. 7

A Day in the Field ............................... 7

National Soil Survey Center

Participates in Infrared

Spectroscopy Study ........................ 9
2

NCSS Newsletter

classes, runoff classes, etc.) are also

used in TES.

Direct Gradient Analysis

Direct gradient analysis is used to

integrate ecosystem components (soil

and vegetation) with climate. Soil

moisture and soil temperature regimes

provide the initial quantifiable means

of separating a climatic continuum

into meaningful segments, or life

zones.

The correlation of indicator plants

with soil moisture and temperature

regimes results in further refinement of

the zones. This correlation is based on

the following two concepts:

1. The lower elevation limit of

a given plant species on a

moisture-temperature

gradient is controlled by

deficient moisture.

2. The upper elevation limit is

controlled by deficient heat.

The final phase of direct gradient

analysis consists of integrating soil

taxonomic categories with plant

communities to form individual

terrestrial ecosystems. The resultant

organized alignment of terrestrial

ecosystems is a continuum of climax

categories of plant communities and

their edaphic environments.

Information Management

Ecological data collected from TES

meet the corporate business

requirements of the USDA Forest

Service’s Natural Resources

Information System (NRIS). NRIS is an

ORACLE database/Geographic

Information System (GIS) application

and set of analysis tools designed to

implement corporate data standards for

Terrestrial Ecological Unit Inventory.

The Terra module of NRIS stores core

terrestrial ecological data elements on

climate, soils, geology, geomorphology,

and potential plant communities.

The spatial component of TES is

processed and edited through

ARCINFO software. This is a polygon

layer of ecological map units.

System-generated analysis and

interpretations are processed by an

E-Tools application. E-Tools is a

nationally accessible, comprehensive

set of data analysis and reporting tools

that enables one to work efficiently with

data contained in a given database. It is

specifically designed to assist in

analyzing compiled data through

application of a standard set of

sampling protocols.

E-Tools enables specialists to access

basic ecological data and create

taxonomic unit description and map

unit description summaries. It assists in

performing analyses and resource

characterizations and facilitates sharing

of information about ecological units

and interpretations on a National level.

Use and Application of

Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey

TES provides ecological information

that assists land managers in

determining desired resource conditions

and management activities that conform

to the physical and biological

capabilities of ecosystems. Ecological

map units consist of terrestrial

ecosystems and phases from which

ecological structure, function,

capabilities, responses, and

management opportunities and

limitations are determined. The

ecological information also includes

data on both natural and anthropogenic

disturbances (fire, floods, wind,

grazing, use of off-highway vehicles,

etc.).

This information provides vital basic

land capability information for

environmental analysis (NEPA) and

decision-making; habitat data used to

predict the effects on threatened and

endangered species (ESA); soil,

climate, and landscape information for

watershed assessments (CWA); and

interpretations for management

activities outlined in forest plans

(NFMA).

Protocols

Terrestrial ecosystem surveys are

necessary to meet the requirements of

the Forest and Rangelands Resource

Planning Act of 1974 as amended by

the National Forest Management Act of

1976 implementing regulations in 36

CFR Part 219 of the National

Environmental Policy Act. The

objectives, policy, and responsibility for

conducting terrestrial ecosystem

surveys are contained in FSM 2060 and

FSH 2090.

TES meets the requirements of the

National Hierarchal Framework of

Ecological Units, which is a land

classification hierarchy that provides

the framework for developing terrestrial

ecological units at multi-scales. The

framework is a classification and

mapping system for stratifying the

Earth into progressively smaller areas

of increasingly uniform ecological

potentials. TES provides information

useful in landscape ecology analysis at

the land type association, land type, and

land type phase hierarchal levels within

the framework.

 Identification of the soil component

meets the standards and follows the

policies and procedures outlined in the

National Cooperative Soil Survey

program. The description and

classification of soils meets the criteria

established in Soil Taxonomy: A Basic

System of Soil Classification for

Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys

(2nd edition, 1999), the Soil Survey
3

NCSS Newsletter

Manual, and the “National Soil Survey

Handbook.”

The “Terrestrial Ecosystem Survey

Handbook” of USDA, Forest Service,

Southwestern Region, describes the

basic concepts, standards, and

procedures for conducting and

interpreting terrestrial ecosystem

surveys. This handbook requires a

systematic (cause/effect) evaluation of

the relationship among the components

of terrestrial ecosystems.

Literature Cited

Carleton, J.O., D. Shaw, J. Gass, H.G.

Brown, C. Spann, G. Robertson, W.

Robbie, T. Robinson, W. Moir, D.

Potter, R. Fletcher, R. GaleanoPopp, and G. Miller. 1991. General

ecosystem survey. USDA, Forest

Service, Southwestern Region,

Albuquerque, New Mexico.

USDA, Forest Service. 1986.

Terrestrial ecosystem survey

handbook. USDA, Forest Service,

Southwestern Region,

Albuquerque, New Mexico.

USDA, Forest Service. 1999. GIS data

dictionary. USDA, Forest Service,

Southwestern Region,

Albuquerque, New Mexico

USDA, Forest Service. 2000. E-Tools

information. Web site—http://

fsweb.sandy.wo.fs.fed.us/

terra_web/etools.html. USDA,

Forest Service, Sandy, Oregon.

USDA, Forest Service. 2000. NRIS:

The Forest Service natural resources

information system. Web site—

http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nris/facts/

terra_fact_sheet_23mar01.htm.

USDA, Forest Service, Sandy,

Oregon.

Winthers, E., D. Fallon, J. Haglund, T.

DeMeo, D. Tart, M. Ferwerda, G.

Robertson, A. Gallegos, A. Rorick,

and D. Shadis. 2002. Terrestrial

ecological unit inventory technical

guide. [Draft.] USDA, Forest

Service, Washington Office,

Ecosystem Management

Coordination Staff, Technical

Guide xx. 

The Lewis and Clark

Expedition at Council

Bluff

By Stanley P. Anderson, Editor, NRCS,

National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

The Lewis and Clark Expedition held its first official council

with Native Americans on August 3,

1804, at a site in what is now

Washington County, Nebraska. Clark’s

map of the Missouri River in this area

identifies this site as “Councell Bluff.”

Clark’s journal entry for July 30

identifies the various levels of the

landscape at Council Bluff. It also

identifies the kind of vegetation,

including grasses that are 10 to 12

inches tall on a “high Prarie” above

their camp and 5 to 8 feet tall on a

prairie below the camp. The journal

indicates that the soil is “of good

quality” (Moulton, 1987, vol. 2, pp.

430 and 434).

After walking to one of the highest

points on the landscape, Clark observed

the “Countrey” as “one Continual Plain

as fur as Can be Seen, from the Bluff on

the 2d rise imediately above our Camp

the most butifull prospect of the River

up & Down and the Countrey opsd.

prosented it Self which I ever beheld”

(Moulton, 1987, vol. 2, p. 430). This

description shows the enthusiasm with

which members of the expedition

responded to the vast, nearly treeless

prairies of the Great Plains. An earlier

example of this enthusiasm is recorded

in Clark’s journal for July 19, 1804. As

Clark was pursuing elk in an area near

what is now Nebraska City, he was

enchanted by a view of the prairie:

Came Suddenly into an open

and bound less Prarie, I Say

bound less because I could not

See the extent of the plain in

any Derection, the timber

appeared to be confined to the

River Creeks & Small

branches, this Prarie was

covered with grass about 18

Inches or 2 feat high and

contained little of any thing

else, except as before

mentioned on the River Creeks

&c, This prospect was So

Sudden & entertaining that I

forgot the object of my prosute

and turned my attention to the

Variety which presented

themselves to my view

(Moulton, 1987, vol. 2, p.

394).

As he looked out over the river at

Council Bluff on July 30, Clark was

afforded a panoramic view of “Two

ranges of High Land parrelel to each

other and from 4 to 10 miles Distant

between which the river and its

bottoms are Contained. (from 70 to

300 feet high)” (Moulton, 1987, vol. 2,

p. 430). This view is sketched on his

map.

In a document written the following

winter at Fort Mandan, Meriwether

Lewis describes Council Bluff. He

Council Bluff as drawn on Clark’s map (from

The Journals of the Lewis and Clark

Expedition, vol. 1). At the time of the

expedition, the Missouri River touched

the bluff.
4

NCSS Newsletter

Council Bluff as it appears in the Soil Survey of Washington County, Nebraska, published in 1917. The date of the

map is 1915. Council Bluff is just east of Fort Calhoun. The long and narrow body of water between the

words “Fort” and “Calhoun” on the map may indicate the old course of the river and may be the

approximate landing site for the Lewis and Clark Expedition more than 100 years earlier. A flood plain

separates the Missouri River from the bluff where the expedition landed.
5

NCSS Newsletter

apparently had Clark’s map of the site

in front of him as he wrote:

the base of the Bluff is washed

by the river about a mile; it is

about 60 feet high & nearly

perpendicular; as it’s lower

extremity it leaves the river

nearly at right angles,

descending with a handsome

and regular declivity on it’s

lower side about forty feet to a

high, level, fertile and

extensive bottom, lying

between itself and the river.

the top of the bluff is a level

plain from one to two miles in

width, and about five miles in

length (Moulton, 1987, vol. 3,

p. 353).

Both Lewis and Clark thought that

Council Bluff would be a suitable site

for a fort and trading post, partly

because of the panoramic view of the

river that the site provided at that time.

Lewis thought that the main problem

with building a fort at this site would

be the scarcity of timber, but he noted

that the soils in the area appeared to be

good sources of clay for bricks. Fort

Atkinson was later built at the site

(mainly from timber in the immediate

vicinity). It was in operation from 1819

to 1827. It has been restored and is

open to visitors. Today, a good view of

the Missouri is not possible from this

spot because the river has shifted its

course. 

Snotel Site Installation

By Brad Duncan, Resource Soil Scientist,

NRCS, Idaho Falls, Idaho.

As a Resource Soil Scientist, I spend most of my time

providing technical soil information for

conservation planning, animal waste

management, soil surveys, and

Council Bluff as it appears on map sheet 24 in the Soil Survey of Washington

County, Nebraska, published in 1964. The map was compiled in 1962.

The long and narrow area of water in the 1919 survey is now a soil—

CfE3 (Crofton silt loam, 18 to 30 percent slopes, eroded).

Council Bluff as it appears on the latest soil map (1988). This map is from a new soil survey of

Washington County that is being prepared for publication.
6

NCSS Newsletter

interpretation maps. I spend most of

my time on the arid and semiarid

landscapes of eastern Idaho.

Recently, the Snow Survey section

of our State Office in Boise asked me to

help install equipment and instruments

at a new Snotel site. They told me it

would take about 21/2 days to install all

the equipment and instruments. I was

kind of excited by this opportunity

because I knew that the Snotel sites are

usually high in the mountains and

usually in remote locations. I was told

we would be camping for two nights

and the site was accessible only by four

wheelers, trail bikes, or helicopters.

This particular site was at the head of

Lake Creek, south of the Copper Basin

area, in the Challis National Forest.

I met the project coordinator and

other workers who were going to help

install the equipment and instruments at

the loading zone about 6 miles below

the actual site. All the equipment, food,

water, and camping gear had to be

sling-loaded by helicopter up to the

site. There were about 12 loads all

together, and it took quite a while for

the helicopter to make all the trips.

Another person and myself rode in

ATVs up to the site, two others rode

trail bikes, and two others got to ride in

the helicopter on the last trip. The

helicopter pilot said he would be back

in 2 days to sling-load materials and

equipment back down. The project

coordinator told me that I could ride the

helicopter back down and that he would

ride in the ATV.

The installation work at a Snotel site

is more involved than I imagined.

Concrete had to be mixed with water

for the base of the electronic equipment

shack and for the bases of two towers.

The snow pillow area had to be leveled

and raked and a layer of sand put down

for a smooth surface for the pillow. The

snow pillow was filled with a mixture

of antifreeze and water. All the

electronic equipment had to be installed

and wires run through conduit to every

instrument. My particular job was to

excavate a soil pit and do a full soil

profile description. We were in a

lodgepole pine-whitebark pine habitat

type, and the soil had quite a bit of

volcanic ash in the upper part. My job

also involved installing moisture

sensors at three different depths in the

soil, and these will be read

electronically by the Snotel equipment.

We worked a couple of long days,

and we spent the evenings by the camp

stoves listening to the elk bugle all

around us.

The last day was spent cleaning up

the site and waiting for the helicopter to

come and haul the garbage and empty

barrels back down. The helicopter

arrived at about 1:00 p.m. and took

about four sling loads back down to the

staging area. The other workers took

the ATVs and trail bikes down, and

another person and myself rode in the

helicopter. The pilot took us over the

site, and it was pretty impressive to see

the work that we had done.

This was quite an experience for me,

and I quickly volunteered my services

for the next Snotel site installation. 

The Ohio Soil Survey:

Cooperative for 50 Years

By Tim Gerber, Ohio Department of Natural

Resources, and Jon Gerken, Natural Resources

Conservation Service. Reprinted from News &

views, January/February/March 2003, Vol. 38,

No. 1, a newsletter published by the Ohio

Department of Natural Resources, Division of

Soil and Water Conservation.

I

f you know any of the 26 NRCS

 or ODNR soil scientists who are

a part of the Ohio Soil Survey, chances

are you may not know which of the two

agencies employs them. This lack of

apparent distinction between agencies

is a testament to the effectiveness of the

Ohio Soil Inventory Board, which was

created by a memorandum of

understanding signed in May 1953.

During the past 50 years, NRCS,

ODNR, and Ohio State institutions

(School of Natural Resources, Ohio

Agricultural Research and

Development Center, and OSU

Extension) have undergone name

changes, re-organizations, re-locations,

expansions and reductions in staffing,

and changes in leadership and

priorities. These changes have certainly

impacted the state’s soil survey

program, but Board coordination of

these three agencies has maintained a

level of stability that otherwise could

not have been achieved here.

To encourage similar cooperative

benefits at the national level, last year

Division Chief David Hanselmann

began encouraging his colleagues in the

National Association of State

Conservation Agencies (NASCA) to

seek direct representation for NASCA

in the National Cooperative Soil Survey

Conference. With the signing of a

memorandum of understanding between

NRCS and NASCA recently, NASCA

officially became part of the National

Cooperative Soil Survey.

Ohio Soil Inventory Board members

Jon Gerken (NRCS), Tim Gerber

(ODNR), and Neil Smeck (OARDC)

meet monthly to plan and coordinate

various aspects of the state’s soil survey

program, and schedule a two-day Work

Planning Conference each summer to

develop a business plan for the

upcoming federal fiscal year. The first

part of this year’s conference is

scheduled for late June.

The Ohio Soil Survey Business Plan

for the current fiscal year can be

accessed on NRCS’ Ohio website, at

http://www.oh.nrcs.usda.gov. It

documents the status of manuscript and

map development for 12 counties and

field activities in two other counties.

Information on the scheduling of
7

NCSS Newsletter

digitizing work for 70 counties is

included, along with plans for editing

the National Soil Information System

(NASIS) database for 28 counties

during this fiscal year. Some aspects of

the state’s soil survey are more

glamorous than others, but all are

critical to delivering important soils

information to landowners and units of

government.

The Statewide Digital Soils

Information (SDSI) Project, which is a

part of a national SSURGO Initiative,

and the Soil Information Delivery

Program are probably the most visible

parts of the Ohio Soil Survey now. Both

are excellent examples of how NRCS,

ODNR, and the OSU institutions have

tackled tasks that could not be

completed independently. Although the

three entities are funded separately and

have missions that differ at least

slightly, they share many objectives.

And, with only 30 soil scientists

available to contribute, coordinating

their activities is well worth the Soil

Inventory Board’s efforts. 

NASCA President Steve Cauthen (left) and NRCS Chief Bruce Knight signed a memorandum of

understanding establishing NASCA as a member of the National Cooperative Soil Survey

Conference during the 2003 NACD annual meeting.

Version 5.01 of Field

Indicators of Hydric Soils

in the United States

Available on CD

By Karl W. Hipple, National Leader for

Interpretations, NRCS, National Soil Survey

Center, Lincoln, Nebraska

Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, version

5.01, 2003, is now available on a CD

from the National Soil Survey Center

(NSSC). A pdf version is available at

http://soils.usda.gov/soil_use/hydric/

main.htm or from the Soils Web page,

http://soils.usda.gov (select “Soil Use”

and then “Hydric Soils”). This version

was created after the 2003 annual

meeting of the National Technical

Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS),

which was held at the NSSC.

At the meeting, the NTCHS

approved several changes to version

5.0, issued in 2002. For example, it

approved changes in the procedure for

adding new hydric soil test indicators

and/or modifying existing test

indicators.

The committee also adopted a

definition of “biological zero” to

further clarify the hydric soil indicator

criteria. Alaska research data show that

plant respiration in cold environments

(an indicator of plant growth and

function) was measured at temperatures

well below 5 degrees C. The biological

zero issue was clarified for possible use

within the hydric soil criteria.

An errata sheet listing the changes

approved by the NTCHS will be

included in the printed copies of

version 5.0 that have not yet been

distrubuted. 

A Day in the Field

By Emily Rose Seifferlein, Chemical

Analysis Section, National Soil Survey

Laboratory, National Soil Survey Center, NRCS,

Lincoln, Nebraska.

I

 started at the National Soil

 Survey Laboratory (NSSL),

National Soil Survey Center (NSSC), a

year ago, and I’ve enjoyed ever

widening exposure to the broader

mission of NRCS, in part through such

activities as the Lancaster County Field

Trip on May 15th, 2003. Dewayne

Mays (head, NSSL, NSSC) organized

the field trip to illustrate field practices

and highlight environmental issues and

research. Participants included

technicians, support staff, student

workers, and soil scientists—a group of

about 30 individuals. There were five

stops around Lancaster County,

Nebraska, and at each stop we

participated in lectures given by

specialists in soil science, soil

conservation, and water quality.

At our first stop, near the airport

west of Lincoln, Warren Lynn

(Research Soil Scientist, NSSL, NSSC)

illustrated how soil samples are
8

NCSS Newsletter

collected in the field (fig. 1). He

showed how horizons can be designated

based on physical properties in the soil,

performed the tricky task of collecting

soil from a particular horizon for

characterization, and demonstrated how

clods are prepared. Doug Wysocki

(Research Soil Scientist, NSSC) spoke

about the age and development of soils

at that site. We learned that we were

standing on over 500,000 years of soil

development!

Roger’s Memorial farm, northeast of

Lincoln, was the second stop. John

Gilley, Agricultural Engineer,

Agriculture Research Service/

University of Nebraska, and Cliff

Hunter, the farm manager, led us

through sites where research was being

conducted. We learned about

conservation practices and observed an

alternative wastewater treatment system

which used a constructed wetland to

filter the wastewater. We saw a riparian

buffer system and grassed waterways,

which prevent runoff and digest excess

nutrients, as well as a rainfall

simulation station. We heard lectures on

the effects of early season planting and

on a comparison between till and no-till

farming. Bob Grossman (Research Soil

Scientist, NSSC) demonstrated a

technique to simulate infiltration of

rainwater into the soil (fig. 2).

At the third stop, southwest of

Lincoln, Dennis Shroder (District

Conservationist, NRCS, Lincoln Field

Office), Jim Harder (Soil

Conservationist, NRCS, Lincoln Field

Office), and Moustafa Elrashidi (Soil

Scientist, NSSL, NSSC) talked about

flood-control structures, excessive

nutrients in runoff which promote algae

blooms in ponds, and other

conservation issues concerning

watersheds in Lancaster County.

Our fourth stop was Wagon Train

Lake, a reservoir in southern Lancaster

County. Dennis and Jim continued the

discussion about conservation issues in

Figure 1.—Warren Lynn demonstrates the art of sampling soils.

Figure 2.—Robert Grossman illustrates the infiltration process.
9

the county, including soil fertility, crop

rotations, and compensation to farmers

who practice conservation. Steve

Peaslee (GIS Specialist, NSSC) spoke

about Geographic Information System

(GIS) techniques in mapping using

global positioning satellite (GPS) units.

He demonstrated military-based

technology, which determines position

to within 20 feet at the push of a button!

We had an impromptu birthday

celebration for Bob Grossman (NSSC)

and enjoyed some cake under beautiful

blue skies.

Our final stop was the Audubon

Nebraska Spring Creek Prairie near

Denton (fig. 3). Arnold Mandenhall

(NRCS retiree) guided us through the

prairie. This 500-acre reserve was

established to promote the conservation

of original tall-grass prairie that once

covered vast areas of the Great Plains

States. Less than 2 percent of the

original tall-grass prairie remains. This

NCSS Newsletter

site is unique to our area because it has

never been plowed and represents

native prairie. Arnold is working hard

to remove alien plant species that

compete with the native species, using

techniques such as rotational grazing of

cattle, prescribed burning, and tree

removal. He is also working to restore

water and woodland habitats within the

prairie that support the diverse wildlife

that live around Spring Creek.

Feedback from participants was as

varied as the group:

What was your favorite spot/

moment?

“Audubon Prairie...neat to see the

virgin prairie.”

“The soil profile...when Warren cut

out the potato (clod).”

“Audubon Prairie because of all the

new conservation practices they are

using.”

“Roger’s Farm where we learned

about the Riparian Buffer system.”

Figure 3.—Observing native prairie at Spring Creek are from left to right Arnold Mendenhall,

Warren Lynn, Valarie Murray, Amber Kunc, Cathy Seybold, James Harder, Robert

Grossman, and Suzie Riedel.

National Soil Survey

Center Participates in

Infrared Spectroscopy

Study

By M. Dewayne Mays, USDA, NRCS,

Lincoln, Nebraska, and David Brown, Montana

State University, Bozeman, Montana.

The Soil Survey Laboratory (SSL) at the National Soil

Survey Center is participating in a

research study with Dr. David Brown,

Assistant Professor at Montana State

University. Thousands of soil samples

in the Soil Survey Laboratory archive

“Roger’s Farm; the new septic

system was really cool. It was neat to

see how it would work on farms.”

“... having lunch under the old cotton

wood tree at Wagon Train Lake!”

What were your thoughts about

the field trip?

“It was wonderful, I had a great

time, there were a good mix of stops,

and it helps us to be proud of what we

do.”

“It was good for morale; it made me

feel like I’m part of something.”

“The walk through the prairie was

lots of exercise; my legs were really

stiff the next day.”

“...I would have liked to spend more

time at some of the stops.”

“It would be worth going again.”

Everyone was excited to see how

their jobs tied in with the mission of

the NRCS. Some said it made them

feel good to know that the soil

properties they determine in the lab

help contribute to the welfare of

farmers and the planet. Many

participants had never seen soil

collected before and now can more

fully appreciate the care and thought

that go into conserving one of our

valuable natural resources. 
10

NCSS Newsletter

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all

its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex,

religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family

status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities

who require alternative means for communication of program information

(Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at

(202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil

Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA

is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

will be scanned with a high-resolution

visual and near-infrared (VNIR, 350-

2500 nm) spectrometer. The reflectance

spectra thus obtained can be

statistically related to chemical and

physical soil properties (McCarty and

Reeves, 2001; Shepherd and Walsh,

2002). Using the models and the VNIR

Spectroradiometric technology,

scientists can rapidly and

nondestructively characterize soils in

the laboratory and in situ.

The objective of this study is to

compile the first comprehensive soil

spectral library with a diverse sampleset (geographically dispersed, all

horizons) and with complete

characterization comparing reflectance

to chemical and physical properties.

By using <2 mm archived samples,

the researchers expect to minimize

efforts to create a robust model that

may prove useful to field personnel

using this technology. If such

technology proves successful, NRCS

will be able to rapidly estimate

chemical and physical properties of

soils under field conditions, thus

improving the quality of soil surveys

and field investigation studies. The

investigation studies that will benefit

from this research will include field

environmental studies.

The spectral absorption features of

soil materials are related to functional

groups, such as OH, SO4

, and CO3

(Hunt and Salisbury, 1970). While

much of the research on reflectance

spectroscopy has been related to

organic carbon in soils (McCarty and

Reeves, 2001), other researchers have

found strong relationships for clay

content, organic carbon, total N,

CaCO3, surface area, cation-exchange

capacity, and 1500 kPa water (Ben-Dor

and Banin, 1989; Reeves et al., 2002;

Shepherd and Walsh, 2003). The best

results were obtained from homogeneous

samples, such as the <2 mm processed

samples we decided to use.

We look forward to working with Dr.

Brown and other researchers who are

seeking to improve field methods

relating to rapid estimates of soil

analyses. These kinds of technology

will improve the quality of soil surveys

and environmental assessments.

This study will add to an earlier pilot

study conducted in Eastern and

Southern Africa by Shepherd and Walsh

(2002) and is expected to add to the

spectral library of over 1,000 African

topsoils. Samples from the SSL archive

will add further validation to samples in

the spectral library and will add new

dimensions, making the overall model

more robust (Shepherd and Walsh,

2003).

In summary, there are several major

applications of this technology to soil

survey. The technology can:

--Serve as a rapid means of

quantifying information needed

to make predictions;

--Apply to risk-based evaluation of

soils;

--Possibly be a substitute for some

of the more complex analyses;

--Significantly increase the number

of soil profiles that can be

characterized;

--Provide a method for more

vigorously ground-truthing GISbased landscape models, such as

SoLIM;

--Monitor soil change and/or

degradation, such as the loss of

organic matter and soil erosion.

References

Ben-Dor, E., and A. Banin. 1989.

Determination of organic matter

content in arid-zone soils using

simple “loss-on ignition” method.

Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 20:

1675-1695.

Hunt, G.R., and J.W. Salisbury. 1970.

Visible and near infrared spectra of

minerals and rock: Silicate

minerals. Mod. Geol. 1: 283-300.

McCarty, G.W., and J.B. Reeves III.

2001. Development of rapid

instrumental methods for

measuring soil organic carbon. In:

Lai, R., J.M. Kimble, R.F. Follett,

and B.A. Stewart (eds.).

Assessment methods for soil

carbon. Lewis Publishers,

Washington, DC, pp. 371-380.

Reeves, J. III, G. McCarty, and J.

Mimmo. 2002. The potential of

diffuse reflectance spectroscopy

for the determination of carbon

inventories in soils. Env. Pollution

116: S277-S284. Elsevier Sci. Ltd.

Shepherd, K.D., and M. Walsh. 2002.

Development of reflectance

spectral libraries for

characterization of soil properties.

Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 66: 988-998.

Shepherd, K.D., and M. Walsh. 2003.

Diffuse reflectance spectroscopy

for rapid soil analysis. Submitted

for publication in Encyclopedia of

Soil Sci.