1

National

Cooperative

Soil

Survey Newsletter

Issue 25

November 2003

In This Issue— Endangered Soils

By Craig Ditzler, National Leader, Soil

Classification and Standards, NRCS, National

Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

We are all familiar with the concept of “threatened or

endangered species” as it applies to

plants and animals. After all, most

everyone has heard of the snail darter

and spotted owl. But have you ever

considered if a soil might be

endangered? If there are endangered

soils, how many are there? Where are

they located? Why are they

endangered? Dr. Ronald Amundson and

his coauthors explore these questions in

their recent article “Soil Diversity and

Land Use in the United States,”

published in the journal Ecosystems

(Amundson, et al., October 2003, vol.

6, pages 470-482) and available on-line

at http://www.springerlink.com/. To

view the on-line version, use the search

engine on the Springer Web site to

locate the article.

In this study, the authors present the

first quantitative analysis of the impact

that humans have had on the diversity

of soils in the United States. The article

opens with a short discussion of the

importance of soils as components of

ecosystems and goes on to describe the

nature of soils as a continuum on the

earth’s surface. The authors do a nice

job of explaining how soil scientists use

Soil Taxonomy to break the natural

continuum of soil cover into discrete

units based on major properties. They

compare Soil Taxonomy’s hierarchical

levels of “order” through “series” to the

biological classes of “kingdom”

through “species.” Since there are no

currently accepted definitions for

concepts of rare or endangered soils,

the authors propose the following

definitions as a first approximation:

Rare: Soils that make up <10,000

hectares.

Unique: Soils that occur in only

one state.

Rare-unique: Soils that make up

<10,000 hectares and occur in

only one state.

Endangered: Rare or rare-unique

soils that have had more than 50

percent of their area impacted

by urban or agricultural

development.

For the analysis, the NRCS State

Soil Geographic Database (STATSGO)

was combined in a GIS with National

Land Cover Data (NLCD) interpreted

from Landsat Thematic Mapper scenes.

Combining the data layers allowed the

authors to estimate the extent of various

soil series in the United States and the

degree to which the soils may have

been impacted by human activities.

Based on their analysis, the authors

identified 4,540 rare or rare-unique

soils, or about 35 percent of the series

included in STATSGO. Fifty-four

percent of these series are located in

just six Western states (CA, ID, NV,

OR, UT, and WA). This distribution

pattern is likely a function of the

complexity of parent materials in the

region and moisture and temperature

regimes, resulting in more soil series

per unit area compared to other regions.

Hawaii and Puerto Rico also have

relatively large numbers of rare or rareunique soils (159 and 135,

respectively), and, given their small

Endangered Soils ................................ 1

A Mark Twain Tale About a

Landslide in Nevada ...................... 2

Who Were the First Soil Scientists

 in America? ................................... 4

Soil Taxonomy Forum ........................ 4

The Soaring Birds of Spain—A

Metaphor on Survival in

Bureaucracy ................................... 4

Nationwide Investigation of the

Boundary Between the Thermic

and Hyperthermic Soil

Temperature Regimes .................... 5

Supplement to the Desert Project

Soil Monograph, Volume III .......... 6

New Edition of the Keys to Soil

Taxonomy ....................................... 7

Publication Backlog ............................ 7

Editor’s Note

Issues of this newsletter are

available on the World Wide Web

(http://soils.usda.gov/). Under Quick

Access, click on NCSS Newsletter and

then on the desired issue number.

You are invited to submit stories for

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.
2

NCSS Newsletter

A Mark Twain Tale About

a Landslide in Nevada

By Stanley P. Anderson, Editor, NRCS,

National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

Mark Twain’s story “The Facts in the Great Land-Slide

Case,” first published in the Buffalo

Express on April 2, 1870, and reprinted

in collections of Twain’s works,

size, they were identified as the areas

with by far the highest density of these

soils, 10 and 15 percent, respectively,

per 100,000 hectares. Washington State

is next with about 3 percent.

When the extent of urban or

agricultural disturbance is considered,

six states were identified as having 50

percent or more of their rare or rareunique soils “endangered.” They are

Indiana and Iowa (each with about 81

percent ), followed by Illinois (66

percent), Nebraska (61 percent),

Minnesota (53 percent), and

Connecticut (50 percent). I think that

most would agree that urban

development, where it consists of

excavation, filling, or paving over, may

have an effect akin to “endangering” a

rare or unique soil, but I suspect many

will question whether agricultural use

alone (plowing) should be considered

in the same context, especially where

adequate conservation measures are

applied.

The authors acknowledge numerous

weaknesses in the procedure they used.

I will focus on a few of the more

important ones.

STATSGO (1997 version) includes

only about 60 percent of the total

number of series currently recognized

in the United States. Many of those not

listed are likely to be of minor extent,

but those are precisely the soils that this

analysis is attempting to identify.

 Some parts of the country, such as

Alaska and some wilderness areas, are

mapped at a low intensity, resulting in

the recognition of fewer soil series per

given area compared to more

intensively mapped areas. Defining

unique soils by the extent within the

boundaries of a state (as opposed to a

physiographic unit, such as an MLRA)

can be questioned, although the authors

remind us that many plant and animal

lists are presented this way and there

are some political advantages to this

approach.

One concern that I have with this

analysis is the comparison of soil series

to species of plants or animals. Soil

series are concepts we have devised to

organize our knowledge of soils as they

occur on the landscape and to transfer

technology related to soil performance

from one place to another. As such, soil

series do not really exist in nature in the

way plants and animals do. The extent

of a series depends directly on the way

we define it. Many soil series have

become less extensive over time, not

through human disturbance on the

landscape, but simply by having their

concept narrowed (consider the Miami

and Cecil series). The conceptual nature

of the soil series is also illustrated by

considering the fact that it would

change if different classification

systems were used (for example World

Reference Base vs. Soil Taxonomy vs.

the Russian Taxonomy). The authors

acknowledge this shortcoming by

saying, “While soils (nonreplicating

entities), and the soil classification

system (practical, not scientific),

differ from biological entities, this

analogy is at least an organizing

concept on which to begin this

investigation.”

The authors go on to present a case

for why all this matters. They argue

that land use changes have an impact on

soil properties, which in turn affect

function. (While they do not use the

phrase, this is much like what the

concept of Soil Quality is all about.)

The authors state that “cultivated soils

might be viewed as domesticated

versions of their natural counterparts

with widely differing properties and

functions.” While we know a lot about

the value of soils for agricultural

production, we know less about the

value of soils in performing other

environmental services, such as

support of genetic diversity in microorganisms that may prove valuable for

medicinal and industrial purposes,

ecosystem regulation, and waterflow,

carbon cycling, and other forms of

elemental cycling. We also know less

about the linkage between rare soils

and rare and endangered plants. For

these and other reasons, the authors

argue that soils and landscapes should

be considered along with plants and

animals in preservation efforts.

I found this article to be interesting

and worth reading for two reasons.

First, the idea of rare and endangered

soils is a fascinating one that few of us

have considered. This discussion tends

to connect soil science and soil survey

with aspects of conservation and

preservation that we soil scientists have

not usually identified closely with. I

suspect most of us would feel

uncomfortable with the development

of a list of threatened and endangered

soils that could be used in a regulatory

sense to restrict growth and

development.

Second, I found it very interesting to

once again see how soil survey

information can be used in ways not

anticipated by those of us who

originally made the maps. Amundson

and his colleagues have used the soil

survey to provide a unique analysis that

brings additional attention to the

subject of soil science, to the important

role that soils play in regulating the

environment, and to the possible

consequence of human alteration. Their

article is worth the read. 
3

NCSS Newsletter

Slide Mountain in an area of Washoe County, Nevada. Major landslides occurred on this mountain in 1852, 1874, 1890, 1950, and 1983. William

Dollarhide, State Soil Scientist in Nevada, says that there is soil evidence indicating that landslides have been occurring on the mountain for

many thousands of years and geologic evidence that they have been occurring for millions of years. He also says that the Railcity series was

set up on these landslides. He characterizes this series “not very extensive but certainly unique.” The series consists of very deep soils that

formed in colluvium derived from granitic rocks. Bill saw the results of the 1983 slide in a field where about 70 percent of the surface was

“covered with debris, about 6 feet thick at the top of the field and 2 feet at the bottom.”

cattle, and soil (“solid clouds of dust”)

from the mountainside and deposited

it right on top of Sides’ ranch, the soil

covering it to a depth of about 6 feet.

According to Sides, Morgan claims

that he still owns the repositioned

ranch, even though it is now on top of

Sides’ ranch, and so he refuses to leave.

Sides claims that Morgan is a

trespasser.

The courts are out of session, so

former Governor Roop, who is in on

the joke, is appointed to referee the

case. Though all of the testimony,

including that of the witnesses called by

Morgan’s lawyer, favored plaintiff

Sides, Roop argues that the

repositioning of Morgan’s ranch was an

act of God that is not to be questioned

in court, that God created the ranches

and is free to rearrange them as he sees

fit. Roop’s verdict is that Sides “has

been deprived of his ranch by the

visitation of God! And from this

decision there is no appeal.”

That night, General Buncombe begs

Roop to modify his verdict. Roop acts

as though he is reconsidering the

matter, pacing the floor for 21/2 hours

as he does so, and then announces his

modification. He says that Sides still

has title to the ranch underlying

Morgan’s new ranch and has “a right to

dig it out from under there.” General

Buncombe is stunned first by the

original verdict and then by this

modification. Two weeks pass before he

realizes that he has been had.

A slightly revised version of this

story is included as chapter XXXIV

in Roughing It (1872). In this version,

the name of the plaintiff is changed

from Dick Sides to Dick Hyde and

the description of how General

Buncombe came to realize that he was

the victim of a practical joke is

expanded: “At the end of two months

the fact that he had been played upon

with a joke had managed to bore itself,

like another Hoosac Tunnel, through

the solid adamant of his

understanding.”

Also, the depth of the defendant’s

repositioned ranch over the plaintiff’s

property is changed from 6 feet to 38

feet. The tall tale got taller. 

including Mark Twain: Collected Tales,

Sketches, Speeches, & Essays, 1852–

1890, edited by Louis J. Budd (pages

345-349), begins with a description of

how landslides occur in Nevada. Twain

says that the landslides begin when “the

warm surface-earth” on the very high,

very steep mountains near Carson,

Eagle, and Washoe Valleys becomes

moist and soft after snow begins to melt

rapidly in the spring. Whole

mountainsides are removed and

deposited in the valleys, and “a vast,

treeless, unsightly scar” is left on the

front of the mountains.

The “case” is a trumped-up one

designed as a practical joke on General

Buncombe, a newly arrived U.S.

Attorney. The General is hired by Dick

Sides (the supposed plaintiff), who

owns a ranch on the edge of a valley in

“Washoe District.” The supposed

defendant is Tom Morgan, who owns a

ranch on the mountainside directly

above Sides’ ranch. When Sides hires

General Buncombe, he claims that a

landside has moved all of Morgan’s

ranch, including barns, cabins, fences,
4

NCSS Newsletter

Who Were the First Soil

Scientists in America?

Stephen Gourley, State Soil Scientist, NRCS,

Colchester, Vermont.

The first soil scientists in America are almost always assumed to

be those men who completed the first

soil surveys in the late 1800s. Lewis

and Clark are often given credit for

conducting the first soil surveys in the

West. Some early European settlers are

often credited with making

contributions that led to the

development of soil science.

What is often forgotten is that many

American Indian tribes relied in part on

farming for food. In New England,

farming was a way of life long before

the Pilgrims set foot on Plymouth Rock.

American Indians of the Abenaki

Tribe, which occupied a large portion

of northern New England, have a

number of words in their language that

demonstrate a good understanding of

the principals of soil science. (See

Gordon M. Day, Western Abenaki

Dictionary, Volume 2: EnglishAbenaki). Some examples include:

• aki—earth, land, ground, soil,

world

• asakwamki—grey soil under moss,

a podzol soil

• asakwamimskagw—a moss swamp

• azeskojagw—muddy soil

• begwi—sand

• bidhomkitan—silt

• senomkol—gravel

• mazalopskw–clay

• megoakw—a swamp

• mekwakaa—red earth

• mkazawiki—black soil

From the early accounts of European

settlement in New England, it is clear

that the local tribes were good farmers,

in part because of their understanding

of soil science. In the beginning, it was

the American Indians who shared their

harvest with European settlers who had

little knowledge of farming.

Undoubtedly, they also shared their

knowledge of soils with the new

settlers.

Other American Indian tribes who

farmed the land must have also had a

basic understanding of soil science. The

evidence can be discovered if you care

to look beyond the history books. 

Soil Taxonomy Forum

By Robert Engel, Soil Scientist, NRCS,

National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

The Soil Taxonomy forum is again functioning. The forum is

for topics and issues concerning Soil

Taxonomy and classification of soils

using Soil Taxonomy. Anyone may post

a question or join in the discussion.

Bob Engel, Soil Scientist at the

National Soil Survey Center, is the

moderator for this forum. To respond to

an item posted after February 2003,

click on the link of interest. To respond

to any items posted before February

2003, open the old message and

incorporate it into a new posting at the

following link:

http://clic.cses.vt.edu/soiltax/soilt.html

Many of the topics and issues on

the forum have been related to why

criteria were selected or changed in

Soil Taxonomy. We may select and

publish some of the questions and

answers in a publication describing

the rationale for the taxonomic

concepts. This publication will be

similar to Guy Smith Interviews:

Rationale for Concepts in Soil

Taxonomy. If you have any questions,

please post them on the forum. The

Classification and Standards Staff will

try to answer them. 

The Soaring Birds of

Spain—A Metaphor on

Survival in Bureaucracy

By Bob Grossman, Research Soil Scientist,

NRCS, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln,

Nebraska.

Many years ago I read a piece inThe Atlantic on the soaring

birds of Andalusia, Spain. I have come

to realize that these birds serve as a

metaphor for how to survive in the soil

survey, probably in NRCS as a whole,

and perhaps in life generally.

There are three kinds of birds. The

largest are the bone-crushers. They are

large birds that soar to great heights,

drop their prey on the rocks, alight, and

tear out the bone marrow, which is high

in fat and provides high energy per unit

weight. The next size lands and tears

away the flesh from the bones of the

bone-crushers’ prey or from other

carrion. The third and smallest bird has

a long, curved beak, with which it

cleans the meat from between the bones

of a wide range of carrion.

For your career choice, consider that

the bone-crusher flies the highest but is

dependent on the vagaries of upward air

drafts for flight, being too large to fly

with its wing power alone, and hence is

extremely dependent on the

environment. Then, too, the bonecrusher must be able to catch the prey

and have the opportunity to crush it by

dropping it on the rocks—a

combination that may not be too

common in a bureaucracy.

The intermediate size is so flexible

that it is not dependent on catching

prey. It eats only carrion and does not

need the special conditions of strong

updrafts with rocks beneath. Neither

does it have the special adaptations of

the smallest soaring bird. It can survive

without a restricted diet and has access

to flesh not available to the two larger
5

NCSS Newsletter

birds. The smallest can survive on the

interstitial flesh through an extensive

specialization. It depends on neither of

the two larger soaring birds, but it does

have to work harder than either of the

others, and then what if that long beak

were to break?

So, is there a moral? Perhaps there

is: Do not attempt to soar to the height

of important administration, because

you must be adept at both catching prey

and finding the conditions that will let

you capitalize, and yet do not become

so specialized that you become

dependent on a very narrow range of

work being available for application of

a particular skill that you could lose.

The ecology of the soaring birds of

Andalusia shows that in a state soil

survey program, the best place is in the

middle, at the level of a field soil

scientist. 

Nationwide Investigation

of the Boundary Between

the Thermic and

Hyperthermic Soil

Temperature Regimes

By Henry Mount, Soil Scientist, NRCS,

National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

A 4-year study investigating the soil temperature regime at 147

sites has been initiated in eight states

representing six MLRA regions. A

formal work plan for this initiative was

prepared by the MLRA Office in

Temple, Texas. This is the largest

coordinated study of soil temperature in

Soil Survey Division history. States

participating in the study include

California, New Mexico, Texas,

Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama,

Florida, and Georgia. The majority of

the funding for this study was provided

by the MLRA Offices and States.

Technical review, coordination of

equipment acquisition, and software

support to launch the data loggers in a

uniform fashion were provided by the

National Soil Survey Center.

The purpose of this investigation is

to identify the latitudinal boundary

between the thermic and hyperthermic

soil temperature regimes in the

Southern States. Prior technology used

to collect soil temperature data

invariably required a soil scientist to

travel to a site either each month or

four times a year. These studies

yielded inconclusive or mixed results.

The early attempts at making a division

between the thermic and hyperthermic

temperature regimes were based mainly

on estimates and, in some cases,

Soil temperature summary for San Antonio, Texas.
6

NCSS Newsletter

convenience of correlation.

Consequently, correlation conflicts

involving Soil Taxonomy have

occurred throughout the study area.

The primary objective of this

investigation is to gather soil

temperature data in a comprehensive

and uniform manner that will

determine the division between the

thermic and hyperthermic temperature

regimes across the Southern United

States. Air temperature data will also

be gathered, so that the relationship

between air temperature and the soil

temperature at a depth of 50 cm can be

ascertained. 

Supplement to the Desert

Project Soil Monograph,

Volume III

By Stanley P. Anderson, Editor, NRCS,

National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

This book, by Leland Gile, Robert Grossman, and Robert

Ahrens, is in press. It includes soil

descriptions, a chapter on organic and

carbonate carbon, about 150

illustrations, traditional detailed soil

maps, and GIS maps. The printed copy

will be accompanied by a CD that

contains the text and the GIS maps. 

Caption for figure 104 in The Desert Project: The Ustic Haplargid, Caralampi 60-9, is at left in this mine pit near Organ. Bob Grossman, at left,

and Lee Gile are sampling the pedon. The Organ Mountains are on the skyline.
7

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.

New Edition of the Keys to

Soil Taxonomy

By Craig Ditzler, National Leader, Soil

Classification and Standards, NRCS, National

Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

The NSSC Soil Classification and Standards Staff, along with the

NCSS Regional Soil Taxonomy

Committees, reviewed over 50

proposals for revising Soil Taxonomy

that were submitted since 1998. Many

of the proposals were approved,

resulting in the addition of 4 new

suborders, 11 great groups, and 87

subgroups. These changes have been

included in the Keys to Soil Taxonomy,

9th edition. This edition is available on

the Web (http://soils.usda.gov/

technical/classification/tax_keys/) and

will be printed next year. 

Publication Backlog

By Stanley P. Anderson, Editor, NRCS,

National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

There has been a soil surveypublication backlog since I

joined the Soil Survey Editorial Staff in

Hyattsville, Maryland, in 1974. Even

then, the backlog was not a new thing.

A comment made by Charles E.

Kellogg at the “National Technical

Work-Planning Conference of the

Cooperative Soil Survey” in 1963

identifies the reason for the backlog:

The publication of soil

surveys goes slowly. Only 36

surveys are scheduled to go to

the Government Printer in

1963 and only 40 in 1964. We

have the problem of getting

the soil correlation, the map

work, and the text of the soil

survey for the same area at the

same time.