1

National

Cooperative

Soil

Survey Newsletter

Issue 20

August 2002

In This Issue—

Editor’s Note

Issues of this newsletter are

available on the World Wide Web

(www.statlab.iastate.edu/soils/soildiv).

Click on NCSS and then on the desired

issue number of the NCSS Newsletter.

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.

Notes on Kandic

Properties

During the South Regional Work Planning

Conference in Savannah, Georgia (June 3–6,

2002), the kandic horizon and its place in Soil

Taxonomy was a topic of discussion. A

committee was formed to look into how it can be

better applied to landforms in the Southeast. Dr.

Stan Buol, North Carolina State University, who

was involved early in the development of the

concept, was not in attendance. Responding to a

request by Marc Crouch, however, he did

provide the following history as he knows it.

I

t is hot and dry in Raleigh, and I

 am getting ready to catch and eat

walleyes and northerns next week in

Canada, so this morning I am nostalgic

about the kandic horizon. Evidently, the

apparent CEC7/kg clay is the issue.

That issue goes back to about 1966,

when all the present Udults were

Ochrults (7th Approximation) and

became Normudults (1964 draft

changes to the 7th). At a southern

regional soil classification workshop in

Ft. Worth, the issue was up for

discussion and the proposals were for

splitting the Normudults into

Hapludults and Tropudults. McCracken

was concerned that no provisions were

made to separate coastal plain Udults

from piedmont Udults, so he asked me

to look into the issue. He had become

department head, and I had arrived

from Arizona with a total lack of

experience in Ultisols. Dr. Roy

Simonson had forcefully, and correctly,

pointed out that criteria for

classification had to be from within the

pedon classified and could not be based

on properties below the soil, i.e., 2 m.

Within the proposed Tropudults (iso

soil temperature regime criteria), but

not in the Hapludults, an Oxic subgroup

had been proposed and defined as not

having “more than 24 meq/100g clay in

the major part of the argillic horizon”

(Second Supplement, October 1966).

Armed with all the data I could find

and with McCracken’s blessing, I set

off for Ft. Worth to propose the

following:

1) Pedons that did not have a clay

content decrease of more than 20%,

relative to maximum clay content of the

argillic, within 150 cm of the surface

would be Pachyudults (thick Udults),

and those with a clay decrease of more

than 20% within 150 cm would be

Hapludults.

2) All Udults would have Oxic

subgroups if they had CEC7

/100 g clay

less than 24 meq.

The first proposal met with

resounding success, but the name

Pachyudults was changed to Paleudults

to reflect a bias toward genesis (old

soils on the older coastal plain surfaces

rather than “Pachy,” from “pachyderm,”

meaning thick). The data I had showed

that this would separate most Udults on

coastal plains from Udults on the

piedmont without having to have

weatherable mineral data. The state soil

scientists liked it because it required

less lab data and because the clay

content with depth could be determined

in the field. As a sidelight Bartelli sent

me to my room in the middle of the

afternoon to clean up a few sentences in

my proposal, by 5 p.m. the group

accepted the proposal, and at happy

hour the concept of “Pale” based on

clay content decrease with depth was

being touted for Alfisols, Mollisols, and

even Aridisols. The second proposal,

Notes on Kandic Properties ............... 1

A Note on Erosion in the Lewis and

Clark Journals ............................... 4

1904 Guidance on the Form and

Content of Soil Survey Reports .... 4

2002 National Cooperative

Soil Survey Soil Scientist

Achievement Award ...................... 5

2002 National Cooperative Soil

Survey Soil Scientist of the

Year Award .................................... 6

Integrated Long-Term Soils Study ..... 7

Landslips............................................ 8

Postfire Runoff................................... 8

Soil Visualization Through

Micromorphology ......................... 8

Nonagricultural Soil Survey

Interpretations ............................... 9
2

NCSS Newsletter

Oxic subgroups in all Udults, was

soundly shouted down by the group. It

required too much lab data, and

available data indicated that it would

affect a large number of existing series

in the Southern region. When the

proposal reached Guy Smith, he liked

both the “Pale” and the “Oxic”

proposals, but the state soil scientists

were strongly against the “Oxic”

subgroups, so it remained only in the

Tropudults and thus was not of concern

in most of the Southern region.

After Guy retired and was in

Venezuela, the question of “Oxic”

subgroups continued to arise. We were

then in the beginnings of the ICOM’s

with the International Committee on

Low Activity Clays. The most pressing

issue was the volume of clay skins

needed (>1%) to distinguish an argillic

horizon from an oxic horizon and

seemed to be an insoluble problem. In

soils that have few weatherable

minerals from which to form “new”

clay, few clay skins are present

(Rebertus and Buol, 1985.

Intermittency of illuviation in

Dystrochrepts and Hapludults from the

piedmont and Blue Ridge provinces of

North Carolina. Geoderma 36: 277-

291). During the time Guy was in

Venezuela, we had several exchanges of

letters relative to Ultisols. I well

remember and retain those letters, in

which Guy was so convinced that the

Southern States would not accept the

low clay CEC criteria that he wanted to

retain the Tropudults, based only on the

iso STR criteria, and recognize Oxic

subgroups only in “Trop” great groups

so as not to upset the Southern region. I

wanted to abandon “Trop” as a great

group because it was redundant to the

family criteria, and I argued, “Low

CEC was low CEC regardless of

whether it was in the tropics or in the

temperate zone.” In one exchange of

letters, I sent Guy a postage stamp from

the U.S. that outlined the tropics,

temperate, and boreal latitudes and

asked the very pointed question of

whether he thought we should use a

great group formative element on

criteria that could be mapped on a

postage stamp. Feeling a bit guilty

about being so abrupt with an elder I so

respected, I was hesitant when his letter

arrived a couple of weeks latter. To my

surprise his first sentences were, “Now

I am going to surprise you. I agree with

you.” Guy’s concern for low activity

clay criteria in the Southern region is

shown on page 240 of the Guy Smith

interviews.

The work of ICOMLAC was in full

swing, and the clay skin issue would not

go away. Frank Moormann did not want

to violate the mandate to ICOMLAC to

study low activity clay in Ultisols and

Alfisols. Both orders required an

argillic horizon, but clearly it was often

impossible to find clay skins in argillic

horizons with low activity clay. A new

diagnostic horizon seemed the best way

to address the problem, and in 1979, I

introduced the “finer textured

subsurface horizon (FTSH)” (page 122

in the Excerpts from the Circular

Letters of ICOMLAC). After some

editing, Frank and I proposed the “finer

textured subsoil horizon” that was like

the argillic horizon but had low

apparent clay CEC and no clay skin

requirements (page 125 in the Excerpts

from ICOMLAC). Of course, we had to

have a better name for the FTSH

horizon, and as an aside I proposed

“Impic horizon,” derived from

“impotent,” but more scientific heads

prevailed, and I think Hari Eswaran

proposed “Kandic,” derived from

kandite, the family name for kaolinites.

(I still find that students are more likely

to remember what is defined if it is

referred to as impotent “Impudults”

rather than “Kandiudults.”)

That ended the search for clay skins

in argillic-like horizons of low activity

clay, but there remained two

fundamental questions on how this new

diagnostic horizon should be used.

First, there was the separation of

coastal plains from piedmont areas in

the Southern region. I firmly believed

that distinction had to be retained and

thus saw the necessity of the dual great

group name—“Kanhap” for the thinner

kandic horizons, mostly in the

piedmont, and “Kandi,” i.e., “Pale,” for

the thicker kandic horizons of the

coastal plain. The second question was

more difficult and was a major point of

disagreement between Frank and

myself. Apparently, the same issue is

now in debate. Should the CEC criteria

be 16 cmol/kg clay or 24 cmol/kg clay

when CEC is determined at pH 7?

Frank wanted 24 because it better

defined the low activity clay areas in

West Africa. I wanted 16 because it

better fit the criteria we had been using

to separate clayey kaolinitic and clayey

mixed families in the Ultisols of the

U.S. I also argued that the 16 cmol/kg

clay was equivalent to the Oxic horizon

and thus the separation of Oxisols from

Inceptisols. In some obscure hotel

room, Frank and I consumed the

mollifying contents of a bottle of

Scotch and decided on the phrase

“apparent clay CEC at pH 7 of 16 or

less OR apparent ECEC of the clay of

12 or less.” By that time we had a

number of data sets that determined

that an ECEC of 12 cmol/kg clay was

nearly equal to an apparent CEC of 20

cmol/kg clay at pH 7. Thus, it would be

a compromise between the 24 he

wanted and the 16 I wanted, and we

would both save face. (Saving face is

very necessary in Asian culture, and

Frank had spent many years in Viet

Nam and Thailand.)

The ICOMLAC proposal went to

John Witty in that form. John held a

small meeting in Washington to review

the proposal. Frank could not attend,

but I did. I was armed with a study of

existing data and a map made by Joe
3

NCSS Newsletter

Nichols showing that if the higher pH 7

CEC value of 24 cmol/kg clay were

accepted, it would move the “kandi” to

include parts of Tennessee, Kentucky,

and Mississippi, but I do not have the

exact map Joe prepared. Anyhow, at

that meeting it was argued that the dual

criteria of 16 cmol/kg clay or less at pH

7 OR an ECEC of 12 cmol/kg clay or

less would require two lab analyses of

each sample and it would be better if

we settled on one criterion. Thus, the

wording was change to AND. The data

available clearly showed that if a

sample had an apparent CEC of 16

cmol/kg clay at pH 7, it would always

meet the 12 or less cmol/kg clay ECEC

criterion. I personally feel that the

confusion created by including both

values in the definition should be

eliminated by stating only the apparent

CEC at pH 7 criterion, but at the time

everyone was more concerned with

adhering to the words of the

ICOMLAC proposal, even though the

application of the criteria had been

changed by using AND rather than OR

in the definition. Although I clearly

favored AND, I refused to vote on the

decision out of respect for Frank, who

was not able to present his case. After

Frank saw the final outcome, he thought

I had unduly influenced John. Later,

when I visited Frank in the Netherlands,

we had dinner and a good bottle of

wine, and as I explained what had

happened, he forgave me and we parted

good and respected friends.

It appears that the 16 vs. 24 apparent

clay CEC at pH 7 is again up for

debate. From the work Joe Nichols did

with data existing at that time, all that

changing the kandic limit to 24 cmol/kg

clay would do is put the borderline

pedons in a different place throughout

the Southern region. With introduction

of the clay activity family classes, a

small range of soils fit as subactive

families between “kandi” and 24

cmol/kg clay. One could argue that

there is no need to have a 0.16 to 0.24

CEC7 to % clay ratio subactive activity

family class and have the semiactive

activity class range from 0.40 down to

0.16 as defined by the kandic.

There are three reasons I personally

would not like to see the kandic horizon

criteria raised to less than 24 cmol/kg

clay. First, my most selfish reason is

that the rules for identifying soils with

expansive clays for the purpose of

permitting standard septic systems is in

the process of being defined at 16

cmol/kg apparent clay CEC determined

at pH 7 in North Carolina. This is what

I have been doing for about 30 years

when septic system questions and

samples with more than 35% clay

come to my lab. I have tested this

criterion against x-ray traces of the clay

and believe that it more clearly defines

the limit of more or less than 10% 2:1

clay minerals in a sample than I can

obtain from x-ray (Kimble, Buol, and

Witty. 1993. Rationale for using ECEC

and CEC in defining the Oxic and

Kandic horizons. Soil Survey Horizons.

34: 39-44). It is a lot easier to do, more

easily reproduced, and looks better than

x-ray traces in a courtroom when

decisions of the Health Department and

consultants come up for litigation.

Joe Kleiss (1994. Relationship

between geomorphic surfaces and low

activity clay on the North Carolina

coastal plain. Soil Science 157: 373-

378) has helped to establish a

geomorphic relationship that can be

used, at least in North Carolina, to

define the extent of the kandic horizon

on the coastal plain. We have not

formally tested limits in the piedmont,

but in working with sanitarians and

consultants, we have found a good

relationship between the 16 limit and

other morphological features of the

pedons that these people can recognize

in the field and use to make their septic

system recommendations.

There always is a gray area at the

“on ground” boundary between any

taxonomic criteria definition of any

natural entity. Soils are no more

problematic in this respect than rocks or

minerals. Within a limited geographic

area, it is usually possible to find some

taxonomic criterion that fits a

geographic boundary, but as that

geographic area is expanded and more

pedons are examined, we always find

that there is no taxonomic criterion that

satisfactorily “fits” with “natural”

geographic boundaries of soils in all

areas.

I was personally very concerned

when the kandic criterion was

established because I knew the line

would be difficult to establish within

“my own backyard,” but we do the best

we can. If the limit is increased, it will

only push the decisions to another

“backyard,” i.e., younger geomorphic

surfaces and more poorly drained soils

on the coastal plains (see the Kleiss

reference) and soils with greater

inclusions of basic parent material

and/or loess in other areas.

Secondly, we should remember that

Soil Taxonomy attempts to classify all

soils in the world. In the Southern

region we are on the “fringe” of the

kandic horizon and do not find the

extremely low CEC soils defined as the

Acrudoxic Kandiudults (ECEC of 1.5

cmol/kg clay or less) and the various

“Acr” great groups of Oxisols.

Increasing the “kandic” limit will

enlarge the range of clay activity

identified by the kandic horizon and

needs to be tested in many other places,

especially where “Kandi” Ultisols and

Alfisols are in geographic association

with Oxisols.

Finally, I like 16 cmol/kg clay limit

for the kandic horizon because

apparent CEC7

 of the clay is most often

spatially related to parent material.

Having one limit that separates Oxisols

and “Kandi” great groups from

Inceptisols and “nonkandic” great
4

NCSS Newsletter

1904 Guidance on the Form and Content of Soil

Survey Reports

By Stanley P. Anderson, Editor, NRCS, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

The following guidelines are from pages 40 and 41 of Instructions to Field Parties and Descriptions of Soil Types published by the United States

Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Soils, in 1904. Note the restrictions on the

length of the various sections in soil survey reports. Sentenced to a 30-year term of

hard labor as an editor of the much more lengthy modern soil survey reports, I say

that the early years of the soil survey program were the good old days.

Form of a soil survey report.—Owing to the large amount of data being collected by

soil-survey parties, it will be necessary to confine the report from each party to about 50

typewritten pages of 250 words each, or 25 printed pages of 500 words each for the

Western Division and to about 15 or 20 printed pages for the Eastern Division. The

material for the report should be collected and written up, so far as possible, before the

party leaves the field.

An outline of the chapters is given as a guide in the arrangement of the report, and

should be followed as closely as circumstances will permit. The number of words to be

given in each chapter will be a guide in the preparation of the material and is given as the

result of experience in former reports. It is understood of course that the headings will

necessarily have to be changed somewhat in different districts, and the relative importance

of the different chapters will vary with the locality. This is intended, therefore, simply as a

guide in the preparation of the reports, and the number of words should be taken as the

maximum to be used except in the case of matters of special importance, which may need

fuller treatment.

groups is desirable when map units

(often associations of great groups) are

named on small-scale generalized

maps. I think it is desirable to have

some degree of uniformity within Soil

Taxonomy. As Guy Smith once said,

“Have sympathy for the students.” If

we identify low activity clay at 16 for

the oxic horizon and 24 for the kandic

horizon, persons looking at the

description of these diagnostic

horizons in Soil Taxonomy (on page 43

of the 2nd edition, we say the kandic

CEC is comparable to that of Oxisols)

may wonder if soil scientists really

know what they mean by low activity

clay. 

A Note on Erosion in the

Lewis and Clark Journals

By Stanley P. Anderson, Editor, NRCS, National

Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, Nebraska.

The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition (Gary E.

Moulton, ed., University of Nebraska

Press, 1987) include William Clark’s

description of wave erosion near a

Tillamook village along the Pacific,

January 8, 1806:

The Coast in the

neighbourhood of this old

village is slipping from the

Sides of the high hills, in

emence masses; fifty or a

hundred acres at a time give

way and a great proportion of

an instant precipitated into the

Ocean. those hills and

mountains are principally

composed of a yellow Clay;

their Slipping off or Spliting

assunder at this time is no

doubt Caused by the incessant

rains which has fallen the last

two months (vol. 6, pp. 182-

183). 
5

NCSS Newsletter

The matter should be presented in a terse style, and no more words used than are

absolutely necessary to convey the meaning, being careful, however, to treat each subject

so that all important phases may be brought out and clearly stated. In order to attain this,

the different chapters should be revised several times if necessary, so that all important

matters may be considered and all unnecessary words eliminated. A careful consideration

of this matter of style in writing is enjoined upon all members of the division charged with

the preparation of reports.

Outline of soil survey report.—The outline of chapters referred to is as follows:

I. Location and Boundaries of the Area (100 words).

II. History of Settlement and Agricultural Development (500 words).

Date or dates of county organization.

Principal source of population.

Agricultural development.

III. Climate.

IV. Physiography and Geology (500 words).a

V. Soils (500 words to each type).b

Name, description, depth, and color of soil and subsoil.c

Location of soil in area.

Topographic features.

Drainage features.

Origin of soil and processes of formation.

Mineral or chemical features. Alkali salts.

Unusual or characteristic crops to which adapted.

Crops crown and average yields.

VI. Special Soil Problems, such as Hardpan, Acid Soils, Reclamation of Swamp and

Worn-out lands (100 words).

VII. Water Supply for Irrigation, Amount and Character (250 words).

VIII. Underground and Seepage Waters, Drainage of Soils (250 words).

IX. Alkali in Soils (1,000 words).b

Location of alkali areas.

Origin of alkali.

Chemical composition of alkali.

Distribution in soil.

Reclamation of alkali lands.

X. Agricultural Methods in Use as Adapted to the Soils and Conditions of the Area.

XI. Agricultural Conditions in the Area (1,500 words).b

General prosperity of farming class.

Tenure of farms.

General size of farms.

Character of labor.

Character of principal products.

Recognition of adaptation of soils to crops.

Transportation facilities.

Markets.

a The physiography should be described in some detail; the geology should be briefly treated, only

those features having a direct or important bearing on the soils being considered. Authorities for

statements made should be cited wherever possible. b In preparing chapters V, IX, and XI write in the subtopics and discuss each in the order given.

This will aid in securing uniformity in the reports, and prevent the omission of matter important in

making comparisons of the soils and conditions in different areas. c The greatest care should be taken to make the descriptions of the soils, while full enough to be

clear, concise and explicit.

It would be difficult to improve upon the advice concerning brevity and clarity

given in the third paragraph. In fact, this paragraph is repeated virtually verbatim

in the bureau’s Instructions to Field Parties published in 1914 (page 113). The

only differences are that the word “division” is changed to “bureau” in sentence 3

and the word “terse” is changed to “direct” in sentence 1. “Terse” is better. 

2002 National Cooperative

Soil Survey Soil Scientist

Achievement Award

Allan G. Giencke, Soil Data Quality Specialist, St. Paul,

Minnesota, Natural Resources

Conservation Service, has been

selected as the winner of the 2002

National Cooperative Soil Survey

(NCSS) Soil Scientist Achievement

Award. This award will be presented at

the Soil Science Society of America

National Meeting in Indianapolis,

Indiana, during the week of November

10–15, 2002. Winners are selected

from nominations submitted by all

NCSS cooperators from across the

Nation.

The NCSS Soil Scientist

Achievement Award nationally

recognizes exceptional achievement by

outstanding soil scientists who are

working in the production phase of soil

survey under the auspices of the

National Cooperative Soil Survey

Program. The first award was

presented in 1999 as part of the Soil

Survey Centennial Celebration.

Nominees must have a minimum of 10

years (cumulative) service in the

production phase of soil survey and

must be currently working in project

soil survey work or technical soil

services. An individual may receive this

award only once during his or her

career.

Allan G. Giencke
6

NCSS Newsletter

Allan Giencke has enjoyed a long

and successful career with USDA, Soil

Conservation Service (SCS) and

Natural Resources Conservation

Service (NRCS). He has been

employed for 30 years as a soil survey

project leader, assistant state soil

scientist, and area resource soil

scientist. In Minnesota, Al has used

outstanding technical and

communication skills to ensure a

superior soils program for both the

National and Minnesota Cooperative

Soil Surveys. He has coordinated soil

survey activities in eight states

throughout the upper Midwest. He

plays a leading role in creating

electronic soil surveys in this region.

Al was selected as Soil Scientist of

the Year by the Minnesota Association

of Professional Soil Scientists in

December of 2001. He is a licensed

professional soil scientist with the State

of Minnesota.

Al is married and has two children.

In his spare time, he is involved with

volunteer activities, including

PREPARE, Junior Achievement, Cub

Scouts, Boy Scouts, Habitat for

Humanity, Science Fair, and Kids

Computer Club. 

2002 National Cooperative

Soil Survey Soil Scientist

of the Year Award

David Roberts, Area Resource Soil Scientist, Madison,

Wisconsin, Natural Resources

Conservation Service, has been

selected as the winner of the 2002

National Cooperative Soil Survey

(NCSS) Soil Scientist of the Year

Award. This award will be presented at

the North-Central Regional NCSS

Conference in Madison, Wisconsin,

during the week of June 24–28, 2002.

be a new and innovative means of

doing soil survey work that would

improve accuracy, increase production,

and provide more usable soil survey

information in a much more timely

fashion. His insistence with

management that this concept can

produce a more efficient and accurate

method of portraying soil survey

information has brought us to the point

we are at today in the application of the

SoLIM technology. Currently, SoLIM

is being used to produce soil maps in

Wisconsin and Tennessee. Also,

Arizona is exploring the possibility of

using SoLIM to map some inaccessible

lands on a military reservation. The

work with the SoLIM concept has

proven to be highly successful in

Wisconsin, where the project is now in

a full production mode.

The SoLIM concept has created an

excitement in the soil science

community that is unprecedented and

potentially could revolutionize how soil

survey work is accomplished. 

Winners are selected from nominations

submitted by all NCSS cooperators

from across the Nation.

The NCSS Soil Scientist of the Year

Award nationally recognizes

“exceptional achievement by NRCS

soil scientists who are working in the

production phase of the soil survey

program.” The first award was

presented in 1999 as part of the Soil

Survey Centennial Celebration and is

now granted annually to outstanding

soil scientists at the GS–12 level and

below. Nominees must have a minimum

of 3 years service in the production

phase of soil survey. An individual may

receive this award only once during his

or her career.

David Roberts has enjoyed a long

and successful career with USDA, Soil

Conservation Service (SCS) and

Natural Resources Conservation

Service (NRCS). He has been

employed for over 30 years as a project

soil scientist, soil survey project leader,

and resource soil scientist. Dave has

always been forward thinking and

innovative in his approach to soil

survey work.

One of the contacts that Dave has

maintained in his work as a resource

soil scientist in southeastern Wisconsin

is with the Geography Department at

University of Wisconsin in Madison. In

late 1997, Dave discovered some

research of Professor Axing Zhu that

related to computer modeling of soil

survey information. For a number of

years, Dr. Zhu had been working on a

concept that could potentially automate

the soil survey process using digital

elevation models and fuzzy logic for

soil membership. The concept, coined

SoLIM, has evolved into a very

successful research project and

partnership between NRCS and the

University of Wisconsin. The evolution

of this concept was brought about by

Dave’s recognition that SoLIM could

David Roberts
7

NCSS Newsletter

Integrated Long-Term

Soils Study

By Sandy Wilmot, Monitoring Director,

Vermont Monitoring Cooperative1

(sandy.wilmot@anrmail.anr.state.vt.us)

I

n 1999, a team2 of scientists

 associated with the Vermont

Monitoring Cooperative (VMC)

proposed establishment of a long-term

forest soil monitoring study. The

justification for such a study was multipronged but focused on the long-term

impacts of air pollution on the quality

of forest soils. The concerns related to

these impacts included the fate of heavy

metals (e.g., mercury and lead)

deposited from the atmosphere, loss of

available nutrients (especially calcium

and magnesium) through leaching, and

changes in carbon and nitrogen

resulting from nitrogen saturation and

from climatic changes. The overall goal

of this study is to detect human-caused

changes in forested soils at two VMC

study sites. An additional goal is to

provide basic soil characterization data

to support VMC monitoring and

research.

Updating soil maps for the study

sites was the first task of the team and

was accomplished by Thom Villars in

1999 and 2000. The study sites straddle

four counties (Chittenden, Lamoille,

Bennington, and Winham Counties),

and seven towns (Underhill,

Cambridge, Stowe, Manchester,

Sunderland, Winhall, and Stratton).

The soil map update ensured that

each area was mapped according to the

newest soil standards. The two study

sites have been mapped at a 1:20,000

scale, but the specific long-term soil

monitoring locations will be mapped at

a higher resolution.

Five soil sites have been identified

for long-term monitoring. Three of

these are at Mount Mansfield, and two

are at Lye Brook. An elaborate soil

characterization of each site is near

completion. Analysis was conducted at

the National Soil Survey Laboratory,

Natural Resources Conservation

Service (NRCS), Lincoln, Nebraska.

Initial site characterization has been

completed, and the sites have been

permanently marked. A sampling

design has been established, and the

baseline sampling year is expected to

be 2002.

Following is a description of the

sampling design:

• Sampling will be done over a 200-

year period.

• Sampling dates: 0, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100,

150, and 200 years.

• Three sites at Mount Mansfield—

northern hardwood forest, transitional

forest, and high-elevation spruce/fir

forest; two sites at Lye Brook—

northern hardwood forest and

transitional forest.

• Plot size is 50 x 50 meters with

uniform, relatively stone-free soils.

• In each sampling year, 10 1-meter

samples per site will be used to collect

soil from five horizons.

• Samples will be analyzed against a

known forest soil standard.

• Archived samples will be stored at

room temperature in 8-ounce jars.

An added bonus to the soil

monitoring study is the installation of

two Soil Climate Analysis Network

(SCAN) stations, one at Mount

Mansfield and one at Lye Brook. This

NRCS national network provides

continuous monitoring of soil

temperature and moisture and will be an

excellent source of supplemental

environmental data in support of the

study.

Additional research questions are

being addressed at these sites. Don

Ross is using the VMC study sites in

addition to other locations as part of a

regional nitrogen transformation study.

Nitrate in rain and snow is transformed

in the soil before appearing in streams.

Soil micro-organisms are involved in

nitrogen cycling processes. Soil

disturbance changes transformation

rates. This complex process will shed

light on the question of nitrogen

saturation in soils, both in Vermont and

in the region.

A study initiated in 2001 by Linda

Pardo of the U.S. Forest Service

approaches the nitrogen saturation issue

from above ground. An evaluation of

tree foliage for delta-N-15 can

determine the status of soil nitrogen at a

site.

Additional studies are being

planned in association with the longterm soil monitoring sites. The subjects

of these studies include weathering

rates of soils, status of mercury

accumulation in soils, calcium

transformations over time, rooting

depth and density, and carbon flux. In

addition, scientists are working with the

Soil Science Society of America to

establish forest soil reference samples.

These samples will provide VMC and

others involved in studying the forest

ecosystem with a known standard for

forest soils and thus will improve

laboratory analyses. 

1 The Vermont Monitoring Cooperative

(VMC) is a multi-disciplinary program initiated

in 1990 as a State, university, and Federal

partnership to improve our understanding of

forested ecosystems. It was designed to enhance

access to data and information from monitoring

and research studies. The VMC facilitates this

process by providing networking opportunities

and data management services. 2 The Soil Team includes Scott Bailey, U.S.

Forest Service; Thom Villars, Natural Resources

Conservation Service; Don Ross, University of

Vermont; Nancy Burt, Green Mountain National

Forest; Deane Wang, University of Vermont; and

Sandy Wilmot, Vermont Department of Forests,

Parks & Recreation. Tim Scherbatskoy, from

University of Vermont, was involved in the

 initial planning but has now moved on to New

York.
8

NCSS Newsletter

Soil Visualization Through

Micromorphology

By Michael Wilson, Research Soil Scientist,

NRCS, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln,

Nebraska.

Micromorphology, the microscopic examination

of thin slices of undisturbed soil

fabric, provides scientific information

Landslips

By Chuck Gordon, State Soil Scientist/

MLRA Leader, USDA, NRCS, Bozeman,

Montana.

L

andslips result when masses of

 soil and rock material move

downslope under natural conditions.

Block glides, slumps, and earth flows

are the major types of landslips.

Although landslips have many causes,

most involve either earth materials with

low shear strength or ground-water

saturation of materials. Large landslips

are most common in areas where shales

and other soft sedimentary rocks

abound. Landslip deposits have many

seeps, springs, and depressions that

often contain small ponds or bogs.

Landslips are hazardous to life and

property both in the landslip itself and

in the areas where the landslip material

is deposited. Some landslips are stable

and unlikely to move again; others

remain unstable and can be reactivated

by basal undercutting, such as that

caused by stream erosion or artificial

excavation. Movement can also recur

because of increased ground-water

pressure, such as that induced by the

removal of forest cover or the diversion

of drainage water to unusual slope

positions. Landslips can by reactivated

by some management practices, such as

excavation. Excavation for road

construction can be particularly

hazardous. 

Postfire Runoff

By Chuck Gordon, State Soil Scientist/

MLRA Leader, USDA, NRCS, Bozeman,

Montana.

Wildfires are an integral part of nature. They can have many

positive effects on plant ecology and

wildlife but also can have devastating

effects on life and property. Besides the

direct effect of the fire itself, postfire

runoff problems can occur. Slopes left

denuded by forest or range fires are

susceptible to accelerated soil erosion,

flash flooding, and debris flows

because of the absence of vegetation

and roots that bind the soil. In addition,

very high temperatures can produce

hydrophobicity in the soil surface.

Hydrophobic soils repel water, reducing

the amount of infiltration.

Several recovery techniques can

reduce the hazards associated with

postfire runoff. Revegetation and

structural practices assist in the

recovery from the aftermath of a

wildfire. Vegetation is one of the most

important factors influencing soil

erosion. It helps to control erosion by

shielding the soil from the impact of

raindrops, by maintaining a soil

surface capable of absorbing water,

and by reducing the amount and

velocity of runoff. A few of the

structural practices that aid in the

recovery process are straw wattles,

which stabilize slopes; contour tree

felling; mulching; temporary check

dams; concrete barriers; and rock-lined

channels. 

Photograph of a landslip by Mary McDonald

Pochelon, Soil Conservation Technician,

USDA, NRCS, Kalispell, Montana.

An area that is subject to the damaging effects of postfire runoff. Photograph by Tasha Gibby,

Public Affairs Specialist, USDA, NRCS, Bozeman, Montana.
9

Nonagricultural Soil

Survey Interpretations

By R.B. Grossman, Research Soil Scientist,

NRCS, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln,

Nebraska. From a paper prepared for a

conference in Kenya in 1989. Only the part of

the paper entitled “1.0 Current USDA System”

is given here. A few modifications of the original

text have been made.

A few words about the history of nonagricultural soil survey

interpretations in the United States may

add perspective (Gardner, 1957;

Simonson, 1987a, 1987b). In the 1920’s

and early 1930’s the Federal Soil

Survey was involved in successful

cooperative studies with the National

Bureau of Roads on characterization of

soil as construction material and with

the National Bureau of Standards on

corrosion (Romanoff, 1957). There was

not, however, an encompassing

program in nonagricultural

interpretations. The present strong,

broad program may be traced to the

assumption of leadership of the Federal

Soil Survey in the Bureau of Soils by

C.E. Kellogg in the mid 1930’s. He had

been involved while a graduate student

at Michigan State University in a

program that employed soil survey

information for planning road

construction (Michigan State Highway

Department, 1952). This experience

may have been a factor in the emphasis

placed on use of soil information for

engineering decisions. Kellogg’s

assumption of leadership of the Bureau

of Soils soil survey coincided with the

early period of the New Deal, when

there was much effort to improve the

infrastructure of the country and large

scale social planning was generally

accepted. The Soil Conservation

Service had its origins in this period. A

NCSS Newsletter

that complements analytical soils data.

It is the one laboratory technique that

preserves the natural arrangement of

soil materials in the study of the

properties and relationships of soil

mineral and organic constituents.

The National Soil Survey Center

(NSSC) laboratory in Lincoln,

Nebraska, has produced thin sections

of soil fabric for many of the pedons

being analyzed for chemical, physical,

and mineralogical properties. When

the thin sections are made, soil

material is impregnated with a resin

that hardens upon heating and the

soil is then sliced to fit a glass slide

and ground to a thickness of about 30

micrometers. Particle features, such as

arrangement, size, mineralogy, and

weathering, can then be examined

with a petrographic microscope.

Primary soil structural units as well as

the shape and continuity of pores are

readily visible.

Micromorphology has been

instrumental in developing certain

criteria of Soil Taxonomy and in

elucidating pedogenetic processes, such

as argillation, pan formation, and

crusting. This science has wide

application in such disciplines as soil

chemistry, soil physics, land-use

management, biology, and archaeology.

Photomicrographs of soil fabrics are

increasingly used to educate students of

all ages and levels (K-12, university,

and professional levels).

These images help soil scientists

and others to visualize soil

composition and genetic processes.

The slide presentation “Soil Under a

Microscope” (http://

www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/

worldsoils/microscope/) is an example

of the educational use of

micromorphology. The poster “The

Colors of Soil,” in addition to providing

information about the science of soils,

features an enlarged image of a thin

section of soil fabric. 

A thin section of the Bk6 horizon from a

pedon in Fremont County, Wyoming.

This horizon consists mainly of medium

(0.25-0.50 mm) and coarse (0.5-1.0 mm)

sand-sized grains with surface coatings

of calcium carbonate.

Photomicrograph of the 2Bkqm horizon of a

pedon from Jefferson County, Oregon.

The fabric has an opal and chalcedony

laminar cap. Much of the fabric is

composed of durinodes (noncrystalline

silica) surrounded by moderately

oriented silicate clays.
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.

utilitarian soil survey was begun for soil

erosion control by the Soil

Conservation Service separate from the

one Kellogg headed. The Soil

Conservation Service program may

have fostered more emphasis on

interpretations in the soil survey of the

Bureau of Soils headed by Kellogg.

During World War II nonagricultural

interpretations were made for the

military by soil survey personnel

associated with the Bureau of Soils.

Maps were prepared that estimated

suitability of soils for construction and

trafficability. After World War II,

people who had been involved in the

military program had a large influence

on the interpretations effort.

In the period 1950-1970 the current

comprehensive interpretative program

was largely established. A probable

reason for the strong emphasis on

interpretations as a whole was the

placement of all responsibility for soil

survey in the Soil Conservation Service

with its practical thrust. The “Guide for

Interpreting Engineering Uses” (USDA,

SCS, 1971) codifies various

interpretations for nonagricultural

purposes developed in this period and

is still a useful reference for current

interpretations. This was an important

reference for the completion of SCSSOI-5 forms, which were the bases of

the first consistent national system of

interpretive quantities and class

placements.

Three factors probably favored

an emphasis on nonagricultural over

agricultural interpretations during the

formative 1950-1970 period. First, a

concern about agricultural surpluses

made it difficult to emphasize

agricultural interpretations that

would add to the surpluses. Second,

strong programs in agricultural

interpretations, particularly in soil

fertility, existed in the state agricultural

experiment stations, whereas there was

no other national program for

dissemination of nonagricultural soil

survey information. The third factor

was a rapidly expanding need

resulting from prosperity and

population growth. This emphasis on

nonagricultural interpretations has

continued and only recently may be

changing with the advent of

environmental concern about

agriculture and greater awareness of the

hazards of erosion.

During 1950-1970, there was a

major movement of people to the

suburbs related to the general

economic improvement and the large

increase in birth rate immediately after

World War II. Nonagricultural

interpretations increasingly emphasized

the prediction of soil properties

important to construction and

maintenance of detached houses on

individual lots. The soil survey of

Fairfax County, Virginia (Porter et al.,

1963; Pettry and Coleman, 1974)

pioneered the comprehensive

treatment on nonagricultural

interpretations with emphasis on sites

for detached houses. From 1940-1960

the population of the county increased

several fold, leading to a large increase

in the need for nonagricultural

interpretations which the soil survey

attempted to meet.

References

Gardner, D.R. 1957. The National

Cooperative Soil Survey of the

United States. Ph.D. Thesis,

Harvard University, Cambridge,

MA.

Michigan State Highway Department.

1952. Field Manual of Soil

Engineering. Third edition.

Pettry, D.E., and C.S. Coleman. 1974.

Two Decades of Urban Soil

Interpretations in Fairfax County,

Virginia. Geoderma 10: 27-34.

Porter, H.C., J.F. Derting, J.H. Elder,

and E.F. Henry. 1963. Soil Survey

of Fairfax County, Virginia. U.S.

Dept. of Agriculture, Soil

Conservation Service, Washington,

D.C.

Romanoff, M. 1957. Underground

Corrosion. Nat. Bureau Standards

Circ. 579.

Simonson, R.W. 1987a. Historical

Aspects of Soil Survey and Soil

Classification Part VI. 1951-1960.

Soil Survey Horizons 28: 39-46.

Simonson, R.W. 1987b. Historical

Aspects of Soil Survey and Soil

Classification Part VII. 1961-1970.

Soil Survey Horizons 28: 77-84.

United States Department of

Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service. 1971. “Guide for

Interpreting Engineering Uses.”