United States

Department of

Agriculture

Natural

Resources

Conservation

Service

Soil Survey of

Florence County,

Wisconsin

In cooperation with

the Research Division of

the College of Agricultural

and Life Sciences,

University of Wisconsin
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is committed to making its

information accessible to all of its customers and employees. If you are experiencing

accessibility issues and need assistance, please contact our Helpdesk by phone at

1-800-457-3642 or by e-mail at ServiceDesk-FTC@ftc.usda.gov. For assistance with

publications that include maps, graphs, or similar forms of information, you may also

wish to contact our State or local office. You can locate the correct office and phone

number at http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app.

NRCS Accessibility Statement
Detailed Soil Maps

The detailed soil maps can be useful in planning the use and management of small areas.

To find information about your area of interest, locate that area on the Index to Map Sheets. Note the number of

the map sheet and turn to that sheet.

Locate your area of interest on the map sheet. Note the map unit symbols that are in that area. Turn to the

Contents, which lists the map units by symbol and name and shows the page where each map unit is described.

The Contents shows which table has data on a specific land use for each detailed soil map unit. Also see the

Contents for sections of this publication that may address your specific needs.

3

How To Use This Soil Survey
4

Additional information about the Nation’s natural resources is available on the

Natural Resources Conservation Service homepage on the World Wide Web. The

address is http://www.nrcs.usda.gov.

This soil survey is a publication of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort

of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State

agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The

Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) has

leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Major fieldwork for this soil survey was completed in 1995. Soil names and

descriptions were approved in 1995. Unless otherwise indicated, statements in this

publication refer to conditions in the survey area in 1995. This survey was made

cooperatively by the Natural Resources Conservation Service; the Forest Service; and

the Research Division of the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of

Wisconsin. The survey is part of the technical assistance furnished to the Florence

County Land Conservation Committee, which also helped finance the fieldwork for the

survey.

Soil maps in this survey may be copied without permission. Enlargement of these

maps, however, could cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping. If enlarged,

maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a

larger scale.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all of

its programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability,

political beliefs, sexual orientation, and 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 the USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice or TDD).

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

Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC

20250-9410, or call 202-720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity

provider and employer.

Cover: LaSalle Falls on the Pine River in an area of Rock outcrop-Metonga-Sarona complex, 15 to

35 percent slopes. The amber color of the water is caused by organic materials derived from wetland

vegetation.
5

Contents

How To Use This Soil Survey ................................. 3

Foreword ................................................................. 9

General Nature of the County ................................. 12

Physiography, Relief, and Drainage .................... 12

Climate ............................................................... 12

Water Supply ...................................................... 12

History and Development ................................... 13

Transportation Facilities and Industry ................. 14

How This Survey Was Made ................................... 14

Detailed Soil Map Units ........................................ 17

AnB—Annalake fine sandy loam, 0 to 6

percent slopes ............................................. 18

AnC—Annalake fine sandy loam, 6 to 15

percent slopes ............................................. 19

Au—Au Gres loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent

slopes .......................................................... 21

Ca—Capitola muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes,

very stony .................................................... 23

CoA—Crossett silt loam, 0 to 3 percent

slopes .......................................................... 24

CrA—Croswell loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent

slopes .......................................................... 25

CuA—Cublake loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent

slopes .......................................................... 27

EdB—Ellwood silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes ... 28

EdC—Ellwood silt loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes .......................................................... 30

ElB—Ellwood-Crossett silt loams, 0 to 6

percent slopes ............................................. 31

EmB—Ellwood-Iosco-Morganlake complex,

0 to 6 percent slopes.................................... 33

EnC—Ellwood-Iosco-Vilas complex, 0 to 15

percent slopes ............................................. 37

EoD—Ellwood-Vilas-Padus complex, 10 to 30

percent slopes ............................................. 40

Ep—Epiaquents and Epiaquods, nearly level ..... 42

FeB—Fence silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes ...... 44

Fm—Fordum loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes........... 45

GaA—Gastrow silt loam, 0 to 3 percent

slopes .......................................................... 47

GmC—Goodman silt loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes, very stony ........................................ 48

GmD—Goodman silt loam, 15 to 25 percent

slopes, very stony ........................................ 49

GwB—Goodwit silt loam, 1 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony ........................................ 51

IsA—Iosco loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent

slopes .......................................................... 52

Kr—Kinross muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes............ 54

Lo—Loxley, Beseman, and Dawson peats,

0 to 1 percent slopes.................................... 55

Lu—Lupton, Cathro, and Markey mucks,

0 to 1 percent slopes.................................... 57

MaA—Manitowish sandy loam, 0 to 3

percent slopes ............................................. 59

Mn—Minocqua muck, 0 to 2 percent

slopes .......................................................... 60

MrB—Morganlake loamy fine sand, 0 to 6

percent slopes ............................................. 62

MuB—Mudlake silt loam, 1 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony ........................................ 64

M-W—Miscellaneous water................................ 65

PaB—Padus sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent

slopes .......................................................... 66

PaC—Padus sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes .......................................................... 67

PaD—Padus sandy loam, 15 to 35 percent

slopes .......................................................... 69

PeB—Padus-Pence sandy loams, 0 to 6

percent slopes ............................................. 70

PeC—Padus-Pence sandy loams, 6 to 15

percent slopes ............................................. 72

PeD—Padus-Pence sandy loams, 15 to 35

percent slopes ............................................. 74

PnB—Pence sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent

slopes .......................................................... 76

PnC—Pence sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes .......................................................... 77

PnD—Pence sandy loam, 15 to 35 percent

slopes .......................................................... 79

PsB—Pence-Vilas complex, 0 to 6 percent

slopes .......................................................... 80

PsC—Pence-Vilas complex, 6 to 15 percent

slopes .......................................................... 82

PsD—Pence-Vilas complex, 15 to 35 percent

slopes .......................................................... 83

Pt—Pits, gravel ................................................... 85

Px—Pits, mine .................................................... 85
6

Rb—Robago fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent

slopes .......................................................... 87

RkC—Rock outcrop-Ishpeming-Vilas complex,

1 to 15 percent slopes.................................. 88

RkD—Rock outcrop-Ishpeming-Vilas complex,

15 to 35 percent slopes................................ 90

RmC—Rock outcrop-Metonga-Sarona

complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes .................. 92

RmD—Rock outcrop-Metonga-Sarona

complex, 15 to 35 percent slopes ................ 95

RsB—Rousseau loamy fine sand, 0 to 6

percent slopes ............................................. 97

RsC—Rousseau loamy fine sand, 6 to 15

percent slopes ............................................. 98

SaB—Sarona fine sandy loam, 1 to 6

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 100

SaC—Sarona fine sandy loam, 6 to 15

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 101

SaD—Sarona fine sandy loam, 15 to 25

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 103

SdB—Sarona-Padus complex, 0 to 6

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 104

SdC—Sarona-Padus complex, 6 to 15

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 106

SdD—Sarona-Padus complex, 15 to 30

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 108

SlB—Sarona-Vilas complex, 0 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony ...................................... 110

SlC—Sarona-Vilas complex, 6 to 15 percent

slopes, very stony ...................................... 112

SlD—Sarona-Vilas complex, 15 to 30

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 114

SnB—Sayner loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent

slopes ........................................................ 116

SnC—Sayner loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent

slopes ........................................................ 117

SnD—Sayner loamy sand, 15 to 30 percent

slopes ........................................................ 118

SoD—Soperton-Goodman silt loams, 15 to

35 percent slopes, very stony .................... 120

StC—Stambaugh silt loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes ........................................................ 121

StD—Stambaugh silt loam, 15 to 25 percent

slopes ........................................................ 123

SuC—Stambaugh-Goodman silt loams, 6 to

15 percent slopes, very stony .................... 124

SuD—Stambaugh-Goodman silt loams, 15

to 35 percent slopes, very stony ................ 126

TpA—Tipler sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent

slopes ........................................................ 128

VaB—Vanzile silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes ... 129

VgB—Vanzile-Goodwit silt loams, 0 to 6

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 130

VsB—Vilas loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent

slopes ........................................................ 132

VsC—Vilas loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent

slopes ........................................................ 134

VsD—Vilas loamy sand, 15 to 30 percent

slopes ........................................................ 135

W—Water......................................................... 136

WaC—Wabeno-Goodman silt loams, 6 to 15

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 137

WbB—Wabeno-Goodwit silt loams, 1 to 6

percent slopes, very stony ......................... 139

WkB—Wakefield silt loam, 1 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony ...................................... 141

WkC—Wakefield silt loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes, very stony ...................................... 142

WrA—Worcester sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent

slopes ........................................................ 144

Use and Management of the Soils .................... 147

Woodland Management and Productivity ......... 147

Forest Habitat Types .................................... 155

Crops and Pasture ........................................... 157

Yields per Acre............................................. 160

Land Capability Classification ...................... 162

Prime Farmland ........................................... 162

Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings ........ 163

Recreation ........................................................ 163

Wildlife Habitat ................................................. 165

Engineering ...................................................... 169

Building Site Development ........................... 170

Sanitary Facilities ......................................... 170

Construction Materials ................................. 172

Water Management...................................... 173

Soil Properties .................................................... 175

Engineering Index Properties ........................... 175

Physical and Chemical Properties .................... 176
7

Soil and Water Features ................................... 177

Engineering Index Test Data ............................. 179

Classification of the Soils .................................. 181

Soil Series and Their Morphology ......................... 181

Annalake Series ............................................... 181

Au Gres Series ................................................. 182

Beseman Series ............................................... 183

Capitola Series ................................................. 184

Cathro Series ................................................... 185

Crossett Series ................................................ 186

Croswell Series ................................................ 187

Cublake Series ................................................. 187

Dawson Series ................................................. 188

Ellwood Series ................................................. 189

Fence Series .................................................... 190

Fordum Series .................................................. 191

Gastrow Series................................................. 192

Goodman Series .............................................. 193

Goodwit Series ................................................. 194

Iosco Series ..................................................... 195

Ishpeming Series ............................................. 196

Kinross Series .................................................. 197

Loxley Series .................................................... 197

Lupton Series ................................................... 198

Manitowish Series ............................................ 198

Markey Series .................................................. 203

Metonga Series ................................................ 204

Minocqua Series .............................................. 205

Morganlake Series ........................................... 206

Mudlake Series ................................................ 207

Padus Series .................................................... 208

Pence Series .................................................... 209

Robago Series ................................................. 210

Rousseau Series .............................................. 211

Sarona Series .................................................. 211

Sayner Series ................................................... 213

Soperton Series ............................................... 214

Stambaugh Series ............................................ 215

Tipler Series ..................................................... 216

Vanzile Series .................................................. 217

Vilas Series ...................................................... 218

Wabeno Series ................................................. 219

Wakefield Series .............................................. 220

Worcester Series .............................................. 221

Formation of the Soils........................................ 223

Geology and Underlying Material ..................... 223

Factors of Soil Formation ................................. 224

Climate......................................................... 225

Plant and Animal Life ................................... 225

Relief and Drainage ..................................... 225

Parent Material ............................................. 226

Time ............................................................. 226

Processes of Soil Formation............................. 226

References .......................................................... 229

Glossary .............................................................. 231

Tables .................................................................. 241

Table 1.—Temperature and Precipitation .......... 242

Table 2.—Freeze Dates in Spring and

Fall ............................................................. 243

Table 3.—Growing Season ............................... 243

Table 4.—Acreage and Proportionate Extent

of the Soils ................................................. 244

Table 5.—Woodland Management and

Productivity ................................................ 246

Table 6.—Woodland Equipment Use ................ 262

Table 7.—Land Capability and Yields per

Acre of Crops and Pasture ......................... 269

Table 8.—Prime Farmland ................................ 274

Table 9.—Windbreaks and Environmental

Plantings .................................................... 275

Table 10.—Recreational Development.............. 284

Table 11.—Wildlife Habitat ................................ 292

Table 12.—Building Site Development .............. 298

Table 13.—Sanitary Facilities ........................... 307

Table 14.—Construction Materials .................... 316

Table 15.—Water Management ........................ 324

Table 16.—Engineering Index Properties ......... 331

Table 17.—Physical and Chemical Properties

of the Soils ................................................. 350

Table 18.—Soil and Water Features ................. 358

Table 19.—Engineering Index Test Data ........... 363

Table 20.—Classification of the Soils ................ 367

Issued 2004

9

This soil survey contains information that affects land use planning in this survey

area. It contains predictions of soil behavior for selected land uses. The survey also

highlights soil limitations, improvements needed to overcome the limitations, and the

impact of selected land uses on the environment.

This soil survey is designed for many different users. Foresters, farmers, and

agronomists can use it to evaluate the potential of the soil and the management needed

for maximum food and fiber production. Planners, community officials, engineers,

developers, builders, and home buyers can use the survey to plan land use, select sites

for construction, and identify special practices needed to ensure proper performance.

Conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, wildlife

management, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the survey to help them

understand, protect, and enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose

special restrictions on land use or land treatment. The information in this report is

intended to identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land

treatment decisions. Statements made in this report are intended to help the land users

identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or

user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are

seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are shallow to bedrock. Some are too

unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are

poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil

poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

These and many other soil properties that affect land use are described in this soil

survey. The location of each soil is shown on the detailed soil maps. Each soil in the

survey area is described, and information on specific uses is given. Help in using this

publication and additional information are available at the local office of the Natural

Resources Conservation Service, the Cooperative Extension Service, or private soil

science consultants.

Patricia S. Leavenworth

State Conservationist

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Foreword

11

FLORENCE COUNTY is in the extreme northeastern

part of Wisconsin (fig. 1). It is bound on the north and

along most of its eastern border by the Brule and

Menominee Rivers, which form the WisconsinMichigan boundary; on the west and south by Forest

County; and on the south and east by Marinette

County. Florence County has a total area of 318,215

acres. In 1990, the county had a population of 4,590.

Florence, the county seat, is unincorporated.

Recreation, tourism, agriculture, logging, lumbering,

manufacturing, and retail trade industries are

important in the county.

A reconnaissance soil survey of Florence County

was made prior to 1916 by the Soil Survey Division,

Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey,

State of Wisconsin, in cooperation with the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Soils (Whitson

and others, 1916). That survey is part of a report on

northeastern Wisconsin published by the State of

Wisconsin in 1916. Another soil survey of Florence

County was made during the period 1958 to 1961 by

the Soil Survey Division, Wisconsin Geological and

Natural History Survey, State of Wisconsin, in

cooperation with the Soils Department, College of

Agriculture, University of Wisconsin, and the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service (Hole and others, 1962). That survey was

published in 1962 by the State of Wisconsin. The

current survey updates the two earlier surveys. It

provides more interpretive information and has

larger maps, which show the soils in greater

detail.

Soil Survey of

Florence County, Wisconsin

By Joseph M. Boelter and Angela M. Elg, Natural Resources Conservation Service

Fieldwork by Joseph M. Boelter, Angela M. Elg, David J. Hvizdak, A.J. Klingelhoets,

Howard E. Lorenz, Larry L. Natzke, Harvey V. Strelow, Jeff A. Talsky, and

Stacy S. Webb, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and Lance R. Lindwall

and Edward W. Neumann, Forest Service

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service and

Forest Service,

in cooperation with

the Research Division of the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of

Wisconsin

Figure 1.—Location of Florence County in Wisconsin.
12 Soil Survey of

General Nature of the County

This section provides general information about the

county. It describes physiography, relief, and drainage;

climate; water supply; history and development; and

transportation facilities and industry.

Physiography, Relief, and Drainage

Florence County is in the Northern Highland

physiographic region of Wisconsin. Elevations range

from about 1,033 feet above sea level at the eastern

edge of the county to about 1,732 feet in the northwest

(Clayton, 1986).

Landforms in Florence County are mostly of glacial

origin. In the eastern part of the county, however, a

considerable degree of bedrock-controlled topography

is evident. The majority of Florence County is an

outwash plain, much of which is pitted as the result of

melting of buried ice blocks. The most extensive areas

of drumlins occur in the northwestern part of the

county and extend into neighboring Forest County. The

general flow of ice was from northeast to southwest,

as indicated by the orientation of the drumlins. Ground

moraines are most numerous in the central part of the

county, and end moraines occur in the southeastern

and eastern parts. Esker and esker-like ridges occur

mostly in the western half of the county. Glacial lake

plains are most common in Homestead Township in

the southeastern part of Florence County. Although

flood plains, bogs, and other depressional areas

where organic soils have formed are scattered

throughout the county, they are most common in the

western half.

Most of Florence County is drained by the Brule,

Pine, Popple, Little Popple, and Pemebonwon Rivers

and their tributaries eastward to the Menominee River,

which empties into Green Bay of Lake Michigan in the

St. Lawrence River drainage system. A small portion

of Florence County is drained by KC Creek

southeastward into the Pike River system in Marinette

County. This system empties into the Menominee

River about 20 miles southeast of Florence County.

Climate

Table 1 gives data on temperature and precipitation

for the survey area as recorded at Brule Island,

Wisconsin, in the period 1951 to 1984. Table 2 shows

probable dates of the first freeze in fall and the last

freeze in spring. Table 3 provides data on length of the

growing season.

In winter, the average temperature is 13 degrees F

and the average daily minimum temperature is 2

degrees. The lowest temperature on record, which

occurred on February 17, 1979, is -48 degrees. In

summer, the average temperature is 63 degrees and

the average daily maximum temperature is 77

degrees. The highest recorded temperature, which

occurred on July 19, 1977, is 102 degrees.

Growing degree days are shown in table 1. They

are equivalent to “heat units.” During the month,

growing degree days accumulate by the amount that

the average temperature each day exceeds a base

temperature (50 degrees F). The normal monthly

accumulation is used to schedule single or successive

plantings of a crop between the last freeze in spring

and the first freeze in fall.

The total annual precipitation is 30.42 inches. Of

this total, 21.29 inches, or about 70 percent, usually

falls in April through September. The growing season

for most crops falls within this period. In 2 years out of

10, the rainfall in April through September is less than

18 inches. The heaviest 1-day rainfall during the period

of record was 3.74 inches on August 16, 1972.

Thunderstorms occur on about 34 days each year.

The average seasonal snowfall is 59 inches. The

greatest snow depth at any one time during the period

of record was 43 inches. On the average, 84 days of

the year have at least 1 inch of snow on the ground.

The number of such days varies greatly from year to

year.

The average relative humidity in midafternoon is

about 60 percent. Humidity is higher at night, and the

average at dawn is about 80 percent. The sun shines

65 percent of the time possible in summer and 45

percent in winter. The prevailing wind is from the

southwest. Average windspeed is highest, 12 miles

per hour, in spring.

Water Supply

Thomas J. Alvarez and Michael T. McCawly, geologists, Natural

Resources Conservation Service, helped prepare this section.

Florence County has many streams, lakes, and

rivers that furnish a good supply of surface water.

Ground water is available in quantities that are

adequate to meet present and anticipated future

needs for domestic, agricultural, municipal, and

industrial needs because only a small part of the total

potential is being utilized. Areas of large-scale

pumpage are relatively few, and the population density

is low. The availability of ground water differs locally,

however, and detailed studies are needed to guide the

development of ground-water resources, especially in

present and anticipated pumpage centers.

Sand and gravel aquifers are the most productive in

Florence County. These aquifers occur mainly in the
Florence County, Wisconsin 13

western and northeastern parts of the county. Wells in

these areas generally yield 100 to 500 gallons of water

per minute (Oakes and Hamilton, 1973). The greatest

yields occur where the saturated glacial deposits are

at least 50 feet thick. In the central and southeastern

parts of the county, the sand and gravel aquifers are

typically isolated, shallow, and less permeable. Wells

in these areas generally yield 10 to 100 gallons per

minute.

The bedrock aquifers in Florence County generally

are not very productive. More than half of the wells in

this aquifer yield less than 5 gallons per minute. The

bedrock aquifers are typically small, are limited to the

fractured or decomposed portions of the bedrock, and

typically depend on nearby glacial deposits for

recharge. Bedrock aquifers are utilized wherever

glacial deposits are small, thin, isolated, or

impermeable.

The ground water in Florence County generally is of

good quality. The least mineralized water is from the

sand and gravel aquifers. This water has moved along

relatively short flow paths, typically through sand and

gravel with rapid or very rapid permeability, and there

has been relatively little contact time between the

water and soluble minerals. The mineralization of the

sand and gravel aquifer is higher in areas near ground

moraines and glacial lake plains and lower in areas

near end moraines and outwash plains. The total

mineralization in the sand and gravel aquifers in

Florence County is less than 300 milligrams per liter.

Water in the bedrock aquifers has had the longest

contact time with soluble minerals and may have a

high concentration of calcium magnesium bicarbonate,

calcium magnesium sulfate, or sodium chloride. Data

for the bedrock aquifers in Florence County are

insufficient to measure water quality. A deep well

drilled in the Florence iron pit in 1910 struck stagnant,

saline water that had an artesian flow (Carlson and

others, 1971).

Minor water use problems in Florence County are

caused by hardness and, in some areas, by high

concentrations of iron.

Florence County has a total of 261 lakes and

impoundments and 165 rivers and streams (Carlson

and others, 1971). Natural lakes account for 79

percent of the lake area, and five impoundments make

up 21 percent of the lake surface area. Lakes smaller

than 10 acres make up 63 percent of the total number

of lakes but only 5 percent of the lake acreage. Only

16 lakes are 100 acres or larger; however, these lakes

make up 57 percent of the lake acreage. Fifty-one

percent of the lakes are less than 8 feet deep, but

these shallow lakes make up only 10 percent of the

total lake acreage. Natural lake depths range from less

than 1 foot in several spring ponds to a maximum of

82 feet in Sealion Lake. Some iron mine shafts, now

filled with water, are as much as 147 feet deep. Twin

Falls Flowage is the largest body of water in the

county (681.7 acres).

Pollution of the Brule and Menominee Rivers by

effluent and mining spoil has been identified as a

concern. Recently, the Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources and the Wisconsin Division of

Health have identified the Brule River (at the Paint

River Pond) and Emily Lake, Sand Lake, and Sealion

Lake as habitat where high concentrations of mercury

can occur in some fish. Other pollution problems in

Florence County are minor; in lakeshore areas,

however, where the development of cottages and

homes is dense, lakes may be affected by effluent

from sewage disposal facilities. The results are

pollution of the water and excessive growth of

undesirable weeds and algae. Overall, Florence

County, with its extensive forest land and limited

development, has relatively few problems resulting

from human influences on surface waters. In the

future, however, a policy that prevents pollution and

shoreland damage will be needed if the present high

quality of water is to be maintained.

History and Development

Florence County is one of the few counties in

Wisconsin in which the early pioneering era is still

fairly recent. The area was undoubtedly visited by

early French voyageurs and missionaries from the

Green Bay region. The first European to leave any

description of his journey along the Menominee and

Brule Rivers was Captain Thomas Jefferson Cram,

who surveyed the northwest boundary of Wisconsin in

1840-41 (Carlson and others, 1971). Cram surveyed

the Brule River, which forms part of the boundary with

Michigan, and reported many Chippewa and

Menominee Indians there.

Florence County was created in 1882 from territory

that included parts of Marinette and Oconto Counties.

The county was named for Florence Hulst, the wife of

N.P. Hulst, who discovered a number of iron mines in

the area.

Florence County was a hunting and trapping region

until iron ore was discovered in 1877. Three years

earlier, iron had been discovered on the Michigan side

of the border. Mining operations began during the

winter of 1879-80, and peak production was reached

in 1920. The population of the area that became

Florence County increased from fewer than 300 in

1880 to 2,604 in 1890, only 8 years after the county

was organized.
14 Soil Survey of

The logging and lumbering in Florence County are

associated with those industries in Marinette and

Oconto Counties. The first sawmill in the territory was

built in what is now Marinette County by William

Farnsworth and Charles N. Bush in 1832. Although

this date marked the beginning of lumbering in the

territory, very little lumbering was done in the survey

area prior to 1865. The primary timber in the early

logging period was eastern white pine; a limited

amount of red pine also was logged. By 1898, most of

the eastern white pine had been cut. In the early 20th

century, when the pine was gone, the logging of

eastern hemlock and hardwoods was begun.

Farming in Florence County had its origin in the

need for agricultural products by the lumber

companies. In 1890, there were 90 farms in the county.

Farm numbers increased to 349 farms in 1920 and

580 farms in 1935. After this period, the number of

farms in Florence County declined with the failing of

small family farms and the growth of larger commercial

farms. In 1959, Florence County had a total of 185

farms and an average of 185.5 acres per farm. In

1990, Florence County had a total of 90 farms and an

average of 255.6 acres per farm (Wisconsin

Agricultural Statistics Service, 1991).

Transportation Facilities and Industry

Florence County is served by U.S. Highway 2-141,

which crosses the northeastern part of the county. The

major north-south routes are State Highways 101 and

139. State Highway 70 is the principal east-west route.

Florence County is also served by six county

highways, which are mainly in the eastern half of the

county. Commercial air transportation is available at

Ford Airport near Iron Mountain, Michigan. An

abandoned rail line runs north and south in the

western part of Florence County.

The recreation and tourism industry is an important

part of the local economy. This industry includes

restaurants, taverns, hotels, motels, resorts,

campgrounds, sporting goods stores, and amusement

and recreation establishments. Fishing, boating,

camping, hunting, skiing, swimming, hiking,

snowmobiling, auto touring, and other sports as well

as the natural beauty of the county attract many

vacationers and make recreation and tourism a yearround industry. The county-owned Keyes Peak ski hill

offers downhill skiing. The many lakes, rivers, and

streams and the surrounding forest land provide

excellent opportunities for expanding the recreation

and tourism industry in Florence County.

Manufacturing and retail trade industries also are

significant parts of the Florence County economy. In

Florence, the 114-acre In-Comm Center industrial

park, which was created in 1986, includes several

manufacturing firms. Some light industry is also in

Aurora.

The logging industry is an important part of the

economy in the county. Forest products include

sawtimber, poletimber, pulpwood, and veneer logs. A

number of sawmills are located near Tipler and Long

Lake in western Florence County. The production of

maple syrup is a seasonal enterprise of local

importance.

Hay, corn, and oats are the main crops grown in

Florence County. Potatoes, a specialty crop, also are

grown. Dairy farming and beef production are

important parts of the county’s agriculture.

Presently, excavation for minerals is of minor extent

in the county. Minerals mined include sand and gravel.

Recently, some of the finer textured soils in the

eastern part of the county have been identified as

suitable for use as landfill liner. Also, some topsoil is

being removed for construction and landscaping

purposes. Some mineral exploration has taken place

in Florence County.

How This Survey Was Made

This survey was made to provide information about

the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area.

The information includes a description of the soils and

miscellaneous areas and their location and a

discussion of their suitability, limitations, and

management for specified uses. Soil scientists

observed the steepness, length, and shape of the

slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of

crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock.

They dug many holes to study the soil profile, which is

the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil.

The profile extends from the surface down into the

unconsolidated material in which the soil formed. The

unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other

living organisms and has not been changed by other

biological activity.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey

area are in an orderly pattern that is related to the

geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural

vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and

miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind

of landform or with a segment of the landform. By

observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the

survey area and relating their position to specific

segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a

concept or model of how they were formed. Thus,

during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist

to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the
Florence County, Wisconsin 15

kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location

on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge

into one another as their characteristics gradually

change. To construct an accurate soil map, however,

soil scientists must determine the boundaries between

the soils. They can observe only a limited number of

soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations,

supplemented by an understanding of the soilvegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to

verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to

determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the

soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color,

texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and

amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots,

reaction, and other features that enable them to

identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey

area and determining their properties, the soil

scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes

(units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each

taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with

precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a

basis for comparison to classify soils systematically.

Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification

used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind

and character of soil properties and the arrangement

of horizons within the profile. After the soil scientists

classified and named the soils in the survey area, they

compared the individual soils with similar soils in the

same taxonomic class in other areas so that they

could confirm data and assemble additional data

based on experience and research.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some

of the soils in the area generally are collected for

laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil

scientists interpret the data from these analyses and

tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and

the soil properties to determine the expected behavior

of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all

of the soils are field tested through observation of the

soils in different uses and under different levels of

management. Some interpretations are modified to fit

local conditions, and some new interpretations are

developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled

from other sources, such as research information,

production records, and field experience of specialists.

For example, data on crop yields under defined levels

of management are assembled from farm records and

from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of

soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only

on soil properties but also on such variables as

climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are

predictable over long periods of time, but they are not

predictable from year to year. For example, soil

scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of

accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table

within certain depths in most years, but they cannot

predict that a high water table will always be at a

specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the

significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area,

they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial

photographs and identified each as a specific map

unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields,

roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating

boundaries accurately.

The descriptions, names, and delineations of the

soils in this survey area do not fully agree with those

of the soils in the surveys of Forest and Marinette

Counties, Wisconsin. The differences are a result of

variations in the extent of the soils in the counties. The

Brule and Menominee Rivers form the boundary with

Dickinson and Iron Counties, Michigan.

17

The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps

in this survey represent the soils or miscellaneous

areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions in

this section, along with the maps, can be used to

determine the suitability and potential of a unit for

specific uses. They also can be used to plan the

management needed for those uses.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an

area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or

miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and

named according to the taxonomic classification of the

dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are

precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils.

On the landscape, however, the soils are natural

phenomena, and they have the characteristic

variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of

some observed properties may extend beyond the

limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a

single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped

without including areas of other taxonomic classes.

Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils

or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and

some minor components that belong to taxonomic

classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of

the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus

they do not affect use and management. These are

called noncontrasting, or similar, inclusions. They may

or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit

description. Other minor components, however, have

properties and behavioral characteristics divergent

enough to affect use or to require different

management. These are called contrasting, or

dissimilar, inclusions. They generally are in small

areas and could not be mapped separately because of

the scale used. Some small areas of strongly

contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified

by a special symbol on the maps. The contrasting

components are mentioned in the map unit

descriptions. A few areas of minor components may

not have been observed, and consequently they are

not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where

the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to

make enough observations to identify all the soils and

miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in

no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the

data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure

taxonomic classes but rather to separate the

landscape into landforms or landform segments that

have similar use and management requirements. The

delineation of such segments on the map provides

sufficient information for the development of resource

plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned,

however, onsite investigation is needed to define and

locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name

in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes

general facts about the unit and gives the principal

hazards and limitations to be considered in planning

for specific uses.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make

up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the

surface layer, all the soils of a series have major

horizons that are similar in composition, thickness,

and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the

surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of

erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use.

On the basis of such differences, a soil series is

divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on

the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The

name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature

that affects use or management. For example, Vilas

loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is a phase of the

Vilas series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major

soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are

complexes or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or

miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in

such small areas that they cannot be shown

separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of

the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar

in all areas. Pence-Vilas complex, 6 to 15 percent

slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or

more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be

mapped individually but are mapped as one unit

because similar interpretations can be made for use

Detailed Soil Map Units
18 Soil Survey of

and management. The pattern and proportion of the

soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not

uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the

major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made

up of all of them. Loxley, Beseman, and Dawson

peats, 0 to 1 percent slopes, is an undifferentiated

group in this survey area.

This survey includes miscellaneous areas. Such

areas have little or no soil material and support little or

no vegetation. Pits, gravel, is an example.

Table 4 gives the acreage and proportionate extent

of each map unit. Other tables give properties of the

soils and the limitations, capabilities, and potentials for

many uses. The Glossary defines many of the terms

used in describing the soils or miscellaneous areas.

AnB—Annalake fine sandy loam, 0 to 6

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Landscape position: Linear and slightly concave

toeslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 70 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—very dark gray, friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 6 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

6 to 31 inches—dark brown, brown, and dark

yellowish brown, friable fine sandy loam

31 to 39 inches—brown, mottled, friable sandy

loam

Substratum:

39 to 60 inches—brown, mottled, friable, stratified

fine sand, very fine sand, loamy very fine sand,

very fine sandy loam, and silt loam

Composition

Annalake soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus and moderately well drained

Tipler soils, which are underlain by sandy or sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash

• The somewhat poorly drained Robago soils in

depressions and drainageways

• The well drained Rousseau soils, which formed in

sandy glacial outwash or lacustrine deposits; in slightly

convex areas

• Soils that have layers of clay loam or silty clay loam

in the subsoil and substratum

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Sloping areas of Annalake soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are silt loam,

very fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or loamy sand

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that have an apparent seasonal high water

table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 2.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss,

poor tilth

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and grade-
Florence County, Wisconsin 19

stabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years

by the restricted available water capacity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: ATM

AnC—Annalake fine sandy loam, 6 to 15

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 8 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark gray, friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—grayish brown, friable fine sandy

loam

Subsoil:

4 to 24 inches—dark brown and brown, friable fine

sandy loam

24 to 30 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

30 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, mottled, friable,

stratified fine sand, very fine sand, loamy very

fine sand, very fine sandy loam, and silt loam
20 Soil Survey of

Composition

Annalake soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils, which are underlain by

sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• The well drained Rousseau soils, which formed in

sandy glacial outwash or lacustrine deposits

• The excessively drained Vilas soils, which formed in

sandy glacial outwash

• Soils that have layers of clay loam or silty clay loam

in the subsoil and substratum

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have stones and boulders on the surface

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of

Annalake soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are silt loam,

very fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or loamy sand

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 2.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss,

poor tilth

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years

by the restricted available water capacity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe
Florence County, Wisconsin 21

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, slope, water

erosion, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: ATM

Au—Au Gres loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 7 inches—grayish brown, very friable loamy

sand

Subsoil:

7 to 17 inches—dark brown, mottled, very friable

loamy sand

17 to 26 inches—strong brown, mottled, very

friable sand

Substratum:

26 to 62 inches—dark yellowish brown, mottled,

loose sand

Composition

Au Gres soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The very poorly drained Beseman, Cathro, Dawson,

and Markey soils, which have organic layers 16 to 51

inches thick

• The moderately well drained Croswell soils in

slightly convex areas

• The poorly drained Kinross soils in the lower

depressions and drainageways

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty

deposits

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam

• Areas of soils that are fine sand or very fine sand

throughout

• Soils that have a substratum of gravelly sand

• Soils that have a perched seasonal high water

table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 0.5 foot to 1.5

feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderate in the mineral surface layer
22 Soil Survey of

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength frequently limit

access by machinery to the dry summer months or to

periods when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, wetness

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• If the water table is lowered, crop yields are limited

during most years by the restricted available water

capacity. Irrigation can improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

• The seasonal high water table may delay spring

planting in wet years. Providing adequate drainage can

improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—wetness, soil blowing; dwellings with

basements—wetness, soil blowing, caving of

cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVw

Woodland ordination symbol: 6W (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: TMC
Florence County, Wisconsin 23

Ca—Capitola muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes,

very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 90 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 5 inches—black, very friable muck

Subsoil:

5 to 20 inches—dark grayish brown, mottled,

friable silt loam

20 to 34 inches—brown, mottled, friable sandy

loam

Substratum:

34 to 60 inches—brown, mottled, friable sandy

loam

Composition

Capitola soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The very poorly drained Cathro, Lupton, and Markey

soils, which have organic layers 16 to more than 51

inches thick

• The somewhat poorly drained Mudlake soils in the

higher landscape positions

• Areas of Capitola soils that are not stony or that are

bouldery

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or gravelly

sand

• Soils in which the lower part of the subsoil and the

substratum are loam, clay loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, above or near the

surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately slow in the

upper part; moderately slow in the lower part

Available water capacity: Moderate or high

Organic matter content: Very high in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wetland

wildlife habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength generally limit access

by machinery to the dry summer months or to periods

when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

Reforestation is generally limited to natural

regeneration or hand planting.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Wetland wildlife habitat

Suitability: Suited in undrained areas

Major management concerns: Excessive

sedimentation, chemical and nutrient pollution

Management considerations:

• Undrained areas of this soil can provide wetland

wildlife habitat, provide for water purification and

ground-water recharge, and minimize runoff and

sedimentation.

• Maintaining a saturated condition, controlling

sedimentation, and following recommended nutrient

and chemical management practices on adjacent land

help to protect wetland areas.

• In cultivated areas, providing adjacent nesting cover

can enhance the habitat.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, wetness,

ponding, rock fragments, low strength
24 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• The number of suitable forage plants is limited by the

seasonal high water table.

• Establishing or maintaining an improved pasture is

difficult because of the ponding.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Livestock hooves cut the soil and damage the plant

cover.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, surface stones, a severe frost

hazard, and low strength

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness, ponding

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, ponding, soil

blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Providing surface drainage, installing a subsurface

drainage system, and adding fill material to raise the

elevation of the site can help to overcome the wetness

and the ponding.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of ponding

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIw in very stony areas;

VIw in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 7W (balsam fir)

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

CoA—Crossett silt loam, 0 to 3 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 7 inches—dark grayish brown, friable silt loam

Next layer:

7 to 13 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

and reddish brown, mottled, firm silty clay loam

Subsoil:

13 to 30 inches—reddish brown, mottled, firm silty

clay loam

30 to 80 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Composition

Crossett soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Au Gres soils, which are sandy throughout

• The moderately well drained Ellwood soils in slightly

convex areas

• Iosco soils, which have sandy upper layers

• Poorly drained soils in the lower depressions and

drainageways

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or

loam

• Soils that have a subsoil of silt loam, loam, clay

loam, silty clay, or clay

• Areas of Crossett soils on glacial lake plains

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 0.5 foot to 2.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep
Florence County, Wisconsin 25

Permeability: Moderately slow

Available water capacity: high

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—cropland, pasture; other

uses—woodland, wildlife habitat

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, poor tilth, low

strength

Management considerations:

• The seasonal high water table may delay spring

planting in wet years. Providing adequate drainage can

improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface, adding other

organic material to the soil, minimizing tillage, tilling

and harvesting at the proper soil moisture content, and

including grasses and legumes in the cropping

sequence help to prevent excessive compaction,

minimize crusting, and maintain good tilth.

• Low soil strength limits the use of farm equipment to

periods when the soil is not wet.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Low strength

Management considerations:

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength frequently limit

access by machinery to the dry summer months or to

periods when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, shrink-swell

potential

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 3W (red maple)

Primary forest habitat type: TMC

Secondary forest habitat type: ATD

CrA—Croswell loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, toeslopes, and

footslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 5 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

5 to 12 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy

sand
26 Soil Survey of

12 to 27 inches—brown and strong brown, very

friable sand

Substratum:

27 to 62 inches—yellowish brown, mottled, loose

sand

Composition

Croswell soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres soils in

depressions and drainageways

• Cublake soils, which are underlain by stratified

lacustrine deposits

• The excessively drained Vilas soils in slightly convex

areas

• Areas of Croswell soils that have slopes of 3 to 6

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam

• Areas of soils that are fine sand or very fine sand

throughout

• Soils that have a substratum of gravelly sand

• Soils that have a perched seasonal high water table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 2.0 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

low or moderately low in the mineral surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Windthrow hazard,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.
Florence County, Wisconsin 27

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs

Woodland ordination symbol: 5S (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

CuA—Cublake loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, and

glacial lake plains

Landscape position: Linear areas, toeslopes, and

footslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 120 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—black, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

3 to 4 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

4 to 23 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

23 to 32 inches—dark yellowish brown, loose

sand

Substratum:

32 to 40 inches—yellowish brown, mottled, loose

sand

40 to 48 inches—yellowish brown, mottled, very

friable fine sand with thin strata of very fine

sand

48 to 60 inches—brown, mottled, friable, stratified

very fine sandy loam and silt loam with a few

thin strata of very fine sand

Composition

Cublake soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Annalake soils, which formed in primarily loamy

deposits underlain by stratified lacustrine deposits

• The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres soils in

depressions and drainageways

• Croswell soils, which are sandy throughout

• The excessively drained Vilas soils, which are sandy

throughout; in slightly convex areas

• Areas of Cublake soils that have slopes of 3 to 6

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, or sandy loam

• Soils that have a substratum of gravelly sandy loam,

gravelly loamy sand, clay loam, or silty clay loam

• Areas of soils in which the stratified sandy, loamy,

and silty deposits are at a depth of less than 40 inches

• Soils that have an apparent seasonal high water

table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 2.0 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the upper

part; moderate or moderately slow in the lower

part

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low in the surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture
28 Soil Survey of

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Windthrow hazard,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

restricted permeability, wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs

Woodland ordination symbol: 7S (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

EdB—Ellwood silt loam, 1 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 250 acres
Florence County, Wisconsin 29

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 7 inches—very dark grayish brown, friable silt

loam

Subsurface layer:

7 to 10 inches—reddish gray, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

10 to 15 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

silty clay loam and reddish gray, friable silt loam

15 to 80 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Composition

Ellwood soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Crossett soils in

depressions and drainageways

• The somewhat poorly drained Iosco and Morganlake

soils, which have sandy upper layers

• Poorly drained soils in depressions and

drainageways

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Sloping areas of Ellwood soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

is silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty clay, or clay

• Areas of eroded soils

• Areas of Ellwood soils on glacial lake plains

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 1.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately slow

Available water capacity: High

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—cropland, pasture; other

uses—woodland, wildlife habitat

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss, poor tilth

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe
30 Soil Survey of

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Dwellings without basements—moderately

well suited; dwellings with basements—poorly

suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, shrink-swell

potential, water erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

EdC—Ellwood silt loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 50 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 7 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

7 to 14 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty clay

loam and reddish gray, mottled, friable silt loam

14 to 80 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Composition

Ellwood soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Morganlake soils, which have sandy upper layers

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Ellwood

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

is silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty clay, or clay

• Areas of eroded soils

• Areas of Ellwood soils on glacial lake plains

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 1.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately slow

Available water capacity: High

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—cropland, pasture; other

uses—woodland, wildlife habitat

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss, poor tilth

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly
Florence County, Wisconsin 31

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Dwellings without basements—moderately

well suited; dwellings with basements—poorly

suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, slope, shrinkswell potential, water erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

ElB—Ellwood-Crossett silt loams, 0 to 6

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Ellwood—shoulders and linear

and slightly convex summits; Crossett—

depressions and drainageways

Slope range: Ellwood—1 to 6 percent; Crossett—0 to

3 percent

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 20 to 600 acres

Representative Profile

Ellwood

Surface layer:

0 to 8 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

8 to 15 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

clay loam and reddish brown, friable silt loam

15 to 25 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

clay loam

25 to 80 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Crossett

Surface layer:

0 to 9 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Next layer:

9 to 19 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

and reddish brown, firm silty clay loam

Subsoil:

19 to 38 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

silty clay loam
32 Soil Survey of

38 to 80 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Composition

Ellwood soil and similar inclusions: 40 to 50 percent

Crossett soil and similar inclusions: 30 to 40 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Iosco soils and the

moderately well drained Morganlake soils, which have

sandy upper layers

• Poorly drained soils in the lower depressions and

drainageways

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Ellwood soils that are well drained

• Sloping areas of Ellwood soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

is silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty clay, or clay

• Areas of Ellwood and Crossett soils on glacial lake

plains

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Ellwood—moderately well drained;

Crossett—somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Ellwood—perched, 1.5 to

3.5 feet below the surface; Crossett—perched, 0.5

foot to 2.5 feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately slow

Available water capacity: High

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—cropland, pasture; other

uses—woodland, wildlife habitat

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor tilth;

Crossett—wetness, poor tilth, low strength

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas of the

Ellwood soil.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water in areas of the Ellwood soil by

reducing runoff losses to lakes and streams.

• In areas of the Crossett soil, the seasonal high water

table may delay spring planting in wet years. Providing

adequate drainage can improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface, adding other

organic material to the soil, minimizing tillage, tilling

and harvesting at the proper soil moisture content, and

including grasses and legumes in the cropping

sequence help to prevent excessive compaction,

minimize crusting, and maintain good tilth.

• In areas of the Crossett soil, low soil strength limits

the use of farm equipment to periods when the soil is

not wet.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss; Crossett—low

strength

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion in

areas of the Ellwood soil.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Ellwood soil by reducing runoff losses to lakes and

streams.

• In areas of the Ellwood soil, low strength restricts the

use of machinery.

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard, plant competition;

Crossett—equipment limitation, windthrow hazard,

plant competition, seedling mortality
Florence County, Wisconsin 33

Management considerations:

• In areas of the Crossett soil, wetness and low soil

strength frequently limit access by machinery to the

dry summer months or to periods when the soil is

frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality on the Crossett soil can be

minimized by planting vigorous nursery stock on the

crest of cradle-knolls or on prepared ridges.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Ellwood—moderately well suited;

Crossett—poorly suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

shrink-swell potential, water erosion; Crossett—

wetness, shrink-swell potential

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling (fig. 2).

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion in areas of the Ellwood soil

during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

shrink-swell potential, water erosion; Crossett—

wetness, shrink-swell potential

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion in areas of the Ellwood soil

during and after construction.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIe

Woodland ordination symbol: Ellwood—3L (sugar

maple); Crossett—3W (red maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: TMC

EmB—Ellwood-Iosco-Morganlake

complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Ellwood and Morganlake—

shoulders and linear and slightly convex summits;

Iosco—depressions and drainageways

Slope range: Ellwood—1 to 6 percent; Iosco—0 to 3

percent; Morganlake—0 to 6 percent

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 250 acres

Representative Profile

Ellwood

Surface layer:

0 to 8 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

8 to 15 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

silty clay loam and reddish brown, friable silt

loam

15 to 80 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Iosco

Surface layer:

0 to 9 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

Subsurface layer:

9 to 10 inches—brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

Subsoil:

10 to 27 inches—dark reddish brown and brown,

mottled, very friable loamy sand
34 Soil Survey of

27 to 40 inches—reddish brown, mottled, firm silty

clay loam

Substratum:

40 to 60 inches—reddish brown, firm silty clay

loam

Morganlake

Surface layer:

0 to 9 inches—dark brown, friable loamy fine sand

Subsurface layer:

9 to 10 inches—brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

Subsoil:

10 to 20 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy fine sand

20 to 23 inches—brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

23 to 31 inches—reddish brown, very friable fine

sandy loam and reddish brown, mottled, firm

silty clay loam

31 to 37 inches—reddish brown, firm silty clay

loam

Substratum:

37 to 60 inches—reddish brown, firm silty clay

loam

Figure 2.—Structural damage caused by shrinking and swelling in an area of Ellwood-Crossett silt loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes.
Florence County, Wisconsin 35

Composition

Ellwood soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Iosco soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Morganlake soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25

percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Crossett soils, which

are silt loam in the upper layers

• The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres soils, the

moderately well drained Croswell soils, and the

excessively drained Vilas soils, which are sandy

throughout

• Poorly drained soils in the lower depressions and

drainageways

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Ellwood and Morganlake soils that are well

drained

• Sloping areas of Ellwood and Morganlake soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or

loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower layer is silt loam,

loam, clay loam, silty clay, or clay

• Areas of Ellwood, Iosco, and Morganlake soils on

glacial lake plains

• Areas of eroded soils

• Iosco soils that have a perched seasonal high water

table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Ellwood and Morganlake—moderately

well drained; Iosco—somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Ellwood—perched, 1.5 to

3.5 feet below the surface; Iosco—apparent, 0.5

foot to 1.5 feet below the surface; Morganlake—

perched, 1.5 to 3.5 feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Ellwood—moderately slow; Iosco—rapid

in the upper part and moderately slow in the lower

part; Morganlake—moderately rapid or rapid in the

upper part and moderately slow in the lower part

Available water capacity: Ellwood—high; Iosco and

Morganlake—low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—cropland, pasture; other

uses—woodland, wildlife habitat

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor tilth;

Iosco—soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss, wetness; Morganlake—soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas of the

Ellwood soil.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing in areas of the Iosco and Morganlake soils

and prevent damage to plants caused by windblown

sand.

• In areas of the Morganlake soil, crop yields are

limited during most years by the restricted available

water capacity. Irrigation can improve productivity.

• If the water table is lowered in areas of the Iosco

soil, crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soils and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water in areas of the Ellwood soil by

reducing runoff losses to lakes and streams.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses in areas of the Iosco and Morganlake soils and

protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

• In areas of the Iosco soil, the seasonal high water
36 Soil Survey of

table may delay spring planting in wet years. Providing

adequate drainage can improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting in areas of the

Ellwood soil.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss; Iosco—soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss; Morganlake—

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazard of water erosion in areas

of the Ellwood soil and helps to control soil blowing in

areas of the Iosco and Morganlake soils.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• In areas of the Morganlake soil, forage yields are

limited during most years. Drought-tolerant species

are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Iosco and Morganlake

soils and protect the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Ellwood soil by reducing runoff losses to lakes and

streams.

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard, plant competition;

Iosco—equipment limitation, windthrow hazard,

plant competition, seedling mortality;

Morganlake—windthrow hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• In areas of the Iosco soil, wetness and low soil

strength frequently limit access by machinery to the

dry summer months or to periods when the soil is

frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads in areas of

Ellwood and Iosco soils during wet periods. Log

landings and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• In areas of the Iosco soil, seedling mortality can be

minimized by planting vigorous nursery stock on the

crest of cradle-knolls or on prepared ridges.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Ellwood—restricted

permeability, wetness; Iosco and Morganlake—

poor filtering capacity, restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Ellwood—moderately well suited; Iosco—

poorly suited; Morganlake—moderately well

suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

shrink-swell potential, water erosion; Iosco—

wetness, soil blowing; Morganlake—wetness, soil

blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling in areas of the Ellwood soil.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion on the Ellwood soil and soil

blowing on the Iosco and Morganlake soils during and

after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

shrink-swell potential, water erosion; Iosco and

Morganlake—wetness, shrink-swell potential, soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks
Florence County, Wisconsin 37

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion on the Ellwood soil and soil

blowing on the Iosco and Morganlake soils during and

after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Iosco and

Morganlake soils, stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks

can minimize the safety hazard and prevent the

damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIe

Woodland ordination symbol: Ellwood—3L (sugar

maple); Iosco—5W (quaking aspen);

Morganlake—6S (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

EnC—Ellwood-Iosco-Vilas complex, 0 to

15 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Ellwood and Vilas—side slopes;

Iosco—depressions and drainageways

Slope range: Ellwood and Vilas—6 to 15 percent;

Iosco—0 to 3 percent

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Ellwood

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 6 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

6 to 19 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

silty clay loam and reddish brown, friable silt

loam

19 to 80 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Iosco

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy

sand

Subsurface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, mottled, very friable loamy

sand

Subsoil:

5 to 29 inches—dark reddish brown, reddish

brown, and brown, mottled, very friable loamy

sand

29 to 35 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

silty clay loam

Substratum:

35 to 60 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Vilas

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—black, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

5 to 17 inches—dark reddish brown and brown,

friable loamy sand

17 to 29 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

29 to 60 inches—brown, loose sand

Composition

Ellwood soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Iosco soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Crossett soils, which

are silt loam in the upper layers and are underlain by

loamy, silty, or clayey glacial till

• The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres soils, which

are sandy throughout

• The well drained Padus and somewhat excessively

drained Pence soils, which have loamy upper layers

underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial

outwash

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Poorly drained soils in the lower depressions and

drainageways
38 Soil Survey of

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Ellwood soils that are well drained

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Ellwood

and Vilas soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, sandy loam, fine sandy loam, very fine

sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of Ellwood and Iosco soils in which the lower

layer is silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty clay, or clay

• Areas of eroded soils

• Areas of Iosco soils that have a perched seasonal

high water table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Ellwood—moderately well drained;

Iosco—somewhat poorly drained; Vilas—

excessively drained

Seasonal high water table: Ellwood—perched, 1.5 to

3.5 feet below the surface; Iosco—apparent, 0.5

foot to 1.5 feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Ellwood—moderately slow; Iosco—rapid

in the upper part and moderately slow in the lower

part; Vilas—rapid

Available water capacity: Ellwood—high; Iosco—low or

moderate; Vilas—low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard, plant competition;

Iosco—equipment limitation, windthrow hazard,

plant competition, seedling mortality; Vilas—

equipment limitation

Management considerations:

• In areas of the Iosco soil, wetness and low soil

strength frequently limit access by machinery to the

dry summer months or to periods when the soil is

frozen or snow cover is thick.

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites in

areas of the Ellwood and Vilas soils. Landings can be

established on suitable nearly level or gently sloping

adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads in areas of the

Ellwood and Iosco soils during wet periods. Log

landings and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Windthrow in areas of the Ellwood and Iosco soils

can be minimized by using harvest methods that do

not leave the remaining trees widely spaced. The

periodic salvaging of windthrown trees may be

needed.

• Plant competition in areas of the Ellwood and Iosco

soils can be controlled by mechanical site preparation

or by limited use of herbicides.

• In areas of the Iosco soil, seedling mortality can be

minimized by planting vigorous nursery stock on the

crest of cradle-knolls or on prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor tilth;

Iosco—soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss, wetness; Vilas—water erosion,

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in areas of the Ellwood and Vilas

soils.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing in areas of the Iosco and Vilas soils and

prevent damage to plants caused by windblown sand.

• In areas of the Vilas soil, crop yields are limited

during most years by the restricted available water

capacity. Irrigation can improve productivity.

• If the water table is lowered in areas of the Iosco

soil, crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soils and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water in areas of the Ellwood and

Vilas soils by reducing runoff losses to lakes and

streams.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season reduce leaching
Florence County, Wisconsin 39

losses in areas of the Iosco and Vilas soils and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

• In areas of the Iosco soil, the seasonal high water

table may delay spring planting in wet years. Providing

adequate drainage can improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting in areas of the

Ellwood soil.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss; Iosco—soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss; Vilas—water

erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazard of water erosion in areas

of the Ellwood and Vilas soils and helps to control soil

blowing in areas of the Iosco and Vilas soils.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields in areas of the Vilas soil are limited

during most years by the restricted available water

capacity. Drought-tolerant species are best suited to

this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Iosco and Vilas soils

and protect the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Ellwood and Vilas soils by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Ellwood—restricted

permeability, wetness, slope; Iosco—poor filtering

capacity, restricted permeability, wetness; Vilas—

poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Ellwood and Vilas—moderately well suited;

Iosco—poorly suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

slope, shrink-swell potential, water erosion;

Iosco—wetness, soil blowing; Vilas—slope, water

erosion, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Ellwood and

Iosco soils.

• In areas of the Ellwood and Vilas soils, buildings can

be designed so that they conform to the natural slope

of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting and

filling.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling in areas of the Ellwood soil.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion on the Ellwood and Vilas soils

and soil blowing on the Iosco and Vilas soils during

and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Vilas soil,

stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can minimize the

safety hazard and prevent the damage caused by

caving.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Ellwood and Iosco—poorly suited; Vilas—

moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

slope, shrink-swell potential, water erosion;

Iosco—wetness, shrink-swell potential, soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks; Vilas—slope, water

erosion, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Ellwood and

Iosco soils.

• In areas of the Ellwood and Vilas soils, buildings can

be designed so that they conform to the natural slope
40 Soil Survey of

of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting and

filling.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling in areas of the Ellwood and

Iosco soils.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion on the Ellwood and Vilas soils

and soil blowing on the Iosco and Vilas soils during

and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Iosco and

Vilas soils, stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can

minimize the safety hazard and prevent the damage

caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: Ellwood—3L (sugar

maple); Iosco—5W (quaking aspen); Vilas—6A

(red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

EoD—Ellwood-Vilas-Padus complex, 10 to

30 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Slope range: Ellwood—10 to 15 percent; Vilas and

Padus—15 to 30 percent

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 120 acres

Representative Profile

Ellwood

Surface layer:

0 to 6 inches—dark reddish brown, friable silt

loam

Subsoil:

6 to 11 inches—reddish brown, mottled, firm silty

clay loam and brown, mottled, friable silt loam

11 to 80 inches—reddish brown, firm silty clay

loam

Vilas

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

3 to 19 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

19 to 30 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

30 to 60 inches—brown, loose sand

Padus

Surface layer:

0 to 4 inches—very dark grayish brown, friable

sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

4 to 5 inches—grayish brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

5 to 20 inches—dark brown, friable sandy loam

20 to 27 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

27 to 30 inches—brown, very friable gravelly

loamy sand

Substratum:

30 to 60 inches—brown, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Ellwood soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers less than 20 inches

thick over sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Ellwood soils that are well drained

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Padus and Vilas

soils

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Ellwood

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or

loam

• Areas of Ellwood soils in which the lower layer is silt

loam, loam, clay loam, silty clay, or clay

• Areas of eroded soils
Florence County, Wisconsin 41

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Ellwood—moderately well drained;

Vilas—excessively drained; Padus—well drained

Seasonal high water table: Ellwood—perched, 1.5 to

3.5 feet below the surface; Vilas and Padus—more

than 6 feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Ellwood—moderately slow; Vilas—rapid;

Padus—moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Ellwood—high; Vilas—low;

Padus—low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard, plant competition;

Vilas—equipment limitation, erosion hazard;

Padus—equipment limitation, erosion hazard,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable or planting seedlings

by hand, may be needed in areas of the Padus and

Vilas soils.

• In areas of the Padus and Vilas soils, carefully

locating skid trails and building haul roads on the

contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• In areas of the Ellwood and Padus soils, ruts form

easily on unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log

landings and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion in areas of the Padus

and Vilas soils.

• In areas of the Ellwood soil, windthrow can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not leave

the remaining trees widely spaced.

• Plant competition in areas of the Ellwood and Padus

soils can be controlled by mechanical site preparation

or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Ellwood—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss; Vilas and

Padus—water erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness,

nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas of the Padus and Vilas soils are

generally limited to pasture of existing forage species.

Maintaining a high-quality cover of pasture plants

reduces the hazards of water erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• In areas of the Vilas soil and in areas of the Padus

soil where the available water capacity is low, forage

yields are limited during most years. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Vilas soil and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the slope

and the hazard of water erosion in areas of the

Padus and Vilas soils and because of the

droughtiness in areas of the Vilas soil

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Ellwood—restricted

permeability, wetness, slope; Vilas and Padus—

poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Ellwood—moderately well suited; Vilas and

Padus—poorly suited in the less sloping areas

and generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

slope, shrink-swell potential, water erosion; Vilas

and Padus—slope, water erosion, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks
42 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Ellwood soil.

• In areas of the Ellwood soil and in the less sloping

areas of the Padus and Vilas soils, buildings can be

designed so that they conform to the natural slope of

the land. The slope can be modified by cutting and

filling.

• In areas of the Ellwood soil, adding coarse textured

material under and around the foundation and properly

reinforcing the foundation help to prevent the structural

damage caused by shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas help to control

water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Padus and

Vilas soils, stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can

minimize the safety hazard and prevent the damage

caused by caving.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Ellwood—poorly suited; Vilas and Padus—

poorly suited in the less sloping areas and

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Ellwood—wetness,

slope, shrink-swell potential, water erosion; Vilas

and Padus—slope, water erosion, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Ellwood soil.

• In areas of the Ellwood soil and in the less sloping

areas of the Padus and Vilas soils, buildings can be

designed so that they conform to the natural slope of

the land. The slope can be modified by cutting and

filling.

• In areas of the Ellwood soil, adding coarse textured

material under and around the foundation and properly

reinforcing the foundation help to prevent the structural

damage caused by shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Padus and

Vilas soils, stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can

minimize the safety hazard and prevent the damage

caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIe

Woodland ordination symbol: Ellwood—3L (sugar

maple); Vilas—6R (red pine); Padus—3R (sugar

maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Ep—Epiaquents and Epiaquods, nearly

level

Setting

Landform: Moraines and glacial lake plains

Landscape position: Depressions and drainageways

Slope range: 0 to 2 percent

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 50 acres

Representative Profile

Epiaquents

The texture, color, thickness, and other properties

of the individual soil layers are highly variable. Most

profiles have a surface layer, subsurface layer, and

substratum. Typically, the surface layer is 8 inches of

very dark grayish brown to black muck. The

subsurface layer is 3 inches of very dark brown or

black loamy sand, sandy loam, fine sandy loam, very

fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam or the mucky

analogs of these textures. The substratum is light

yellowish brown to very dark gray sand, loamy sand,

sandy loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam,

loam, silt loam, clay loam, or silty clay loam.

Epiaquods

The texture, color, thickness, and other properties

of the individual soil layers are highly variable. Most

profiles have a surface layer, subsurface layer, subsoil,

and substratum. Typically, the surface layer is 8 inches

of very dark grayish brown to black muck. The

subsurface layer is 4 inches of light brownish gray to

dark gray, mottled sand, loamy sand, loamy fine sand,

loamy very fine sand, sandy loam, fine sandy loam,

very fine sandy loam, or loam. The subsoil is 11

inches of dark brown to very dusky red, mottled sand,

loamy sand, loamy fine sand, loamy very fine sand,

sandy loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or

loam. The substratum is light yellowish brown to very

dark gray, mottled sand, loamy sand, sandy loam, or

loam or the gravelly analogs of these textures.

Composition

The composition of individual delineations of this

map unit is variable. Some areas are 60 to 90 percent

Epiaquents and similar inclusions and 0 to 30 percent

Epiaquods and similar inclusions; other areas are 60

to 90 percent Epiaquods and similar inclusions and 0
Florence County, Wisconsin 43

to 30 percent Epiaquents and similar inclusions; and

some areas are 30 to 45 percent Epiaquents and

similar inclusions and 30 to 45 percent Epiaquods and

similar inclusions. Contrasting inclusions make up 10

to 25 percent of the map unit.

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The very poorly drained Cathro and Markey soils,

which have organic layers 16 to 51 inches thick

• Somewhat poorly drained soils in the higher convex

areas

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of Epiaquents that have a substratum of silty

clay or clay

• Soils that have an apparent seasonal high water

table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, above or near the

surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Epiaquents—moderate or moderately

rapid in the upper part and moderately slow to

rapid in the lower part; Epiaquods—moderate to

rapid

Available water capacity: Low to high

Organic matter content: Very high in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wetland

wildlife habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength generally limit access

by machinery to the dry summer months or to periods

when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

Reforestation is generally limited to natural

regeneration or hand planting.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Wetland wildlife habitat

Suitability: Suited in undrained areas

Major management concerns: Excessive

sedimentation, chemical and nutrient pollution

Management considerations:

• Undrained areas of these soils can provide wetland

wildlife habitat, provide for water purification and

ground-water recharge, and minimize runoff and

sedimentation.

• Maintaining a saturated condition, controlling

sedimentation, and following recommended nutrient

and chemical management practices on adjacent land

help to protect wetland areas.

• In cultivated areas, providing adjacent nesting cover

can enhance the habitat.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, nutrient

and pesticide loss, wetness, ponding, low strength

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• The number of suitable forage plants is limited by the

seasonal high water table.

• Establishing or maintaining an improved pasture is

difficult because of the ponding.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Livestock hooves cut the soil and damage the plant

cover.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, a severe frost hazard, and low

strength

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

restricted permeability, wetness, ponding

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of
44 Soil Survey of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, ponding, soil

blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Providing surface drainage, installing a subsurface

drainage system, and adding fill material to raise the

elevation of the site can help to overcome the wetness

and the ponding.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of ponding

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 2W (red maple)

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

FeB—Fence silt loam, 0 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Landscape position: Linear and slightly concave

toeslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 6 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

6 to 14 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

14 to 25 inches—brown and reddish brown, friable

silt loam

25 to 42 inches—reddish brown and brown,

mottled, friable silt loam

Substratum:

42 to 60 inches—brown, mottled, stratified silt

loam and very fine sandy loam

Composition

Fence soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Gastrow soils in

depressions and drainageways

• Goodwit soils, which are underlain by sandy or

loamy glacial till or glacial mudflow sediment; in slightly

convex areas

• Tipler and Vanzile soils, which are underlain by

sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Soils that have a substratum of silty clay loam or

clay loam

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Sloping areas of Fence soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that have an apparent seasonal high water

table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 2.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and

moderately slow in the substratum

Available water capacity: High

Organic matter content: Moderately low in the surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss, poor tilth, low strength
Florence County, Wisconsin 45

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Low soil strength limits the use of farm equipment to

periods when the soil is not wet.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss, low strength

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

Fm—Fordum loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Flood plains

Shape of areas: Long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 120 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 9 inches—black, friable loam

Substratum:

9 to 15 inches—dark gray, mottled, very friable

very fine sandy loam

15 to 17 inches—black, very friable muck

17 to 29 inches—dark gray, mottled, friable fine

sandy loam

29 to 60 inches—dark gray, loose sand

Composition

Fordum soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The very poorly drained Cathro, Lupton, and Markey

soils, which have organic layers 16 to more than 51

inches thick; in depressions and drainageways

• Moderately well drained or somewhat poorly drained

soils in slightly convex areas

• Areas of water

• Areas along rivers where rocks, sand, and gravel are

exposed

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the surface layer is muck,
46 Soil Survey of

silty clay, silty clay loam, silt loam, very fine sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or loamy sand

• Soils that have strata of gravel throughout

• Soils that are sandy throughout

• Soils that have sand at a depth of more than 60

inches

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, above or near

the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: High or very high in the

surface layer

Flooding: Frequent for brief or long periods

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wetland

wildlife habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength generally limit access

by machinery to the dry summer months or to periods

when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

Reforestation is generally limited to natural

regeneration or hand planting.

• Planting and harvesting operations are limited during

periods of flooding. Seedling mortality may be high

unless protection from flooding is provided.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Wetland wildlife habitat

Suitability: Suited in undrained areas

Major management concerns: Excessive

sedimentation, chemical and nutrient pollution

Management considerations:

• Undrained areas of this soil can provide wetland

wildlife habitat, provide for water purification and

ground-water recharge, and minimize runoff and

sedimentation.

• Maintaining a saturated condition, controlling

sedimentation, and following recommended nutrient

and chemical management practices on adjacent land

help to protect wetland areas.

• In cultivated areas, providing adjacent nesting cover

can enhance the habitat.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Nutrient and pesticide

loss, wetness, ponding, flooding, low strength

Management considerations:

• Providing flooding protection, reducing chemical

applications, and applying phosphorus fertilizer at

recommended rates help to protect the quality of

surface water by reducing runoff losses to lakes and

streams.

• The number of suitable forage plants is limited by the

seasonal high water table.

• Establishing or maintaining an improved pasture is

difficult because of the ponding and flooding.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, frequent flooding, a severe frost

hazard, and low strength

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness, ponding, flooding

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the flooding

and ponding

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 2W (silver maple)

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned
Florence County, Wisconsin 47

GaA—Gastrow silt loam, 0 to 3 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 20 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—very dark gray, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 6 inches—dark grayish brown, mottled, friable

silt loam

Subsoil:

6 to 31 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

31 to 37 inches—dark brown, mottled, friable fine

sandy loam

Substratum:

37 to 60 inches—brown and yellowish brown,

mottled, friable, stratified fine sand, fine sandy

loam, very fine sandy loam, and silt loam

Composition

Gastrow soil and similar inclusions: 90 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 10 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Annalake soils, which

formed in primarily loamy deposits underlain by

stratified lacustrine deposits; in slightly convex areas

• The moderately well drained Fence soils in slightly

convex areas

• Areas of poorly drained soils in the lower

depressions and drainageways

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand, gravelly sand,

clay loam, or silty clay loam

• Soils that have a perched seasonal high water table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 0.5 foot to 2.0

feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate

Available water capacity: High

Organic matter content: Moderate in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength frequently limit

access by machinery to the dry summer months or to

periods when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, poor tilth, low

strength

Management considerations:

• The seasonal high water table may delay spring

planting in wet years. Providing adequate drainage can

improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface, adding other

organic material to the soil, minimizing tillage, tilling

and harvesting at the proper soil moisture content, and

including grasses and legumes in the cropping

sequence help to prevent excessive compaction,

minimize crusting, and maintain good tilth.

• Low soil strength limits the use of farm equipment to

periods when the soil is not wet.
48 Soil Survey of

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Low strength

Management considerations:

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—wetness; dwellings with

basements—wetness, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 3W (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: AViO or TMC

GmC—Goodman silt loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 8 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 4 inches—grayish brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

4 to 31 inches—brown, friable silt loam

31 to 35 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

35 to 62 inches—brown gravelly sandy loam

Composition

Goodman soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Fence soils, which are

underlain by stratified lacustrine deposits

• The moderately well drained Goodwit soils

• Padus and Stambaugh soils, which are underlain by

sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of Goodman soils that are not stony or that

are bouldery

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of

Goodman soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

and the substratum are loam, clay loam, or gravelly

loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sandy loam, loamy

sand, or gravelly loamy sand

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and

moderate or moderately rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Moderate or high

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderate in the mineral surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet
Florence County, Wisconsin 49

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited in areas where

surface stones have been removed; generally

unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor

tilth, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years in

areas where the available water capacity is moderate.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Moderate

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IIIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

GmD—Goodman silt loam, 15 to 25

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

2 to 5 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

5 to 38 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Substratum:

38 to 60 inches—brown gravelly sandy loam
50 Soil Survey of

Composition

Goodman soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Fence soils, which are

underlain by stratified lacustrine deposits

• The moderately well drained Goodwit soils

• Padus and Stambaugh soils, which are underlain by

sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of Goodman soils that are not stony or that

are bouldery

• Gently sloping, sloping, or steep areas of Goodman

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

and the substratum are loam, clay loam, or gravelly

loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sandy loam, loamy

sand, or gravelly loamy sand

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and

moderate or moderately rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Moderate or high

Organic matter content: Moderate in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants can reduce the hazard of water

erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of surface

stones, the slope, and the very severe hazard of

water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to
Florence County, Wisconsin 51

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe in very stony areas;

VIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

GwB—Goodwit silt loam, 1 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 1,000 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark grayish brown mucky

peat

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 5 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

5 to 6 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

6 to 21 inches—brown, friable silt loam

21 to 40 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

40 to 47 inches—reddish brown, friable sandy

loam

Substratum:

47 to 62 inches—reddish brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Composition

Goodwit soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Fence soils, which are underlain by stratified

lacustrine deposits

• The well drained Goodman soils

• The somewhat poorly drained Mudlake soils and the

poorly drained Capitola soils in depressions

• The well drained Stambaugh and Vanzile soils,

which are underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly

glacial outwash

• Areas of Goodwit soils that are not stony or that are

bouldery

• Sloping areas of Goodwit soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

and the substratum are loam, clay loam, or gravelly

loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sandy loam, loamy

sand, or gravelly loamy sand

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 2.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate

Available water capacity: Moderate or high

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderate in the mineral surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited in areas where surface stones

have been removed; poorly suited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor

tilth, rock fragments
52 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years in

areas where the available water capacity is moderate.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Rock fragments

Management considerations:

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs in very stony areas;

IIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

IsA—Iosco loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Round, irregular, or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 250 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 9 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

Subsurface layer:

9 to 11 inches—brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

Subsoil:

11 to 33 inches—dark reddish brown and reddish

brown, mottled, very friable loamy sand

33 to 44 inches—reddish brown, mottled, firm silty

clay loam

Substratum:

44 to 60 inches—reddish brown, firm silty clay

loam

Composition

Iosco soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Au Gres soils, which are sandy throughout

• Crossett soils, which are silt loam in the upper

layers
Florence County, Wisconsin 53

• The moderately well drained Morganlake soils in the

higher landscape positions

• Areas of poorly drained soils in the lower

depressions and drainageways

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

and the substratum are silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty

clay, or clay

• Areas of Iosco soils on glacial lake plains

• Soils that have a perched seasonal high water table

• Areas in which the silty deposits are at a depth of 40

to 60 inches

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 0.5 foot to 1.5

feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid in the upper part and moderately

slow in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—cropland, pasture; other

uses—woodland, wildlife habitat

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, wetness

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• If the water table is lowered, crop yields are limited

during most years by the restricted available water

capacity. Irrigation can improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

• The seasonal high water table may delay spring

planting in wet years. Providing adequate drainage can

improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength frequently limit

access by machinery to the dry summer months or to

periods when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

restricted permeability, wetness
54 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—wetness, soil blowing; dwellings with

basements—wetness, shrink-swell potential, soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 5W (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: TMC

Kr—Kinross muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Round, irregular, or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 25 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable muck

Subsurface layer:

2 to 9 inches—brown, very friable sand

Subsoil:

9 to 39 inches—dark reddish brown, dark brown,

and brown, mottled, very friable sand

Substratum:

39 to 60 inches—dark yellowish brown, loose

sand

Composition

Kinross soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres soils in

slightly convex areas

• The very poorly drained Beseman, Cathro, Dawson,

and Markey soils, which have organic layers 16 to 51

inches thick

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

sand, fine sand, loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine

sandy loam

• Soils that have strata of gravel throughout

• Soils that have cemented layers in the subsoil

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, above or near

the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wetland

wildlife habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength generally limit access

by machinery to the dry summer months or to periods

when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

Reforestation is generally limited to natural

regeneration or hand planting.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• The sandy soil can interfere with the traction of

wheeled equipment, especially during dry periods.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.
Florence County, Wisconsin 55

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by using

harvest methods that leave some mature trees to

provide shade and protection and by planting vigorous

nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or on

prepared ridges.

Wetland wildlife habitat

Suitability: Suited in undrained areas

Major management concerns: Excessive

sedimentation, chemical and nutrient pollution

Management considerations:

• Undrained areas of this soil can provide wetland

wildlife habitat, provide for water purification and

ground-water recharge, and minimize runoff and

sedimentation.

• Maintaining a saturated condition, controlling

sedimentation, and following recommended nutrient

and chemical management practices on adjacent land

help to protect wetland areas.

• In cultivated areas, providing adjacent nesting cover

can enhance the habitat.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, nutrient

and pesticide loss, wetness, ponding

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• The number of suitable forage plants is limited by the

seasonal high water table.

• Establishing or maintaining an improved pasture is

difficult because of the ponding.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, and a severe frost hazard

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness, ponding

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, ponding, soil

blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Providing surface drainage, installing a subsurface

drainage system, and adding fill material to raise the

elevation of the site can help to overcome the wetness

and the ponding.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of ponding

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 2W (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

Lo—Loxley, Beseman, and Dawson peats,

0 to 1 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Landscape position: Depressions and basins

Shape of areas: Round, irregular, or long and

narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 240 acres

Representative Profile

Loxley

Surface layer:

0 to 9 inches—dark reddish brown, very friable

peat

Next layer:

9 to 60 inches—dark reddish brown and black,

very friable muck

Beseman

Surface layer:

0 to 12 inches—dark brown, very friable peat

Next layer:

12 to 36 inches—dark reddish brown and black,

friable muck
56 Soil Survey of

Substratum:

36 to 60 inches—dark gray, friable silt loam

Dawson

Surface layer:

0 to 10 inches—dark reddish brown, very friable

peat

Next layer:

10 to 44 inches—dark reddish brown, very friable

muck

Substratum:

44 to 60 inches—brown, loose sand

Composition

The composition of individual delineations of this

map unit is variable. Some areas are 50 to 60 percent

Loxley soil and similar inclusions, 0 to 15 percent

Beseman soil and similar inclusions, and 10 to 20

percent Dawson soil and similar inclusions; other

areas are 0 to 20 percent Loxley soil and similar

inclusions, 50 to 65 percent Beseman soil and similar

inclusions, and 5 to 15 percent Dawson soil and

similar inclusions; and some areas are 0 to 15 percent

Loxley soil and similar inclusions, 0 to 15 percent

Beseman soil and similar inclusions, and 50 to 60

percent Dawson soil and similar inclusions.

Contrasting inclusions make up 10 to 25 percent of the

map unit.

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Areas where the soils are less acid and support

trees of merchantable size and quality

• Areas of poorly drained to excessively drained soils

in the higher landscape positions

• Areas of water

• Areas that are inundated throughout most of the year

Similar inclusions:

• Soils that have a surface layer of muck or mucky

peat

• Areas of Beseman soils that have a substratum of

sandy loam, gravelly sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or

loam

• Areas of Dawson soils that have a substratum of fine

sand, loamy fine sand, loamy sand, gravelly loamy

sand, or gravelly sand

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, above or near

the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Loxley—moderately slow to moderately

rapid; Beseman—moderate or moderately rapid in

the organic material and moderately slow in the

substratum; Dawson—moderately slow to

moderately rapid in the organic material and rapid

in the substratum

Available water capacity: Very high

Organic matter content: Very high in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant use—wetland wildlife habitat

Wetland wildlife habitat

Suitability: Suited in undrained areas

Major management concerns: Excessive

sedimentation, chemical and nutrient pollution

Management considerations:

• Undrained areas of these soils can provide wetland

wildlife habitat, provide for water purification and

ground-water recharge, and minimize runoff and

sedimentation.

• Maintaining a saturated condition, controlling

sedimentation, and following recommended nutrient

and chemical management practices on adjacent land

help to protect wetland areas.

• In cultivated areas, providing adjacent nesting cover

can enhance the habitat.

Woodland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, extreme acidity, and low

strength. These soils do not support trees of

merchantable size or quality.

Cropland or pasture

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, a scarcity of suitable drainage

outlets, extreme acidity, a severe frost hazard, and

low strength

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness, ponding, subsidence

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of wetness,

ponding, subsidence, and low strength

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIw
Florence County, Wisconsin 57

Woodland ordination symbol: Not assigned

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

Lu—Lupton, Cathro, and Markey mucks,

0 to 1 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Landscape position: Depressions and drainageways

Shape of areas: Round, irregular, or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 600 acres

Representative Profile

Lupton

Surface layer:

0 to 6 inches—black, very friable muck

Next layer:

6 to 60 inches—black, very friable muck

Cathro

Surface layer:

0 to 8 inches—black, very friable muck

Next layer:

8 to 30 inches—black, very friable muck

Substratum:

30 to 37 inches—gray, friable silt loam

37 to 60 inches—grayish brown and brown,

mottled, friable sandy loam

Markey

Surface layer:

0 to 17 inches—black, very friable muck

Next layers:

17 to 21 inches—black, very friable mucky peat

21 to 36 inches—black, very friable muck

Substratum:

36 to 60 inches—grayish brown, loose sand

Composition

The composition of individual delineations of this

map unit is variable. Some areas are 50 to 60 percent

Lupton soil and similar inclusions, 0 to 15 percent

Cathro soil and similar inclusions, and 10 to 20

percent Markey soil and similar inclusions; other areas

are 0 to 20 percent Lupton soil and similar inclusions,

50 to 65 percent Cathro soil and similar inclusions,

and 5 to 15 percent Markey soil and similar inclusions;

and some areas are 0 to 15 percent Lupton soil and

similar inclusions, 0 to 15 percent Cathro soil and

similar inclusions, and 50 to 60 percent Markey soil

and similar inclusions. Contrasting inclusions make up

10 to 25 percent of the map unit.

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The poorly drained Fordum soils, which formed in

primarily loamy alluvium underlain by sandy or sandy

and gravelly deposits; on flood plains

• Areas where the soils are more acid and do not

support trees of merchantable size and quality

• Areas of poorly drained to excessively drained soils

in the higher landscape positions

• Areas of water

• Areas that are inundated throughout most of the

year

• Soils that have stones and boulders on the surface

Similar inclusions:

• Soils that have a surface layer of mucky peat or peat

• Areas of Markey soils that have a substratum of

gravelly sand, fine sand, loamy sand, gravelly loamy

sand, or loamy fine sand

• Areas of Cathro soils that have a substratum of fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, silty clay

loam, or clay loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, above or near

the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Lupton—moderately slow to moderately

rapid; Cathro—moderately slow to moderately

rapid in the organic material and moderately slow

or moderate in the substratum; Markey—

moderately slow to moderately rapid in the organic

material and very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Very high

Organic matter content: Very high in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wetland

wildlife habitat

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength generally limit access

by machinery to periods when the soil is frozen or

snow cover is thick. Reforestation is generally limited

to natural regeneration.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest
58 Soil Survey of

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Wetland wildlife habitat

Suitability: Suited in undrained areas

Major management concerns: Excessive

sedimentation, chemical and nutrient pollution

Management considerations:

• Undrained areas of these soils can provide wetland

wildlife habitat, provide for water purification and

ground-water recharge, and minimize runoff and

sedimentation (fig. 3).

• Maintaining a saturated condition, controlling

sedimentation, and following recommended nutrient

and chemical management practices on adjacent land

help to protect wetland areas.

• In cultivated areas, providing adjacent nesting cover

can enhance the habitat.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, a scarcity of suitable drainage

outlets, low strength, a severe frost hazard, and

low strength

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, nutrient

and pesticide loss, wetness, ponding, low strength

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

Figure 3.—Wetland wildlife habitat consisting of grasses, sedges, reeds, shrubs, and trees in an area of Lupton, Cathro, and Markey

mucks, 0 to 1 percent slopes, adjacent to a small stream.
Florence County, Wisconsin 59

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• The number of suitable forage plants is limited by the

seasonal high water table.

• Establishing or maintaining an improved pasture is

difficult because of the ponding.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Livestock hooves cut the soil and damage the plant

cover.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Lupton—restricted

permeability, wetness, ponding, subsidence;

Cathro—restricted permeability, wetness, ponding;

Markey—poor filtering capacity, restricted

permeability, wetness, ponding, subsidence

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of wetness,

ponding, subsidence, and low strength

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIw

Woodland ordination symbol: Lupton—6W (balsam

fir); Cathro—5W (balsam fir); Markey—7W

(balsam fir)

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

MaA—Manitowish sandy loam, 0 to 3

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, toeslopes, and

footslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark grayish brown, very

friable peat

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, very friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 13 inches—dark brown, very friable sandy

loam

13 to 18 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

18 to 29 inches—strong brown, loose gravelly

sand

Substratum:

29 to 62 inches—strong brown, mottled, loose,

stratified sand and gravelly sand

Composition

Manitowish soil and similar inclusions: 90 to 95

percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 10 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres soils, which

are sandy throughout; in depressions and

drainageways

• The well drained Padus and Tipler soils, which are

deeper than the Manitowish soil over sandy or sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils in

slightly convex areas

• The somewhat poorly drained Worcester soils, which

are deeper than the Manitowish soil over sandy or

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash; in depressions

and drainageways

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Manitowish soils that have slopes of 3 to 6

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

sand, fine sandy loam, or loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand, gravelly

coarse sand, or stratified sand and gravelly coarse

sand

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 2.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer
60 Soil Survey of

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Plant competition

Management considerations:

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 3A (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: TMC

Mn—Minocqua muck, 0 to 2 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Round, irregular, or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 40 acres
Florence County, Wisconsin 61

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 5 inches—black, very friable muck

Subsurface layer:

5 to 13 inches—grayish brown, friable fine sandy

loam

Subsoil:

13 to 21 inches—gray, mottled, friable fine sandy

loam

21 to 25 inches—olive gray, mottled, very friable

gravelly loamy coarse sand

Substratum:

25 to 60 inches—grayish brown, mottled, loose

sand

Composition

Minocqua soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The very poorly drained Lupton, Cathro, and Markey

soils, which have organic layers 16 to more than 51

inches thick

• The somewhat poorly drained Worcester soils in the

slightly higher landscape positions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are silt loam,

loam, sandy loam, or loamy sand

• Soils in which the depth to sandy or sandy and

gravelly glacial outwash is less than 20 inches or more

than 40 inches

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have a substratum of coarse sand,

gravelly coarse sand, very gravelly coarse sand,

stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand, or stratified

sand and very gravelly coarse sand

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, above or near

the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wetland

wildlife habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength generally limit access

by machinery to the dry summer months or to periods

when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

Reforestation is generally limited to natural

regeneration or hand planting.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Wetland wildlife habitat

Suitability: Suited in undrained areas

Major management concerns: Excessive

sedimentation, chemical and nutrient pollution

Management considerations:

• Undrained areas of this soil can provide wetland

wildlife habitat, provide for water purification and

ground-water recharge, and minimize runoff and

sedimentation.

• Maintaining a saturated condition, controlling

sedimentation, and following recommended nutrient

and chemical management practices on adjacent land

help to protect wetland areas.

• In cultivated areas, providing adjacent nesting cover

can enhance the habitat.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, nutrient

and pesticide loss, wetness, ponding, low strength

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.
62 Soil Survey of

• The number of suitable forage plants is limited by the

seasonal high water table.

• Establishing or maintaining an improved pasture is

difficult because of the ponding.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Livestock hooves cut the soil and damage the plant

cover.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of excessive

wetness, ponding, a severe frost hazard, and low

strength

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness, ponding

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, ponding, soil

blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Providing surface drainage, installing a subsurface

drainage system, and adding fill material to raise the

elevation of the site can help to overcome the wetness

and the ponding.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of ponding

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 7W (balsam fir)

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

MrB—Morganlake loamy fine sand, 0 to 6

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Linear and slightly convex

summits, shoulders, footslopes, and toeslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 100 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 7 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

Subsurface layer:

7 to 8 inches—brown, very friable loamy fine sand

Subsoil:

8 to 26 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy fine sand

26 to 31 inches—strong brown, mottled, very

friable loamy fine sand

31 to 40 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam and brown, mottled, friable silt loam

Substratum:

40 to 60 inches—dark reddish brown, firm silty

clay loam

Composition

Morganlake soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95

percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres soils, which

are sandy throughout; in depressions and

drainageways

• The somewhat poorly drained Iosco soils in

depressions and drainageways

• The well drained Rousseau soils and the

excessively drained Vilas soils, which are sandy

throughout

• Ellwood soils, which are silt loam in the upper

layers

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Sloping areas of Morganlake soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, or loamy sand

• Areas where the silty deposits are at a depth of 40

to 60 inches

• Areas of soils in which the lower part of the subsoil

and the substratum are silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty

clay, or clay

• Areas of eroded soils

• Areas of Morganlake soils on glacial lake plains

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Florence County, Wisconsin 63

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 1.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the upper

part and moderately slow in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—cropland, pasture; other

uses—woodland, wildlife habitat

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in areas

where the available water capacity is low. Droughttolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Windthrow hazard,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

restricted permeability, wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, shrink-swell

potential, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Adding coarse textured material under and around

the foundation and properly reinforcing the foundation

help to prevent the structural damage caused by

shrinking and swelling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.
64 Soil Survey of

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 6S (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib

MuB—Mudlake silt loam, 1 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Depressions, drainageways,

toeslopes, and footslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 100 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 4 inches—very dark gray, very friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

4 to 5 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

5 to 34 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

34 to 43 inches—reddish brown, mottled, friable

sandy loam

Substratum:

43 to 70 inches—reddish brown, friable sandy

loam

Composition

Mudlake soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The poorly drained Capitola soils in the lower

depressions and drainageways

• Gastrow soils, which are underlain by stratified

lacustrine deposits

• The moderately well drained Goodwit, Wabeno, and

Wakefield soils and the well drained Sarona soils in

slightly convex areas

• Areas of Mudlake soils that are not stony or that are

bouldery

• Areas of Mudlake soils that have slopes of 6 to 10

percent

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loam,

very fine sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or sandy loam

• Soils that have an apparent seasonal high water

table

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or gravelly

sand

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loam,

gravelly loam, clay loam, gravelly sandy loam, loamy

sand, gravelly loamy sand, cobbly sandy loam, or

cobbly loamy sand

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 0.5 foot to 2.0 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and

moderate or moderately rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Moderate or high

Organic matter content: Moderate in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength frequently limit

access by machinery to the dry summer months or to

periods when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited in areas where surface stones

have been removed; poorly suited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, wetness,

poor tilth, rock fragments, low strength
Florence County, Wisconsin 65

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• If the water table is lowered, crop yields are

somewhat limited during dry years in areas where the

available water capacity is moderate.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• The seasonal high water table may delay spring

planting in wet years. Providing adequate drainage can

improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface, adding other

organic material to the soil, minimizing tillage, tilling

and harvesting at the proper soil moisture content, and

including grasses and legumes in the cropping

sequence help to prevent excessive compaction,

minimize crusting, and maintain good tilth.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

• Low soil strength limits the use of farm equipment to

periods when the soil is not wet.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Rock fragments, low

strength

Management considerations:

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—wetness, water erosion; dwellings

with basements—wetness, water erosion, caving

of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs in very stony areas;

IIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3W (red maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: AViO

M-W—Miscellaneous water

Setting

Landform: Mostly outwash plains and glacial lake

plains

Shape of areas: Rectangular

Size of areas: 5 to 15 acres

General Description

• This map unit occurs as small manmade areas of

water and spoil consisting of excavated soil material.

Typically, these areas contain water most of the year.

The spoil is partially revegetated with grasses and

weeds.

Composition

Miscellaneous water and similar inclusions: 95 to 100

percent

Contrasting inclusions: 0 to 5 percent
66 Soil Survey of

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Access roads and walkways

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of sandy, loamy, or silty soil material between

areas of the excavated spoil material

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—industrial, sanitary, or

mining applications; other use—wetland wildlife

habitat

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: Not assigned

Woodland ordination symbol: Not assigned

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

PaB—Padus sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Toeslopes, side slopes, and linear

and slightly convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—pinkish gray, very friable sandy

loam

Subsoil:

3 to 19 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

19 to 38 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

38 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Manitowish soils and

the somewhat excessively drained Pence soils, which

have thinner loamy deposits than those of the Padus

soil

• The moderately well drained Tipler soils

• The somewhat poorly drained Worcester soils in

depressions

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Sloping areas of Padus soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

sand, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or

silt loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

• Soils that have a substratum at a depth of more than

40 inches

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop
Florence County, Wisconsin 67

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in areas

where the available water capacity is low. Droughttolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—water erosion, soil blowing; dwellings

with basements—water erosion, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: ATM

PaC—Padus sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark grayish brown, very friable

mucky peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—very dark brown, friable sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—grayish brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 30 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

30 to 36 inches—brown, very friable gravelly

loamy sand

Substratum:

36 to 61 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand
68 Soil Survey of

Composition

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have thinner loamy deposits than those of the

Padus soil

• The excessively drained Sayner soils, which are

sandy throughout

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Padus

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

• Soils that have a substratum at a depth of more than

40 inches

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in areas

where the available water capacity is low. Droughttolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.
Florence County, Wisconsin 69

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: ATM

PaD—Padus sandy loam, 15 to 35 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 50 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark brown, friable sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 29 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

29 to 34 inches—brown, very friable gravelly

loamy sand

Substratum:

34 to 60 inches—yellowish brown and light

yellowish brown, loose, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have thinner loamy deposits than those of the

Padus soil

• The excessively drained Sayner soils, which are

sandy throughout

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Padus soils or

areas of Padus soils that have slopes of more than 35

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

• Soils that have a substratum at a depth of more than

40 inches

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition
70 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in areas

where the available water capacity is low. Droughttolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the slope

and the very severe hazard of water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: ATM

PeB—Padus-Pence sandy loams, 0 to 6

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Toeslopes, side slopes, and linear

and slightly convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 300 acres

Representative Profile

Padus

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—dark brown, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

5 to 17 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

17 to 35 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

35 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Pence

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—black, friable sandy loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 71

Subsurface layer:

3 to 6 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

6 to 18 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

18 to 30 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly loamy sand

Substratum:

30 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 65 to 75 percent

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Manitowish and Tipler

soils

• The well drained Rousseau soils and the

excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils, which are

sandy throughout

• The somewhat poorly drained Worcester soils in

depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Sloping areas of Padus and Pence soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, loam, very fine sandy loam, or silt loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

• Soils that have a substratum at a depth of more than

40 inches

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Padus—well drained; Pence—

somewhat excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Padus—moderate in the upper part and

rapid or very rapid in the substratum; Pence—

moderate or moderately rapid in the upper part

and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Padus—low or moderate;

Pence—low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Padus—equipment

limitation, plant competition; Pence—no major soil

limitations or hazards

Major management concerns:

• In areas of the Padus soil, ruts form easily on

unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log landings

and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Plant competition in areas of the Padus soil can be

controlled by mechanical site preparation or by limited

use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season reduce leaching losses in areas of the

Pence soil and protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited
72 Soil Survey of

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in

areas where the available water capacity is low.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to these

soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Pence soil and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—water erosion, soil blowing; dwellings

with basements—water erosion, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: Padus—3L (sugar

maple); Pence—3A (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV or ATM

PeC—Padus-Pence sandy loams, 6 to 15

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 250 acres

Representative Profile

Padus

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 20 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

20 to 33 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

33 to 60 inches—brown and yellowish brown,

loose, stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand

Pence

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—very dark gray, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

5 to 16 inches—reddish brown and dark brown,

friable sandy loam

16 to 27 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly loamy sand

Substratum:

27 to 61 inches—brown, loose, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 60 to 70 percent

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 20 to 30 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 10 to 20 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout
Florence County, Wisconsin 73

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Padus

and Pence soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, loam, very fine sandy loam, or silt loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Padus—well drained; Pence—

somewhat excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Padus—moderate in the upper part and

rapid or very rapid in the substratum; Pence—

moderate or moderately rapid in the upper part

and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Padus—low or moderate;

Pence—low

Organic matter content: Padus—moderately low or

moderate in the surface layer; Pence—very high in

the organic layer and moderately low or moderate

in the mineral surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Padus—equipment

limitation, plant competition; Pence—equipment

limitation

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• In areas of the Padus soil, ruts form easily on

unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log landings

and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Plant competition in areas of the Padus soil can be

controlled by mechanical site preparation or by limited

use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season reduce leaching losses in areas of the

Pence soil and protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in areas

where the available water capacity is low. Droughttolerant species are best suited to these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Pence soil and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying
74 Soil Survey of

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVe

Woodland ordination symbol: Padus—3L (sugar

maple); Pence—3A (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV or ATM

PeD—Padus-Pence sandy loams, 15 to 35

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 300 acres

Representative Profile

Padus

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—grayish brown, friable sandy

loam

Subsoil:

3 to 30 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

Substratum:

30 to 61 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Pence

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

2 to 16 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

16 to 28 inches—strong brown, friable gravelly

loamy sand

Substratum:

28 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 55 to 65 percent

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 10 to 20 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Padus and Pence

soils or areas of Padus and Pence soils that have

slopes of more than 35 percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sandy loam, loam, very fine sandy loam, or silt

loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Padus—well drained; Pence—

somewhat excessively drained
Florence County, Wisconsin 75

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Padus—moderate in the upper part and

rapid or very rapid in the substratum; Pence—

moderate or moderately rapid in the upper part

and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Padus—low or moderate;

Pence—low

Organic matter content: Padus—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Pence—moderately low

or moderate in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Padus—equipment

limitation, erosion hazard, plant competition;

Pence—equipment limitation, erosion hazard

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• In areas of the Padus soil, ruts form easily on

unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log landings

and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition in areas of the Padus soil can be

controlled by mechanical site preparation or by limited

use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in areas

where the available water capacity is low. Droughttolerant species are best suited to these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Pence soil and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the slope

and the very severe hazard of water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV or ATM
76 Soil Survey of

PnB—Pence sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Toeslopes, side slopes, and linear

and slightly convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 500 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—black, very friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 4 inches—brown, very friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 15 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable sandy loam

15 to 31 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly coarse sand

Substratum:

31 to 60 inches—brown, loose, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Manitowish soils

• The well drained Padus soils and the moderately

well drained Tipler soils, which are deeper than the

Pence soil over sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial

outwash

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Sloping areas of Pence soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam or loam

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: No major soil limitations

or hazards

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season can reduce leaching losses and

protect the quality of ground water.
Florence County, Wisconsin 77

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—water erosion, soil blowing; dwellings

with basements—water erosion, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3A (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

PnC—Pence sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 250 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, very friable mucky

peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—black, very friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, very friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

5 to 14 inches—dark reddish brown and brown,

very friable sandy loam

14 to 26 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly coarse sand

Substratum:

26 to 61 inches—brown, loose, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils, which are deeper than

the Pence soil over sandy or sandy and gravelly

glacial outwash

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Pence

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam or loam

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand
78 Soil Survey of

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season can reduce leaching losses and

protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.
Florence County, Wisconsin 79

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3A (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

PnD—Pence sandy loam, 15 to 35 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 100 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, very friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

2 to 15 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable sandy loam

15 to 22 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly coarse sand

Substratum:

22 to 60 inches—light brown, loose, stratified sand

and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils, which are deeper than

the Pence soil over sandy or sandy and gravelly

glacial outwash

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have pockets of sandy loam, loamy sand,

gravelly sandy loam, or gravelly loamy sand in the

substratum

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Pence soils or

areas of Pence soils that have slopes of more than 35

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam or loam

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.
80 Soil Survey of

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying nitrogen

fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the slope

and the very severe hazard of water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

PsB—Pence-Vilas complex, 0 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Toeslopes, side slopes, and linear

and slightly convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Pence

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, very friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 16 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable sandy loam

16 to 29 inches—brown, very friable gravelly

loamy sand

Substratum:

29 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Vilas

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable mucky peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

3 to 21 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

21 to 29 inches—yellowish brown, very friable

sand

Substratum:

29 to 61 inches—brownish yellow and light

yellowish brown, loose sand

Composition

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 55 to 65 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Croswell and

Manitowish soils in the lower landscape positions

• The well drained Padus soils, which have loamy

upper layers 24 to 40 inches thick

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty

deposits

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Sloping areas of Pence and Vilas soils
Florence County, Wisconsin 81

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Pence—somewhat excessively

drained; Vilas—excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Pence—moderate or moderately rapid in

the upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower

part; Vilas—rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Pence—moderately low or

moderate in the surface layer; Vilas—very high in

the organic layer and moderately low or moderate

in the mineral surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: No major soil limitations

or hazards

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Pence—water erosion,

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss; Vilas—soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas of the

Pence soil

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water in areas of the Pence soil by

reducing runoff losses to lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season can reduce leaching losses and

protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Pence—water erosion,

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss; Vilas—soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Pence soil by reducing runoff losses to lakes and

streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Pence—water erosion,

soil blowing; Vilas—soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to
82 Soil Survey of

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Pence—water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks; Vilas—soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs

Woodland ordination symbol: Pence—3A (sugar

maple); Vilas—6A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

PsC—Pence-Vilas complex, 6 to 15

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 300 acres

Representative Profile

Pence

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark brown, friable sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 16 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

16 to 29 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly loamy sand

Substratum:

29 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Vilas

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy

sand

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

3 to 18 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

18 to 28 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

28 to 61 inches—yellowish brown, loose sand

Composition

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 50 to 60 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 30 to 40 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils, which have loamy

upper layers 24 to 40 inches thick

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Pence

and Vilas soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Pence—somewhat excessively

drained; Vilas—excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Pence—moderate or moderately rapid in

the upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower

part; Vilas—rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Pence—moderately low or

moderate in the surface layer; Vilas—very high in

the organic layer and moderately low or moderate

in the mineral surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture
Florence County, Wisconsin 83

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season can reduce leaching losses and

protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs

Woodland ordination symbol: Pence—3A (sugar

maple); Vilas—6A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

PsD—Pence-Vilas complex, 15 to 35

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 400 acres
84 Soil Survey of

Representative Profile

Pence

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

2 to 16 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

16 to 28 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly loamy sand

Substratum:

28 to 60 inches—brown, loose, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Vilas

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, very friable loamy

sand

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

2 to 14 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

14 to 24 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

24 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose sand

Composition

Pence soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 35 to 45 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils, which have loamy

upper layers 24 to 40 inches thick

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Pence and Vilas

soils or areas of Pence and Vilas soils that have

slopes of more than 35 percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Pence—somewhat excessively

drained; Vilas—excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Pence—moderate or moderately rapid in

the upper part and rapid or very rapid in the lower

part; Vilas—rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.
Florence County, Wisconsin 85

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the slope,

droughtiness, and the very severe hazard of water

erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: Pence—3R (sugar

maple); Vilas—6R (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: ATM

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

Pt—Pits, gravel

Setting

Landform: Mostly outwash plains, stream terraces,

eskers, kames, drumlins, and moraines

Shape of areas: Irregular, round, or oblong

Size of areas: 5 to 15 acres

General Description

• This map unit consists of pits where sand, sand and

gravel, glacial till, or glacial drift has been removed to

a depth of at least several feet and includes adjacent

areas where sand, sand and gravel, or other soil

material has been stockpiled. Typically, the actively

mined pits are not vegetated. Abandoned pits are

covered with trees, brush, and weeds. The material

remaining on the bottom and side walls of the pits is

sand, sand and gravel, or sandy or loamy glacial till or

glacial drift.

Composition

Pits and similar inclusions: 90 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 10 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Areas of water

• Access roads and buildings

• Areas of wet soils on the bottom of the pits

• Piles of discarded nonsoil material, such as old

machinery or stones and boulders that are too large to

be crushed

Similar inclusions:

• Pits where silty soil material has been removed for

use as fill material

Use and Management

Land uses:

• This unit is used dominantly as actively excavated

gravel pits. Some pits have been abandoned and are

covered with trees, brush, and weeds, which provide

good wildlife habitat. A few abandoned pits are used

for dirt bike trails or as firing ranges, and some are

used as sanitary landfills.

• Because of the variable nature of this map unit,

onsite investigation is needed to determine the

suitability for proposed uses. Land shaping and the

addition of suitable topsoil are commonly required

before a plant cover can be established.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: Not assigned

Woodland ordination symbol: Not assigned

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

Px—Pits, mine

Setting

Landform: Mostly moraines underlain by metamorphic

bedrock
86 Soil Survey of

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 15 to 30 acres

General Description

• This map unit consists of pits where soil and

metamorphic bedrock have been excavated during

past open-pit iron mining operations (fig. 4). It includes

adjacent areas where spoil has been piled. The spoil

consists of angular and flat or irregularly shaped

pieces of bedrock and soil material pushed from the

site before excavation. Typically, the sidewalls of the

pits are metamorphic bedrock. The bottom of the pits

is covered with water. The spoil piles have been

partially revegetated with trees, brush, and weeds.

Composition

Pits and similar inclusions: 90 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 10 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Access roads

Figure 4.—An area of Pits, mine. The sidewalls of the pit are metamorphic bedrock, and the bottom is covered with water.
Florence County, Wisconsin 87

• Piles of discarded nonsoil material, such as old

machinery

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of sandy, loamy, or silty soil material between

the piles of spoil material

Use and Management

Land uses:

• Areas of this map unit have been abandoned. Some

pits are filled with water and are used for swimming or

could be stocked with fish if the pH is suitable. Some

of the spoil piles could be used as a source of fill

material.

• Because of the variable nature of this map unit,

onsite investigation is needed to determine the

suitability for proposed uses.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: Not assigned

Woodland ordination symbol: Not assigned

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

Rb—Robago fine sandy loam, 0 to 2

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 7 inches—grayish brown, friable fine sandy

loam

Subsoil:

7 to 17 inches—dark brown and brown, mottled,

friable fine sandy loam

17 to 38 inches—brown, mottled, friable fine

sandy loam

Substratum:

38 to 62 inches—dark yellowish brown, mottled,

friable, stratified very fine sandy loam and silt

loam with thin strata of very fine sand and fine

sand

Composition

Robago soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Annalake soils in

slightly convex areas

• Au Gres soils, which are sandy throughout

• Areas of poorly drained soils in the lower

depressions and drainageways

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

sand, loamy fine sand, sandy loam, loam, very fine

sandy loam, or silt loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand, gravelly sand,

clay loam, or silty clay loam

• Soils that have a perched seasonal high water table

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 0.5 foot to 2.0

feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderate in the mineral surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength frequently limit

access by machinery to the dry summer months or to

periods when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.
88 Soil Survey of

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, wetness, poor tilth, low strength

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• If the water table is lowered, crop yields are

somewhat limited during dry years by the restricted

available water capacity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• The seasonal high water table may delay spring

planting in wet years. Providing adequate drainage can

improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Low soil strength limits the use of farm equipment to

periods when the soil is not wet.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, low

strength

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 3W (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: TMC

Secondary forest habitat type: ATD

RkC—Rock outcrop-Ishpeming-Vilas

complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and moraines

Landscape position: Convex summits and side slopes

Shape of areas: Round, long and narrow, or irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 100 acres

Representative Profile

Rock outcrop

Type of material: Exposed schist bedrock

Ishpeming

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—dark brown, very friable mucky peat
Florence County, Wisconsin 89

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 4 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

4 to 16 inches—dark reddish brown and brown,

very friable loamy sand

16 to 32 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Bedrock:

32 inches—schist

Vilas

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

4 to 18 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

18 to 35 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

35 to 62 inches—brown, loose sand

Composition

Rock outcrop: 35 to 45 percent

Ishpeming soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas that do not have rock outcrops

• Areas of nearly vertical bedrock escarpments

• Moderately steep or steep areas of Ishpeming and

Vilas soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam

• Areas where the bedrock is igneous rock or

metamorphic rock other than schist

• Soils that have gravelly bands in the subsoil or

substratum

• Soils that have bedrock at a depth of less than 20

inches or between depths of 40 and 60 inches

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Ishpeming—somewhat excessively

drained; Vilas—excessively drained

Depth class: Ishpeming—moderately deep to hard

igneous or metamorphic bedrock; Vilas—very

deep

Permeability: Ishpeming—rapid in the upper part of the

soil and very slow to rapid in the bedrock; Vilas—

rapid

Available water capacity: Ishpeming—very low; Vilas—

low

Organic matter content: Ishpeming—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low in the mineral

surface layer; Vilas—very high in the organic layer

and moderately low or moderate in the mineral

surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Rock outcrop—generally unsuited;

Ishpeming and Vilas—suited

Major management concerns: Ishpeming—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard; Vilas—equipment

limitation

Management considerations:

• The selection of log landing sites is limited in areas

of the Ishpeming and Vilas soils that have slopes of

more than about 6 percent. Landings can be

established in the less sloping areas or on suitable

nearly level or gently sloping adjacent or included

soils.

• In areas of the Ishpeming soil, hard bedrock limits

the depth of cuts and interferes with the construction

of haul roads and log landings.

• Bedrock outcrops and escarpments severely restrict

the movement of logging equipment. The careful

location of logging roads is necessary.

• Windthrow in areas of the Ishpeming soil can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not leave

the remaining trees widely spaced.

Pasture

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Ishpeming and

Vilas—moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Ishpeming and Vilas—

water erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes on the Ishpeming and Vilas soils reduces the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields in areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas

soils are limited by the restricted available water
90 Soil Survey of

capacity. Drought-tolerant species are best suited to

these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas

soils and protect the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Ishpeming and Vilas soils by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of

droughtiness and the rock outcrops

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations or suitability: Rock outcrop—

unsuited; Ishpeming and Vilas—severe

Major restrictive features: Ishpeming—poor filtering

capacity, slope, depth to rock; Vilas—poor filtering

capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Ishpeming and

Vilas—moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Ishpeming—slope,

depth to rock, water erosion, soil blowing, caving

of cutbanks; Vilas—slope, water erosion, soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas soils, buildings

can be designed so that they conform to the natural

slope of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting

and filling. The underlying hard bedrock, however,

limits the depth of cuts in areas of the Ishpeming soil.

The bedrock can be excavated by blasting or using

suitable power equipment.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Ishpeming—

poorly suited; Vilas—moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Ishpeming—slope,

depth to rock, water erosion, soil blowing, caving

of cutbanks; Vilas—slope, water erosion, soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas soils, buildings

can be designed so that they conform to the natural

slope of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting

and filling. The underlying hard bedrock, however,

limits the depth of cuts in areas of the Ishpeming soil.

The bedrock can be excavated by blasting or using

suitable power equipment.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs

Woodland ordination symbol: Rock outcrop—not

assigned; Ishpeming—5D (quaking aspen);

Vilas—6A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

RkD—Rock outcrop-Ishpeming-Vilas

complex, 15 to 35 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and moraines

Landscape position: Convex summits and side slopes

Shape of areas: Round, long and narrow, or irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Rock outcrop

Type of material: Exposed schist bedrock

Ishpeming

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—dark brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand
Florence County, Wisconsin 91

Subsoil:

2 to 28 inches—dark brown, brown, and strong

brown, very friable loamy sand

Bedrock:

28 inches—schist

Vilas

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

3 to 19 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

19 to 30 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

30 to 60 inches—brown, loose sand

Composition

Rock outcrop: 35 to 45 percent

Ishpeming soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas that do not have rock outcrops

• Areas of nearly vertical bedrock escarpments

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Ishpeming and

Vilas soils or areas of Ishpeming and Vilas soils that

have slopes of more than 35 percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam

• Areas where the bedrock is igneous rock or

metamorphic rock other than schist

• Soils that have gravelly bands in the subsoil or

substratum

• Soils that have bedrock at a depth of less than 20

inches or between depths of 40 and 60 inches

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Ishpeming—somewhat excessively

drained; Vilas—excessively drained

Depth class: Ishpeming—moderately deep to hard

igneous or metamorphic bedrock; Vilas—very

deep

Permeability: Ishpeming—rapid in the upper part of the

soil and very slow to rapid in the bedrock; Vilas—

rapid

Available water capacity: Ishpeming—very low; Vilas—

low

Organic matter content: Ishpeming—moderately low in

the surface layer; Vilas—moderately low or

moderate in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Rock outcrop—generally unsuited;

Ishpeming and Vilas—suited

Major management concerns: Ishpeming—equipment

limitation, erosion hazard, windthrow hazard;

Vilas—equipment limitation, erosion hazard

Management considerations:

• In areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas soils, the slope

limits the selection of log landing sites. Landings can

be established on suitable nearly level or gently

sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed in areas of the

Ishpeming and Vilas soils.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• In areas of the Ishpeming soil, hard bedrock limits

the depth of cuts and interferes with the construction

of haul roads and log landings.

• Bedrock outcrops and escarpments severely restrict

the movement of logging equipment. The careful

location of logging roads is necessary.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion in areas of the

Ishpeming and Vilas soils.

• Windthrow in areas of the Ishpeming soil can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not leave

the remaining trees widely spaced. The periodic

salvaging of windthrown trees may be needed.

Pasture

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Ishpeming and

Vilas—poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas soils

are generally limited to pasture of existing forage

species. Maintaining a high-quality cover of pasture
92 Soil Survey of

plants reduces the hazards of water erosion and soil

blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Ishpeming and Vilas soils are

limited by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to these soils.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas

soils and protect the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Ishpeming and Vilas soils by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the rock

outcrops, the slope, droughtiness, and the very

severe hazard of water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations or suitability: Rock outcrop—

unsuited; Ishpeming and Vilas—severe

Major restrictive features: Ishpeming—poor filtering

capacity, slope, depth to rock; Vilas—poor filtering

capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Ishpeming and

Vilas—poorly suited in the less sloping areas and

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Ishpeming—slope,

depth to rock, water erosion, soil blowing, caving

of cutbanks; Vilas—slope, water erosion, soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas of the Ishpeming and Vilas

soils, buildings can be designed so that they conform

to the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling. The underlying hard

bedrock, however, limits the depth of cuts in areas of

the Ishpeming soil. The bedrock can be excavated by

blasting or using suitable power equipment.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Ishpeming—

generally unsuited because of the slope and the

depth to rock; Vilas—poorly suited in the less

sloping areas and generally unsuited in other

areas

Major management concerns: Vilas—slope, water

erosion, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas of the Vilas soil, buildings

can be designed so that they conform to the natural

slope of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting

and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIs

Woodland ordination symbol: Rock outcrop—not

assigned; Ishpeming—5R (quaking aspen);

Vilas—6R (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

RmC—Rock outcrop-Metonga-Sarona

complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Convex summits and side slopes

Shape of areas: Round, long and narrow, or irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Rock outcrop

Type of material: Exposed granite bedrock
Florence County, Wisconsin 93

Metonga

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—dark brown, very friable mucky peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—black, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 17 inches—dark reddish brown and brown,

friable fine sandy loam

17 to 39 inches—dark reddish brown, friable

gravelly sandy loam

Bedrock:

39 inches—granite

Sarona

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 3 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 6 inches—dark reddish brown, friable fine

sandy loam

6 to 16 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

16 to 41 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

41 to 60 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Composition

Rock outcrop: 35 to 45 percent

Metonga soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Ellwood soils and the

somewhat poorly drained Crossett soils, which have

silty upper layers underlain by loamy, silty, or clayey

glacial till

• Padus soils and the somewhat excessively drained

Pence soils, which are underlain by sandy or sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash

• Rousseau soils and the excessively drained Vilas

soils, which are sandy throughout

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas where the bedrock is weathered and can be

excavated with hand tools

• Areas of nearly vertical bedrock escarpments

• Areas that do not have rock outcrops

• Moderately steep and steep areas of Metonga and

Sarona soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loam,

loamy sand, gravelly loam, or gravelly loamy sand or

the very channery or very flaggy analogs of loamy

sand or sandy loam

• Areas where the bedrock is metamorphic rock

• Soils that have bedrock at a depth of less than 20

inches or between depths of 40 and 60 inches

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Metonga—moderately deep to hard

igneous or metamorphic bedrock; Sarona—very

deep

Permeability: Metonga—moderate in the upper part of

the soil and very slow to rapid in the bedrock;

Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid

Available water capacity: Metonga—low; Sarona—

moderate

Organic matter content: Metonga—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Sarona—moderately low

or moderate in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Rock outcrop—generally unsuited; Metonga

and Sarona—suited

Major management concerns: Metonga—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard, plant competition;

Sarona—equipment limitation, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The selection of log landing sites is limited in areas

of the Metonga and Sarona soils that have slopes of

more than about 6 percent. Landings can be

established in the less sloping areas or on suitable

nearly level or gently sloping adjacent or included

soils.

• In areas of the Metonga soil, hard bedrock limits the

depth of cuts and interferes with the construction of

haul roads and log landings.
94 Soil Survey of

• Bedrock outcrops and escarpments severely restrict

the movement of logging equipment. The careful

location of logging roads is necessary.

• In areas of the Metonga and Sarona soils, ruts form

easily on unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log

landings and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Windthrow in areas of the Metonga soil can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not leave

the remaining trees widely spaced. The periodic

salvaging of windthrown trees may be needed.

• Plant competition in areas of the Metonga and

Sarona soils can be controlled by mechanical site

preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Metonga—

moderately well suited; Sarona—well suited

Major management concerns: Metonga—water

erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss; Sarona—water erosion, soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing in areas of the Metonga and Sarona soils.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Metonga soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Metonga and Sarona soils by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the rock

outcrops

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations or suitability: Rock outcrop—

unsuited; Metonga—severe; Sarona—moderate

Major restrictive features: Metonga—restricted

permeability, slope, depth to rock; Sarona—

restricted permeability, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Metonga and

Sarona—moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Metonga—slope, depth

to rock, water erosion, soil blowing; Sarona—slope,

water erosion, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In areas of the Metonga and Sarona soils, buildings

can be designed so that they conform to the natural

slope of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting

and filling. The underlying hard bedrock, however,

limits the depth of cuts in areas of the Metonga soil.

The bedrock can be excavated by blasting or using

suitable power equipment.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Sarona soil,

stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can minimize the

safety hazard and prevent the damage caused by

caving.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Metonga—poorly

suited; Sarona—moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Metonga—slope, depth

to rock, water erosion, soil blowing; Sarona—slope,

water erosion, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In areas of the Metonga and Sarona soils, buildings

can be designed so that they conform to the natural

slope of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting

and filling. The underlying hard bedrock, however,

limits the depth of cuts in areas of the Metonga soil.

The bedrock can be excavated by blasting or using

suitable power equipment.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Sarona soil,

stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can minimize the

safety hazard and prevent the damage caused by

caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs

Woodland ordination symbol: Rock outcrop—not

assigned; Metonga—3D (sugar maple); Sarona—

3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AVVib
Florence County, Wisconsin 95

RmD—Rock outcrop-Metonga-Sarona

complex, 15 to 35 percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Convex summits and side slopes

Shape of areas: Round, long and narrow, or irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Rock outcrop

Type of material: Exposed granite bedrock

Metonga

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

2 to 15 inches—dark reddish brown and reddish

brown, friable fine sandy loam

15 to 35 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Bedrock:

35 inches—granite

Sarona

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable mucky peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 16 inches—dark reddish brown and reddish

brown, very friable fine sandy loam

16 to 40 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

40 to 60 inches—dark brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Composition

Rock outcrop: 35 to 45 percent

Metonga soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35

percent

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Ellwood soils, which

have silty upper layers underlain by loamy, silty, or

clayey glacial till

• Padus soils and the somewhat excessively drained

Pence soils, which are underlain by sandy or sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash

• Rousseau soils and the excessively drained Vilas

soils, which are sandy throughout

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas where the bedrock is weathered and can be

excavated with hand tools

• Areas of nearly vertical bedrock escarpments

• Areas that do not have rock outcrops

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Metonga and

Sarona soils or areas of Metonga and Sarona soils

that have slopes of more than 35 percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loam,

loamy sand, gravelly loam, gravelly loamy sand, or the

very channery or very flaggy analogs of sandy loam or

loamy sand

• Areas where the bedrock is metamorphic rock

• Soils that have bedrock at a depth of less than 20

inches or between depths of 40 and 60 inches

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Metonga—moderately deep to hard

igneous or metamorphic bedrock; Sarona—very

deep

Permeability: Metonga—moderate in the upper part of

the soil and very slow to rapid in the bedrock;

Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid

Available water capacity: Metonga—low; Sarona—

moderate

Organic matter content: Metonga—moderately low or

moderate in the surface layer; Sarona—very high

in the organic layer and moderately low or

moderate in the mineral surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Rock outcrop—generally unsuited; Metonga

and Sarona—suited
96 Soil Survey of

Major management concerns: Metonga—equipment

limitation, erosion hazard, windthrow hazard, plant

competition; Sarona—equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The selection of log landing sites is limited in areas

of the Metonga and Sarona soils. Landings can be

established on suitable nearly level or gently sloping

adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed in areas of the

Metonga and Sarona soils.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• In areas of the Metonga soil, hard bedrock limits the

depth of cuts and interferes with the construction of

haul roads and log landings.

• Bedrock outcrops and escarpments severely restrict

the movement of logging equipment. The careful

location of logging roads is necessary.

• In areas of the Metonga and Sarona soils, ruts form

easily on unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log

landings and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion in areas of the Metonga

and Sarona soils.

• Windthrow in areas of the Metonga soil can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not leave

the remaining trees widely spaced. The periodic

salvaging of windthrown trees may be needed.

• Plant competition in areas of the Metonga and

Sarona soils can be controlled by mechanical site

preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Metonga—poorly

suited; Sarona—moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Metonga—water

erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss; Sarona—water erosion, soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas of the Metonga and Sarona soils

generally are limited to pasture of existing forage

species. Maintaining a high-quality cover of pasture

plants reduces the hazards of water erosion and soil

blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Metonga soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Metonga and Sarona soils by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the rock

outcrops, the slope, and the very severe hazard of

water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations or suitability: Rock outcrop—

unsuited; Metonga and Sarona—severe

Major restrictive features: Metonga—restricted

permeability, slope, depth to rock; Sarona—

restricted permeability, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Metonga and

Sarona—poorly suited in the less sloping areas

and generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Metonga—slope,

depth to rock, water erosion, soil blowing;

Sarona—slope, water erosion, soil blowing, caving

of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas of the Metonga and Sarona

soils, buildings can be designed so that they conform

to the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling. The underlying hard

bedrock, however, limits the depth of cuts in areas of

the Metonga soil. The bedrock can be excavated by

blasting or using suitable power equipment.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Sarona soil,

stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can minimize the

safety hazard and prevent the damage caused by

caving.
Florence County, Wisconsin 97

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Rock outcrop—unsuited; Metonga—

generally unsuited because of the slope and the

depth to rock; Sarona—poorly suited in the less

sloping areas and generally unsuited in other

areas

Major management concerns: Sarona—slope, water

erosion, soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas of the Sarona soil, buildings

can be designed so that they conform to the natural

slope of the land. The slope can be modified by cutting

and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas of the Sarona soil,

stabilizing or sloping the cutbanks can minimize the

safety hazard and prevent the damage caused by

caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIs

Woodland ordination symbol: Rock outcrop—not

assigned; Metonga and Sarona—3R (sugar

maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AVVib

RsB—Rousseau loamy fine sand, 0 to 6

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, moraines, and glacial lake

plains

Landscape position: Toeslopes, side slopes, and linear

and slightly convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—very dark gray, very friable loamy

fine sand

Subsurface layer:

3 to 6 inches—brown, very friable loamy fine

sand

Subsoil:

6 to 12 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy

fine sand

12 to 36 inches—brown, very friable fine sand

Substratum:

36 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose fine sand

Composition

Rousseau soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Annalake soils, which

have more silt and clay than the Rousseau soil

• The moderately well drained Croswell soils in the

lower landscape positions

• The excessively drained Vilas soils

• Soils that have stratified sandy, loamy, and silty

deposits in the subsoil and substratum

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Sloping areas of Rousseau soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sand, very fine sand, loamy sand, loamy very fine

sand, or fine sandy loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or stratified

sand and gravelly sand

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low in the surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Plant competition

Management considerations:

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.
98 Soil Survey of

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—soil blowing; dwellings with

basements—soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 5A (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: PMV

Secondary forest habitat type: AQV

RsC—Rousseau loamy fine sand, 6 to 15

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, moraines, and glacial lake

plains

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 3 inches—black, very friable loamy fine sand

Subsurface layer:

3 to 7 inches—brown, very friable loamy fine sand

Subsoil:

7 to 10 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy

fine sand

10 to 27 inches—brown and strong brown, very

friable fine sand

Substratum:

27 to 60 inches—brown, loose fine sand

Composition

Rousseau soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Annalake soils, which

have more silt and clay than the Rousseau soil

• The excessively drained Vilas soils

• Soils that have stratified sandy, loamy, and silty

deposits in the subsoil and substratum

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of

Rousseau soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sand, very fine sand, loamy sand, loamy very fine

sand, or fine sandy loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 99

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or stratified

sand and gravelly sand

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low in the surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season can reduce leaching losses and

protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or
100 Soil Survey of

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 5A (quaking aspen)

Primary forest habitat type: PMV

Secondary forest habitat type: AQV

SaB—Sarona fine sandy loam, 1 to 6

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 1,000 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 17 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

17 to 29 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

and brown, friable sandy loam

29 to 66 inches—dark reddish brown, friable

gravelly sandy loam and brown, friable gravelly

loamy sand

Substratum:

66 to 73 inches—reddish brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Padus soils and the somewhat excessively drained

Pence soils, which are underlain by sandy or sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout

• Somewhat poorly drained areas in depressions and

drainageways

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are clay loam

or silty clay loam

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have firm layers in the subsoil

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of Sarona soils that are not stony or that are

bouldery

• Sloping areas of Sarona soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, silt loam, or loamy

fine sand

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loamy

sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited in areas where surface stones

have been removed; poorly suited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss,

poor tilth, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of
Florence County, Wisconsin 101

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years

by the restricted available water capacity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Moderate

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—water erosion, soil blowing; dwellings

with basements—water erosion, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs in very stony areas;

IIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AVVib

SaC—Sarona fine sandy loam, 6 to 15

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—black, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 17 inches—dark brown and brown, friable fine

sandy loam

17 to 21 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

21 to 61 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand and brown, friable gravelly sandy loam

Substratum:

61 to 80 inches—reddish brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Padus soils and the somewhat excessively drained

Pence soils, which are underlain by sandy or sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are clay loam

or silty clay loam

• Areas of wet soils in depressions
102 Soil Survey of

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have firm layers in the subsoil

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of Sarona soils that are not stony or that are

bouldery

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Sarona

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or

silt loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loamy

sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited in areas where

surface stones have been removed; generally

unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss,

poor tilth, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years

by the restricted available water capacity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Moderate

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.
Florence County, Wisconsin 103

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IIIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AVVib

SaD—Sarona fine sandy loam, 15 to 25

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 150 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark brown, very friable fine

sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 21 inches—dark brown and brown, friable fine

sandy loam

21 to 25 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

25 to 60 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand and brown, friable gravelly sandy loam

Substratum:

60 to 65 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Padus soils and the somewhat excessively drained

Pence soils, which are underlain by sandy or sandy

and gravelly outwash

• The excessively drained Sayner and Vilas soils,

which are sandy throughout

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are clay loam

or silty clay loam

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have firm layers in the subsoil

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of Sarona soils that are not stony or that are

bouldery

• Gently sloping, sloping, or steep areas of Sarona

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or

silt loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loamy

sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting the

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.
104 Soil Survey of

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of surface

stones, the slope, and the very severe hazard of

water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe in very stony areas;

VIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AVVib

SdB—Sarona-Padus complex, 0 to 6

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Slope range: Sarona—1 to 6 percent; Padus—0 to 6

percent

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 150 acres

Representative Profile

Sarona

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 14 inches—dark brown and brown, friable fine

sandy loam

14 to 17 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

17 to 63 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand and brown, friable gravelly sandy loam

Substratum:

63 to 70 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Padus

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 5 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

5 to 34 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 105

Substratum:

34 to 60 inches—strong brown, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 55 to 65 percent

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 20 to 30 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers less than 20 inches

thick underlain by sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Rousseau soils and the excessively drained Sayner

and Vilas soils, which are sandy throughout

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

clay loam or silty clay loam

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Soils that have firm layers in the subsoil

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of bouldery soils

• Sloping areas of Sarona and Padus soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid;

Padus—moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Sarona—moderate; Padus—

low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Sarona—about

0.1 to 3.0 percent; Padus—none

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited in areas where surface

stones have been removed; poorly suited in other

areas

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss, poor tilth, rock fragments; Padus—water

erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting in areas of the

Sarona soil.

• Some areas of the Sarona soil have stones on the

surface. Unless they are removed, the stones interfere

with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—soil blowing,

rock fragments; Padus—water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and
106 Soil Survey of

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Padus soil are limited during

most years in areas where the available water

capacity is restricted. Drought-tolerant species are

best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Padus soil by reducing runoff losses to lakes and

streams.

• Stones on the surface of the Sarona soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Sarona—moderate;

Padus—severe

Major restrictive features: Sarona—restricted

permeability; Padus—poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—water erosion, soil blowing; dwellings

with basements—water erosion, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs in very stony areas;

IIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

SdC—Sarona-Padus complex, 6 to 15

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Sarona

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

2 to 18 inches—dark brown and brown, friable fine

sandy loam

18 to 21 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

21 to 55 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand and brown, friable gravelly sandy loam

Substratum:

55 to 60 inches—brown gravelly sandy loam

Padus

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, friable sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 3 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Next layer:

3 to 33 inches—brown and dark brown, friable

sandy loam

Substratum:

33 to 60 inches—yellowish brown and light

yellowish brown, loose, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 50 to 60 percent

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,
Florence County, Wisconsin 107

which have loamy upper layers less than 20 inches

thick underlain by sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Rousseau soils and the excessively drained Sayner

and Vilas soils, which are sandy throughout

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

clay loam or silty clay loam

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Soils that have firm layers in the subsoil

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of bouldery soils

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Padus

and Sarona soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid;

Padus—moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Sarona—moderate; Padus—

low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Sarona—about

0.1 to 3.0 percent; Padus—none

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited in areas where

surface stones have been removed; generally

unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss, poor tilth, rock fragments; Padus—water

erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting in areas of the

Sarona soil.

• Some areas of the Sarona soil have stones on the

surface. Unless they are removed, the stones interfere

with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments; Padus—water erosion, soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and
108 Soil Survey of

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Padus soil are limited during

most years in areas where the available water

capacity is restricted. Drought-tolerant species are

best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface of the Sarona soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Sarona—moderate;

Padus—severe

Major restrictive features: Sarona—restricted

permeability, slope; Padus—poor filtering capacity,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IIIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

SdD—Sarona-Padus complex, 15 to 30

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 50 acres

Representative Profile

Sarona

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

5 to 18 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

18 to 54 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam and brown, friable gravelly loamy sand

Substratum:

54 to 61 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Padus

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—dark brown, very friable sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, very friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

2 to 14 inches—dark brown and brown, friable

sandy loam

14 to 25 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

25 to 30 inches—strong brown, very friable

gravelly loamy sand

Substratum:

30 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Padus soil and similar inclusions: 30 to 40 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent
Florence County, Wisconsin 109

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers less than 20 inches

thick underlain by sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Rousseau soils and the excessively drained Sayner

and Vilas soils, which are sandy throughout

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

clay loam or silty clay loam

• Soils that have firm layers in the subsoil

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of bouldery soils

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Sarona and

Padus soils or areas of Sarona and Padus soils that

have slopes of more than 30 percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid;

Padus—moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Sarona—moderate; Padus—

low or moderate

Organic matter content: Sarona—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Padus—moderately low

or moderate in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Sarona—about

0.1 to 3.0 percent; Padus—none

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments; Padus—water erosion, soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Padus soil are limited during

most years in areas where the available water

capacity is restricted. Drought-tolerant species are

best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface of the Sarona soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of surface

stones, the slope, and the very severe hazard of

water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Sarona—restricted

permeability, slope; Padus—poor filtering capacity,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of
110 Soil Survey of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe in very stony areas;

VIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

SlB—Sarona-Vilas complex, 0 to 6

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Slope range: Sarona—1 to 6 percent; Vilas—0 to 6

percent

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Sarona

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 16 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable fine sandy loam

16 to 30 inches—brown, friable fine sandy loam

and reddish brown, friable gravelly sandy loam

30 to 61 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand and reddish brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Substratum:

61 to 70 inches—reddish brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Vilas

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

2 to 5 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

5 to 15 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

15 to 27 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

27 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose sand

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 55 to 65 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 20 to 30 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils and the somewhat

excessively drained Pence soils, which have loamy

upper layers underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly

glacial outwash

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

clay loam or silty clay loam

• Areas of Sarona soils that have firm layers in the

subsoil

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Sloping areas of Sarona and Vilas soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

sandy loam, loamy sand, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Sarona—well drained; Vilas—

excessively drained
Florence County, Wisconsin 111

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid;

Vilas—rapid

Available water capacity: Sarona—moderate; Vilas—

low

Organic matter content: Sarona—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Vilas—moderately low

or moderate in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Sarona—about

0.1 to 3.0 percent; Vilas—none

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—equipment

limitation, plant competition; Vilas—no major soil

limitations or hazards

Management considerations:

• In areas of the Sarona soil, ruts form easily on

unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log landings

and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Plant competition in areas of the Sarona soil can be

controlled by mechanical site preparation or by limited

use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited in areas where

surface stones have been removed; generally

unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss, poor tilth, rock fragments; Vilas—soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas of the

Sarona soil.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water in areas of the Sarona soil by

reducing runoff losses to lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season reduce leaching losses in areas of the

Vilas soil and protect the quality of ground water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting in areas of the

Sarona soil.

• Some areas of the Sarona soil have stones on the

surface. Unless they are removed, the stones interfere

with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—soil blowing,

rock fragments; Vilas—soil blowing, droughtiness,

nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Vilas soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Vilas soil and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Stones on the surface of the Sarona soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Sarona—moderate; Vilas—

severe

Major restrictive features: Sarona—restricted

permeability; Vilas—poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.
112 Soil Survey of

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing; Vilas—soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks; Vilas—soil

blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IIIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: Sarona—3L (sugar

maple); Vilas—6A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AVVib

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AQV

SlC—Sarona-Vilas complex, 6 to 15

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 150 acres

Representative Profile

Sarona

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 16 inches—dark brown and brown, friable fine

sandy loam

16 to 59 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand and brown, friable gravelly sandy loam

Substratum:

59 to 65 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Vilas

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy

sand

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

3 to 13 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

13 to 19 inches—yellowish brown, very friable

sand

Substratum:

19 to 60 inches—yellowish brown and brownish

yellow, loose sand

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 50 to 60 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils and the somewhat

excessively drained Pence soils, which have loamy

upper layers underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly

glacial outwash

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

clay loam or silty clay loam

• Areas of Sarona soils that have firm layers in the

subsoil

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Sarona

and Vilas soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Sarona—well drained; Vilas—

excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep
Florence County, Wisconsin 113

Permeability: Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid;

Vilas—rapid

Available water capacity: Sarona—moderate; Vilas—

low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Sarona—about

0.1 to 3.0 percent; Vilas—none

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—equipment

limitation, plant competition; Vilas—equipment

limitation

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• In areas of the Sarona soil, ruts form easily on

unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log landings

and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Plant competition in areas of the Sarona soil can be

controlled by mechanical site preparation or by limited

use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited in areas where surface stones

have been removed; generally unsuited in other

areas

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide

loss, poor tilth, rock fragments; Vilas—water

erosion, soil blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and

pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season reduce leaching losses in areas of the

Vilas soil and protect the quality of ground water.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting in areas of the

Sarona soil.

• Some areas of the Sarona soil have stones on the

surface. Unless they are removed, the stones interfere

with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments; Vilas—water erosion, soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Vilas soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Vilas soil and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface of the Sarona soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Sarona—moderate; Vilas—

severe
114 Soil Survey of

Major restrictive features: Sarona—restricted

permeability, slope; Vilas—poor filtering capacity,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IVe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: Sarona—3L (sugar

maple); Vilas—6A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AVVib

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AQV

SlD—Sarona-Vilas complex, 15 to 30

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 100 acres

Representative Profile

Sarona

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, very friable mucky

peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable fine sandy

loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable fine sandy loam

Subsoil:

3 to 17 inches—dark brown and brown, friable fine

sandy loam

17 to 56 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand and brown, friable gravelly sandy loam

Substratum:

56 to 61 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Vilas

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

2 to 12 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

12 to 25 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

25 to 60 inches—brown, loose sand

Composition

Sarona soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 30 to 40 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils and the somewhat

excessively drained Pence soils, which have loamy

upper layers underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly

glacial outwash

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

clay loam or silty clay loam

• Areas of Sarona soils that have firm layers in the

subsoil

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Sarona and Vilas

soils or areas of Sarona and Vilas soils that have

slopes of more than 30 percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

fine sand, sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of Sarona soils in which the lower layers are

loamy sand, sandy loam, loam, or gravelly loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Sarona—well drained; Vilas—

excessively drained
Florence County, Wisconsin 115

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Sarona—moderate or moderately rapid;

Vilas—rapid

Available water capacity: Sarona—moderate; Vilas—

low

Organic matter content: Sarona—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Vilas—moderately low

or moderate in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Sarona—about

0.1 to 3.0 percent; Vilas—none

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—equipment

limitation, erosion hazard, plant competition;

Vilas—equipment limitation, erosion hazard

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special planting and harvesting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• In areas of the Sarona soil, ruts form easily on

unsurfaced roads during wet periods. Log landings

and haul roads can be stabilized with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition in areas of the Sarona soil can be

controlled by mechanical site preparation or by limited

use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Sarona—water erosion,

soil blowing, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments; Vilas—water erosion, soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Vilas soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates reduce

leaching losses in areas of the Vilas soil and protect

the quality of ground water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Some areas of the Sarona soil have stones on the

surface. Unless they are removed, the stones interfere

with tillage.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of surface

stones, the slope, and the very severe hazard of

water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Sarona—restricted

permeability, slope; Vilas—poor filtering capacity,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe in very stony areas;
116 Soil Survey of

VIe in areas where surface stones have been

removed

Woodland ordination symbol: Sarona—3R (sugar

maple); Vilas—6R (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AVVib

Secondary forest habitat type: AQVib or AQV

SnB—Sayner loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, kames,

and eskers

Landscape position: Toeslopes, side slopes, and linear

and slightly convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 150 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark grayish brown, very

friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

4 to 18 inches—dark brown and brown, very

friable loamy sand

18 to 30 inches—brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

30 to 60 inches—strong brown and reddish yellow,

loose gravelly sand

Composition

Sayner soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils and the somewhat

excessively drained Pence soils, which have loamy

upper layers

• Areas of stratified sandy and loamy deposits

• Soils that have strata or pockets of loamy sand or

gravelly loamy sand in the substratum

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Sloping areas of Sayner soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

gravelly sand, or gravelly loamy sand

• Soils that contain little or no gravel in the substratum

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the upper

part and rapid or very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low in the surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: No major soil limitations

or hazards

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the
Florence County, Wisconsin 117

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—soil blowing; dwellings with

basements—soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs

Woodland ordination symbol: 7A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

SnC—Sayner loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 80 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 3 inches—black, very friable mucky peat

Mineral surface layer:

3 to 4 inches—dark reddish gray, very friable

loamy sand

Subsoil:

4 to 17 inches—dark reddish brown and reddish

brown, very friable loamy sand

17 to 27 inches—brown, very friable gravelly

sand

Substratum:

27 to 63 inches—strong brown, loose gravelly

sand

Composition

Sayner soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Padus soils and the somewhat

excessively drained Pence soils, which have loamy

upper layers

• Areas of stratified sandy and loamy deposits

• Soils that have strata or pockets of loamy sand or

gravelly loamy sand in the substratum

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Sayner

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

gravelly sand, or gravelly loamy sand

• Soils that contain little or no gravel in the substratum

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the upper

part and rapid or very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.
118 Soil Survey of

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season can reduce leaching losses and

protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 7A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

SnD—Sayner loamy sand, 15 to 30

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Organic mat:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable mucky peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 4 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand
Florence County, Wisconsin 119

Subsoil:

4 to 17 inches—dark reddish brown and reddish

brown, very friable loamy sand

Substratum:

17 to 61 inches—strong brown, loose gravelly

sand

Composition

Sayner soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers

• Areas of stratified sandy and loamy deposits

• Soils that have strata or pockets of loamy sand or

gravelly loamy sand in the substratum

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Sayner soils or

areas of Sayner soils that have slopes of more than 30

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

gravelly sand, or gravelly loamy sand

• Soils that contain little or no gravel in the substratum

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the upper

part and rapid or very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of

droughtiness, the slope, and the very severe

hazard of water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks
120 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 7R (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

Secondary forest habitat type: PMV

SoD—Soperton-Goodman silt loams, 15

to 35 percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 30 acres

Representative Profile

Soperton

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

5 to 15 inches—dark brown and brown, friable silt

loam

15 to 22 inches—brown, friable silt loam

22 to 42 inches—brown, firm sandy loam

Substratum:

42 to 61 inches—brown, friable gravelly loamy

sand

Goodman

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 6 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

6 to 19 inches—dark brown and brown, friable silt

loam

19 to 27 inches—brown, friable silt loam

27 to 34 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

34 to 61 inches—brown gravelly loamy sand

Composition

Soperton soil and similar inclusions: 65 to 75 percent

Goodman soil and similar inclusions: 15 to 25 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 10 to 20 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Goodwit and Wabeno

soils

• Padus and Stambaugh soils and the somewhat

excessively drained Pence soils, all of which are

underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial

outwash

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of Soperton and Goodman soils that are not

stony or that are bouldery

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Soperton and

Goodman soils or areas of Soperton and Goodman

soils that have slopes of more than 35 percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Soils that have a substratum of loamy sand, sandy

loam, or gravelly sandy loam

• Areas where the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Soperton—moderately deep to a

fragipan; Goodman—very deep

Permeability: Soperton—moderate in the upper part,

slow in the fragipan, and moderate or moderately

rapid in the substratum; Goodman—moderate in

the upper part and moderate or moderately rapid

in the lower part

Available water capacity: Soperton—low; Goodman—

moderate or high

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderate in the mineral surface layer
Florence County, Wisconsin 121

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Soperton—equipment

limitation, erosion hazard, windthrow hazard, plant

competition; Goodman—equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Windthrow in areas of the Soperton soil can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not

leave the remaining trees widely spaced. The

periodic salvaging of windthrown trees may be

needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soperton—water

erosion, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss,

rock fragments; Goodman—water erosion,

nutrient and pesticide loss, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants can reduce the hazard of water

erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Soperton soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of surface

stones, the slope, and the very severe hazard of

water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe in very stony areas;

VIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

StC—Stambaugh silt loam, 6 to 15

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Side slopes
122 Soil Survey of

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 400 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark grayish brown, very friable

peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 4 inches—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

4 to 6 inches—grayish brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

6 to 17 inches—dark brown and brown, friable silt

loam

17 to 33 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Substratum:

33 to 61 inches—dark yellowish brown, loose,

stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Stambaugh soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95

percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Fence soils, which are

underlain by stratified lacustrine deposits

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy layers 10 to 20 inches thick

• The moderately well drained Vanzile soils in the less

sloping areas

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of

Stambaugh soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or

loam

• Soils in which the substratum is at a depth of more

than 40 inches

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that contain little or no gravel in the substratum

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately slow in the upper part and

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor tilth

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years

by the restricted available water capacity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss
Florence County, Wisconsin 123

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

restricted permeability, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

StD—Stambaugh silt loam, 15 to 25

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 20 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

3 to 4 inches—grayish brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

4 to 16 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

16 to 30 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Substratum:

30 to 61 inches—brown and dark yellowish brown,

loose, stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Stambaugh soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95

percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers 10 to 20 inches thick

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Gently sloping, sloping, or steep areas of

Stambaugh soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Soils in which the substratum is at a depth of more

than 40 inches

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that contain little or no gravel in the substratum

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderately slow in the upper part and

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition
124 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants can reduce the hazard of water

erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the slope

and the very severe hazard of water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

restricted permeability, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

SuC—Stambaugh-Goodman silt loams, 6

to 15 percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Stambaugh

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

3 to 13 inches—dark brown and brown, friable silt

loam

13 to 35 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Substratum:

35 to 61 inches—brown, loose, stratified sand and

gravelly coarse sand

Goodman

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

3 to 29 inches—brown, friable silt loam

29 to 37 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 125

Substratum:

37 to 60 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Composition

Stambaugh soil and similar inclusions: 55 to 65

percent

Goodman soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers less than 20 inches

thick underlain by sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Areas of bouldery soils

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of

Goodman and Stambaugh soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

• Areas of Goodman soils in which the substratum is

sandy loam, loamy sand, or gravelly loamy sand

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Stambaugh—moderately slow in the

upper part and very rapid in the substratum;

Goodman—moderate in the upper part and

moderate or moderately rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Stambaugh—moderate;

Goodman—moderate or high

Organic matter content: Stambaugh—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Goodman—moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Stambaugh—

none; Goodman—about 0.1 to 3.0 percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited in areas where

surface stones have been removed; generally

unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Stambaugh—water

erosion, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss,

poor tilth; Goodman—water erosion, droughtiness,

nutrient and pesticide loss, poor tilth, rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years

in areas where the available water capacity is

restricted.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas of the Goodman soil have stones on the

surface. Unless they are removed, the stones interfere

with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Stambaugh—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss; Goodman—

water erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments
126 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface of the Goodman soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Stambaugh—severe;

Goodman—moderate

Major restrictive features: Stambaugh—poor filtering

capacity, restricted permeability, slope;

Goodman—restricted permeability, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IIIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

SuD—Stambaugh-Goodman silt loams, 15

to 35 percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Slope range: Stambaugh—15 to 25 percent;

Goodman—15 to 35 percent

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Stambaugh

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—grayish brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

2 to 28 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Substratum:

28 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Goodman

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—very dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

2 to 27 inches—dark brown and brown, friable silt

loam

27 to 35 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

35 to 60 inches—brown gravelly sandy loam

Composition

Stambaugh soil and similar inclusions: 60 to 70

percent

Goodman soil and similar inclusions: 20 to 30 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers less than 20 inches

thick underlain by sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of bouldery soils

• Areas of moderately well drained soils

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Stambaugh and

Goodman soils, areas of Goodman soils that have

slopes of more than 35 percent, or areas of

Stambaugh soils that have slopes of more than 25

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 127

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

• Areas of Goodman soils in which the substratum is

sandy loam, loamy sand, or gravelly loamy sand

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Well drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Stambaugh—moderately slow in the

upper part and very rapid in the substratum;

Goodman—moderate in the upper part and

moderate or moderately rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Stambaugh—moderate;

Goodman—moderate or high

Organic matter content: Stambaugh—moderately low

or moderate in the surface layer; Goodman—

moderate in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Stambaugh—

none; Goodman—about 0.1 to 3.0 percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting the

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Stambaugh—water

erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss; Goodman—

water erosion, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants can reduce the hazard of water

erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface of the Goodman soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of surface

stones, the slope, and the very severe hazard of

water erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Stambaugh—poor filtering

capacity, restricted permeability, slope;

Goodman—restricted permeability, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Stambaugh—poorly suited; Goodman—

poorly suited in the less sloping areas and

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIe in very stony areas;

VIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3R (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO
128 Soil Survey of

TpA—Tipler sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, toeslopes, and

footslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 5 to 50 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark grayish brown, friable

sandy loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Subsoil:

4 to 15 inches—dark reddish brown and dark

brown, friable sandy loam

15 to 22 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

22 to 31 inches—brown, mottled, friable sandy

loam

Substratum:

31 to 60 inches—brown, mottled, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Tipler soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Manitowish soils and the somewhat excessively

drained Pence soils, which have thinner loamy

deposits than those of the Tipler soil

• The well drained Padus soils in the higher landscape

positions

• The somewhat poorly drained Worcester soils in

depressions

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Areas of Tipler soils that have slopes of 3 to 6

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly, very gravelly, cobbly, or very cobbly

analogs of these textures

• Soils that have a perched seasonal high water table

• Soils in which the substratum is at a depth of more

than 40 inches

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 2.5 to 3.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the substratum

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Moderate in the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.
Florence County, Wisconsin 129

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years in areas

where the available water capacity is restricted.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, soil blowing,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: ATD

Secondary forest habitat type: ATM

VaB—Vanzile silt loam, 0 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, toeslopes, and

footslopes

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 250 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 4 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

4 to 13 inches—dark brown and brown, friable silt

loam

13 to 17 inches—brown, friable silt loam

17 to 33 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

Substratum:

33 to 60 inches—dark yellowish brown, loose,

stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Vanzile soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Fence soils, which are underlain by stratified

lacustrine deposits

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers 10 to 20 inches thick

• Areas of somewhat poorly drained soils

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have an apparent seasonal high water

table 2.5 to 3.5 feet below the surface

• Sloping areas of Vanzile soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or

loam

• Soils in which the substratum is at a depth of more

than 40 inches

• Areas of eroded soils

• Soils that contain little or no gravel in the substratum

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: More than 6 feet below the

surface; mottled zone of seasonal saturation 1.5 to

3.5 feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate or moderately slow in the

upper part and rapid or very rapid in the

substratum

Available water capacity: Moderate
130 Soil Survey of

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor tilth

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years

by the restricted available water capacity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, nutrient

and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

restricted permeability

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—water erosion; dwellings with

basements—water erosion, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIe

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

VgB—Vanzile-Goodwit silt loams, 0 to 6

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Slope range: Vanzile—0 to 6 percent; Goodwit—1 to 6

percent

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 10 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Vanzile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, friable silt loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 131

Subsoil:

4 to 20 inches—brown, friable silt loam

20 to 37 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

Substratum:

37 to 60 inches—yellowish brown, loose, stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Goodwit

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 2 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

2 to 21 inches—brown, friable silt loam

21 to 35 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

35 to 38 inches—brown, friable sandy loam

Substratum:

38 to 60 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Composition

Vanzile soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Goodwit soil and similar inclusions: 35 to 45 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The somewhat poorly drained Mudlake soils in

depressions and drainageways

• The somewhat excessively drained Pence soils,

which have loamy upper layers less than 20 inches

thick underlain by sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of stratified sandy, loamy, and silty deposits

• Areas of bouldery soils

• Areas of well drained soils

• Sloping areas of Vanzile and Goodwit soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are fine

sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or

loam

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

• Areas of Goodwit soils in which the substratum is

sandy loam, loamy sand, or gravelly loamy sand

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Vanzile—more than 6 feet

below the surface (mottled zone of seasonal

saturation 1.5 to 3.5 feet below the surface);

Goodwit—perched, 2.5 to 3.5 feet below the

surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Vanzile—moderate or moderately slow in

the upper part and rapid or very rapid in the

substratum; Goodwit—moderate

Available water capacity: Vanzile—moderate;

Goodwit—moderate or high

Organic matter content: Vanzile—moderately low or

moderate in the surface layer; Goodwit—moderate

in the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: Vanzile—none;

Goodwit—about 0.1 to 3.0 percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited in areas where surface

stones have been removed; poorly suited in other

areas

Major management concerns: Vanzile—water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor

tilth; Goodwit—water erosion, droughtiness,

nutrient and pesticide loss, poor tilth, rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years in

areas where the available water capacity is restricted.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the
132 Soil Survey of

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas of the Goodwit soil have stones on the

surface. Unless they are removed, the stones interfere

with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Vanzile—water erosion,

nutrient and pesticide loss; Goodwit—rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion in

areas of the Vanzile soil.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water in areas of the

Vanzile soil by reducing runoff losses to lakes and

streams.

• Stones on the surface of the Goodwit soil may

interfere with the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Vanzile—poor filtering

capacity, restricted permeability; Goodwit—

restricted permeability, wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Vanzile—well suited; Goodwit—moderately

well suited

Major management concerns: Vanzile—water erosion,

caving of cutbanks; Goodwit—wetness, water

erosion, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Goodwit soil.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs in very stony areas;

IIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

VsB—Vilas loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, kames,

and moraines

Landscape position: Toeslopes, side slopes, and linear

and slightly convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 300 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—very dark grayish brown, very

friable peat

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 4 inches—black, very friable loamy sand

Subsurface layer:

4 to 5 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

5 to 19 inches—dark reddish brown and brown,

very friable loamy sand

19 to 37 inches—strong brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

37 to 62 inches—yellowish brown, loose sand

Composition

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The moderately well drained Croswell soils in the

lower landscape positions
Florence County, Wisconsin 133

• The well drained Rousseau soils, which contain

more fine sand than the Vilas soil

• Soils that have strata or pockets of loamy sand,

loamy fine sand, loamy very fine sand, fine sandy

loam, very fine sandy loam, or silt loam in the

substratum

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have cemented layers in the subsoil

• Sloping areas of Vilas soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy

loam

• Soils that have strata of gravelly sand in the

substratum

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or low in the mineral surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: No major soil limitations

or hazards

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and providing split

applications of nitrogen fertilizer at recommended

rates during the growing season can reduce leaching

losses and protect the quality of ground water.

• Proper irrigation scheduling helps to minimize the

leaching of plant nutrients and other chemicals out of

the root zone and into the underlying ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—soil blowing; dwellings with

basements—soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control soil blowing during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs

Woodland ordination symbol: 6A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV
134 Soil Survey of

VsC—Vilas loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, kames,

and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 2 inches—dark brown, very friable loamy

sand

Subsurface layer:

2 to 3 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

3 to 26 inches—dark reddish brown and reddish

brown, very friable loamy sand

Substratum:

26 to 60 inches—light brown, loose sand

Composition

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Rousseau soils, which contain

more fine sand than the Vilas soil

• Soils that have strata or pockets of loamy sand, loamy

fine sand, loamy very fine sand, fine sandy loam, very

fine sandy loam, or silt loam in the substratum

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have cemented layers in the subsoil

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Vilas

soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy

loam

• Soils that have strata of gravelly sand in the

substratum

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Excessively drained

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

Cropland

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Properly scheduling irrigation, reducing chemical

applications, and providing split applications of

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates during the

growing season can reduce leaching losses and

protect the quality of ground water.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss
Florence County, Wisconsin 135

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes reduces the hazards of water erosion and

soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases

the hazards of water erosion and soil blowing,

and increases the extent of undesirable plant

species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 6A (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

VsD—Vilas loamy sand, 15 to 30 percent

slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, kames,

and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 500 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable peat

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 3 inches—brown, very friable loamy sand

Subsoil:

3 to 20 inches—dark reddish brown and reddish

brown, very friable loamy sand

20 to 32 inches—brown, very friable sand

Substratum:

32 to 61 inches—strong brown, loose sand

Composition

Vilas soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The well drained Rousseau soils, which contain

more fine sand than the Vilas soil

• Soils that have strata or pockets of loamy sand,

loamy fine sand, loamy very fine sand, fine sandy

loam, very fine sandy loam, or silt loam in the

substratum

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have cemented layers in the subsoil

• Gently sloping or sloping areas of Vilas soils or

areas of Vilas soils that have slopes of more than 30

percent

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sand,

loamy fine sand, fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy

loam

• Soils that have strata of gravelly sand in the

substratum

• Areas of eroded soils

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Excessively drained
136 Soil Survey of

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Rapid

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other use—pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

erosion hazard

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Because the slope limits the use of conventional

equipment, special harvesting and planting methods,

such as yarding the logs by cable and planting

seedlings by hand, may be needed.

• Carefully locating skid trails and building haul roads

on the contour help to control erosion and minimize

equipment limitations.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas after logging,

sloping road surfaces to remove runoff water, and

installing water bars, culverts, and drop structures

reduce the hazard of erosion.

Pasture

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion, soil

blowing, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss

Management considerations:

• The steeper areas are generally limited to pasture of

existing forage species. Maintaining a high-quality

cover of pasture plants reduces the hazards of water

erosion and soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazards of water erosion and soil blowing, and

increases the extent of undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

nitrogen fertilizer at recommended rates can reduce

leaching losses and protect the quality of ground

water.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

Cropland

Suitability: Generally unsuited because of the slope,

droughtiness, and the very severe hazard of water

erosion

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited in the less sloping areas;

generally unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Slope, water erosion,

soil blowing, caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• In the less sloping areas, buildings can be designed

so that they conform to the natural slope of the land.

The slope can be modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion and soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIIs

Woodland ordination symbol: 6R (red pine)

Primary forest habitat type: AQV

W—Water

Setting

Landform: Mostly stream terraces, outwash plains,

and moraines

Shape of areas: Round or irregular

Size of areas: 2 to 520 acres

General Description

• This map unit consists of areas that typically contain

water throughout the year.

Composition

Water: 95 to 100 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 0 to 5 percent
Florence County, Wisconsin 137

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Shoreline areas and sandbars exposed during

periods of low water

• Areas of floating aquatic vegetation

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant use—wetland wildlife habitat;

other uses—water-based recreation

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: Not assigned

Woodland ordination symbol: Not assigned

Primary forest habitat type: Not assigned

WaC—Wabeno-Goodman silt loams, 6 to

15 percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 40 acres

Representative Profile

Wabeno

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable mucky peat

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

4 to 16 inches—brown, friable silt loam

16 to 22 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

22 to 60 inches—brown, firm sandy loam

Substratum:

60 to 62 inches—brown, friable loamy sand

Goodman

Organic layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

1 to 2 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

2 to 4 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

4 to 13 inches—brown, friable silt loam

13 to 39 inches—brown and reddish brown, friable

silt loam

39 to 47 inches—reddish brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Substratum:

47 to 61 inches—reddish brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Composition

Wabeno soil and similar inclusions: 55 to 65 percent

Goodman soil and similar inclusions: 25 to 35 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 10 to 20 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Padus and Stambaugh soils and the somewhat

excessively drained Pence soils, all of which are

underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial

outwash

• Areas of wet soils in depressions

• Areas of Wabeno and Goodman soils that are not

stony or that are bouldery

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of Wabeno

and Goodman soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sandy loam or

gravelly loamy sand

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Wabeno—moderately well drained;

Goodman—well drained

Seasonal high water table: Wabeno—perched, 1.5 to

3.0 feet below the surface; Goodman—more than

6 feet below the surface

Depth class: Wabeno—moderately deep to a fragipan;

Goodman—very deep

Permeability: Wabeno—moderate in the upper layers,

slow in the fragipan, and moderate in the

substratum; Goodman—moderate in the upper

part and moderate or moderately rapid in the

lower part

Available water capacity: Wabeno—low; Goodman—

moderate or high

Organic matter content: Wabeno—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Goodman—very high in

the organic layer and moderate in the mineral

surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent
138 Soil Survey of

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Wabeno—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard, plant competition;

Goodman—equipment limitation, plant competition

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow in areas of the Wabeno soil can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not leave

the remaining trees widely spaced. The periodic

salvaging of windthrown trees may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited in areas where

surface stones have been removed; generally

unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor

tilth, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years in

areas where the available water capacity is restricted.

Irrigation can improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wabeno—water

erosion, droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss,

rock fragments; Goodman—water erosion,

nutrient and pesticide loss, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of water erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields on the Wabeno soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Wabeno—severe;

Goodman—moderate

Major restrictive features: Wabeno—restricted

permeability, wetness, slope; Goodman—

restricted permeability, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wabeno—wetness,

slope, water erosion, caving of cutbanks;

Goodman—slope, water erosion, caving of

cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Wabeno soil.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.
Florence County, Wisconsin 139

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Wabeno—poorly suited; Goodman—

moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wabeno—wetness,

slope, water erosion, caving of cutbanks;

Goodman—slope, water erosion, caving of

cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Wabeno soil.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IIIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

WbB—Wabeno-Goodwit silt loams, 1 to 6

percent slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular or long and narrow

Size of areas: 10 to 100 acres

Representative Profile

Wabeno

Organic layer:

0 to 3 inches—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

3 to 5 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

5 to 11 inches—brown, friable silt loam

11 to 15 inches—brown, friable silt

15 to 24 inches—dark brown and brown, mottled,

friable silt loam

24 to 55 inches—dark brown, firm gravelly sandy

loam

Substratum:

55 to 63 inches—dark brown, friable gravelly

sandy loam

Goodwit

Surface layer:

0 to 1 inch—black, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

1 to 3 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

3 to 21 inches—brown, friable silt loam

21 to 38 inches—brown, mottled, friable silt loam

38 to 45 inches—brown, friable gravelly sandy

loam

Substratum:

45 to 60 inches—brown gravelly sandy loam

Composition

Wabeno soil and similar inclusions: 45 to 55 percent

Goodwit soil and similar inclusions: 35 to 45 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Fence soils, which are underlain by stratified

lacustrine deposits

• The well drained Goodman soils

• The somewhat poorly drained Mudlake soils and the

poorly drained Capitola soils in depressions

• The well drained Padus and Stambaugh soils and

Vanzile soils, all of which are underlain by sandy or

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of Wabeno and Goodwit soils that are not

stony or that are bouldery

• Sloping areas of Wabeno and Goodwit soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Soils that have a substratum of sandy loam, loamy

sand, or gravelly loamy sand

• Areas in which the silty deposits are as much as 60

inches thick

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Wabeno—perched, 1.5 to

3.0 feet below the surface; Goodwit—perched, 2.5

to 3.5 feet below the surface

Depth class: Wabeno—moderately deep to a fragipan;

Goodwit—very deep
140 Soil Survey of

Permeability: Wabeno—moderate in the upper part,

slow in the fragipan, and moderate in the

substratum; Goodwit—moderate

Available water capacity: Wabeno—low; Goodwit—

moderate or high

Organic matter content: Wabeno—very high in the

organic layer and moderately low or moderate in

the mineral surface layer; Goodwit—moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Wabeno—equipment

limitation, windthrow hazard, plant competition;

Goodwit—equipment limitation, plant competition

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow in areas of the Wabeno soil can be

minimized by using harvest methods that do not leave

the remaining trees widely spaced. The periodic

salvaging of windthrown trees may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited in areas where surface stones

have been removed; poorly suited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor

tilth, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are somewhat limited during dry years in

areas where the available water capacity is restricted.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wabeno—droughtiness,

rock fragments; Goodwit—rock fragments

Management considerations:

• Forage yields on the Wabeno soil are limited during

most years by the restricted available water capacity.

Drought-tolerant species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State guidelines.

Dwellings without basements

Suitability: Wabeno—moderately well suited;

Goodwit—well suited

Major management concerns: Wabeno—wetness,

water erosion; Goodwit—water erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness in areas of the Wabeno soil.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Dwellings with basements

Suitability: Wabeno—poorly suited; Goodwit—

moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, water erosion,

caving of cutbanks

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.
Florence County, Wisconsin 141

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs in very stony areas;

IIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3L (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

WkB—Wakefield silt loam, 1 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Shoulders and linear and slightly

convex summits

Shape of areas: Irregular or elongated

Size of areas: 5 to 350 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 5 inches—dark reddish brown, friable silt

loam

Subsurface layer:

5 to 6 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

6 to 16 inches—dark reddish brown, friable silt

loam

16 to 27 inches—reddish brown, mottled, firm fine

sandy loam and dark reddish brown, mottled,

firm loam

27 to 50 inches—dark reddish brown, firm loam

Substratum:

50 to 60 inches—reddish brown, friable loam

Composition

Wakefield soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Goodwit soils, which do not have a fragipan and

contain less silt and clay in the substratum than the

Wakefield soil

• The well drained Padus and Stambaugh soils and

Vanzile soils, all of which are underlain by sandy or

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

• Areas of somewhat poorly drained or poorly drained

soils in depressions

• Soils that have sandy and gravelly strata in the lower

part of the subsoil

• Areas of Wakefield soils that are not stony or that

are bouldery

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60 inches

• Sloping areas of Wakefield soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loamy

sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam or the gravelly

analogs of these textures or are clay loam or gravelly

loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 1.0 foot to 1.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Shallow to a fragipan

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part, very slow in

the fragipan, and moderate in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by using

harvest methods that leave some mature trees to

provide shade and protection and by planting vigorous
142 Soil Survey of

nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or on

prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited in areas where surface stones

have been removed; poorly suited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor

tilth, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion in the more sloping areas.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Droughtiness, rock

fragments

Management considerations:

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, water erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IVs in very stony areas;

IIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3W (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

Secondary forest habitat type: ATD

WkC—Wakefield silt loam, 6 to 15 percent

slopes, very stony

Setting

Landform: Moraines

Landscape position: Side slopes

Shape of areas: Irregular or elongated

Size of areas: 5 to 200 acres

Representative Profile

Surface layer:

0 to 4 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

Subsurface layer:

4 to 5 inches—brown, friable silt loam

Subsoil:

5 to 12 inches—dark brown, friable silt loam

12 to 14 inches—reddish brown, firm fine sandy

loam

14 to 28 inches—dark reddish brown, mottled, firm

loam and reddish brown, mottled, firm fine

sandy loam

28 to 40 inches—dark reddish brown, firm loam

Substratum:

40 to 60 inches—reddish brown, friable loam

Composition

Wakefield soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent
Florence County, Wisconsin 143

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• Goodwit soils and the well drained Goodman soils,

which do not have a fragipan and contain less silt and

clay in the substratum than the Wakefield soil

• The well drained Padus and Stambaugh soils, which

are underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial

outwash

• Areas of somewhat poorly drained or poorly drained

soils in depressions

• Soils that have sandy and gravelly strata in the lower

part of the subsoil

• Areas of Wakefield soils that are not stony or that

are bouldery

• Areas of well drained soils

• Soils that have bedrock within a depth of 60

inches

• Gently sloping or moderately steep areas of

Wakefield soils

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are sandy

loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam

• Areas of soils in which the lower layers are loamy

sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam or the gravelly

analogs of these textures or are clay loam or gravelly

loam

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Seasonal high water table: Perched, 1.0 foot to 1.5 feet

below the surface

Depth class: Shallow to a fragipan

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part, very slow in

the fragipan, and moderate in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low

Organic matter content: Moderately low or moderate in

the surface layer

Percent of surface covered by stones: About 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• The slope limits the selection of log landing sites.

Landings can be established on suitable nearly level or

gently sloping adjacent or included soils.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by using

harvest methods that leave some mature trees to

provide shade and protection and by planting vigorous

nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or on

prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Moderately well suited in areas where

surface stones have been removed; generally

unsuited in other areas

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, poor

tilth, rock fragments

Management considerations:

• A conservation tillage system that leaves crop

residue on the surface, contour stripcropping, and

crop rotations that include close-growing crops help to

control water erosion.

• Grassed waterways, diversions, and gradestabilization structures help to prevent gully erosion

and erosion from concentrated flow.

• Crop yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Irrigation can

improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• Providing protection from water erosion, reducing

chemical applications, and incorporating phosphorus

fertilizer at recommended rates help to protect the

quality of surface water by reducing runoff losses to

lakes and streams.

• Leaving crop residue on the surface or regularly

adding other organic material helps to maintain fertility

and good tilth and minimizes crusting.

• Some areas have stones on the surface. Unless they

are removed, the stones interfere with tillage.

Pasture

Suitability: Moderately well suited

Major management concerns: Water erosion,

droughtiness, nutrient and pesticide loss, rock

fragments
144 Soil Survey of

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses

and legumes can reduce the hazard of water

erosion.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of water erosion, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Forage yields are limited during most years by the

restricted available water capacity. Drought-tolerant

species are best suited to this soil.

• Restricting grazing during dry periods helps to

maintain a high-quality cover of pasture plants.

• Reducing chemical applications and applying

phosphorus fertilizer at recommended rates help to

protect the quality of surface water by reducing runoff

losses to lakes and streams.

• Stones on the surface may interfere with the use of

machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Restricted permeability,

wetness, slope

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Wetness, slope, water

erosion

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and adding

fill material to raise the elevation of the site can help to

overcome the wetness.

• Buildings can be designed so that they conform to

the natural slope of the land. The slope can be

modified by cutting and filling.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help to

control water erosion during and after construction.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: VIs in very stony areas;

IIIe in areas that are not stony

Woodland ordination symbol: 3W (sugar maple)

Primary forest habitat type: AViO

Secondary forest habitat type: ATD

WrA—Worcester sandy loam, 0 to 3

percent slopes

Setting

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Landscape position: Linear areas, depressions, and

drainageways

Shape of areas: Irregular

Size of areas: 5 to 45 acres

Representative Profile

Organic layer:

0 to 2 inches—black, very friable muck

Mineral surface layer:

2 to 5 inches—reddish gray, very friable sandy

loam

Subsoil:

5 to 9 inches—dark reddish brown, very friable

sandy loam

9 to 30 inches—brown, mottled, friable sandy

loam

30 to 34 inches—brown, mottled, very friable

gravelly loamy sand

Substratum:

34 to 62 inches—dark yellowish brown, mottled,

loose, stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand

Composition

Worcester soil and similar inclusions: 85 to 95 percent

Contrasting inclusions: 5 to 15 percent

Inclusions

Contrasting inclusions:

• The poorly drained Minocqua soils in the lower

depressions and drainageways

• The well drained Padus soils and the moderately

well drained Tipler soils in convex areas

• Areas that are subject to flooding

• Soils that have stones or boulders on the surface

• Soils that have pockets of loamy sand, sandy loam,

gravelly loamy sand, or gravelly sandy loam in the

substratum

Similar inclusions:

• Areas of soils in which the upper layers are loamy

sand, loamy fine sand, fine sandy loam, very fine

sandy loam, loam, or silt loam

• Soils in which the substratum is at a depth of 40 to

60 inches
Florence County, Wisconsin 145

• Areas in which the loamy deposits are less than 24

inches thick

• Soils that have a substratum of sand or coarse sand

or the gravelly or very gravelly analogs of these

textures

Soil Properties and Qualities

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Seasonal high water table: Apparent, 0.5 foot to 2.0

feet below the surface

Depth class: Very deep

Permeability: Moderate in the upper part and rapid or

very rapid in the lower part

Available water capacity: Low or moderate

Organic matter content: Very high in the organic layer;

moderately low or moderate in the mineral surface

layer

Use and Management

Land uses: Dominant uses—woodland, wildlife

habitat; other uses—cropland, pasture

Woodland

Suitability: Suited

Major management concerns: Equipment limitation,

windthrow hazard, plant competition, seedling

mortality

Management considerations:

• Wetness and low soil strength frequently limit

access by machinery to the dry summer months or to

periods when the soil is frozen or snow cover is thick.

• Ruts form easily on unsurfaced roads during wet

periods. Log landings and haul roads can be stabilized

with gravel.

• Windthrow can be minimized by using harvest

methods that do not leave the remaining trees widely

spaced. The periodic salvaging of windthrown trees

may be needed.

• Plant competition can be controlled by mechanical

site preparation or by limited use of herbicides.

• Seedling mortality can be minimized by planting

vigorous nursery stock on the crest of cradle-knolls or

on prepared ridges.

Cropland

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing,

droughtiness, wetness, low strength

Management considerations:

• Field windbreaks, wind stripcropping, a cover of crop

residue, and a winter cover crop reduce the hazard of

soil blowing and help to prevent the damage to plants

caused by windblown sand.

• If the water table is lowered, crop yields are limited

during most years by the restricted available water

capacity. Irrigation can improve productivity.

• Crop residue management, additions of organic

material, conservation tillage, and field windbreaks

increase the water-holding capacity of the soil and

conserve moisture. Reducing plant populations helps

to ensure adequate moisture for all plants.

• The seasonal high water table may delay spring

planting in wet years. Providing adequate drainage can

improve crop production.

• Open ditches and tile drains remove excess surface

water and improve internal drainage.

• Loose sand enters the tile lines unless a suitable

filter covers the tile.

• Grading ditchbanks and protecting them with a plant

cover help to prevent caving and erosion caused by

flowing water.

• Low soil strength limits the use of farm equipment to

periods when the soil is not wet.

Pasture

Suitability: Well suited

Major management concerns: Soil blowing, low

strength

Management considerations:

• Establishing a high-quality cover of grasses and

legumes can reduce the hazard of soil blowing.

• Overgrazing depletes the plant cover, increases the

hazard of soil blowing, and increases the extent of

undesirable plant species.

• Low strength restricts the use of machinery.

Septic tank absorption fields

Severity of soil limitations: Severe

Major restrictive features: Poor filtering capacity,

wetness

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed. The design of

absorption fields should meet local and State

guidelines.

Dwellings

Suitability: Poorly suited

Major management concerns: Dwellings without

basements—wetness, soil blowing; dwellings with

basements—wetness, soil blowing, caving of

cutbanks
146

Management considerations:

• Onsite investigation is needed.

• Installing a subsurface drainage system and

adding fill material to raise the elevation of the site

can help to overcome the wetness.

• Seeding and mulching exposed areas can help

to control soil blowing during and after

construction.

• In excavated or cut and fill areas, stabilizing or

sloping the cutbanks can minimize the safety hazard

and prevent the damage caused by caving.

Interpretive Groups

Land capability classification: IIw

Woodland ordination symbol: 2W (red maple)

Primary forest habitat type: TMC
147

This soil survey is an inventory and evaluation of

the soils in the survey area. It can be used to adjust

land uses to the limitations and potentials of natural

resources and the environment. Also, it can help to

prevent soil-related failures in land uses.

In preparing a soil survey, soil scientists,

conservationists, engineers, and others collect

extensive field data about the nature and behavioral

characteristics of the soils. They collect data on

erosion, droughtiness, flooding, and other factors that

affect various soil uses and management. Field

experience and collected data on soil properties and

performance are used as a basis in predicting soil

behavior.

Information in this section can be used to plan the

use and management of soils as woodland; for crops

and pasture; as sites for buildings, sanitary facilities,

highways and other transportation systems, and parks

and other recreational facilities; and for wildlife habitat.

It can be used to identify the suitability and limitations

of each soil for specific land uses and to help prevent

construction failures caused by unfavorable soil

properties.

Planners and others using soil survey information

can evaluate the effect of specific land uses on

productivity and on the environment in all or part of the

survey area. The survey can help planners to maintain

or create a land use pattern in harmony with the

natural soil.

Contractors can use this survey to locate sources

of sand and gravel, roadfill, and topsoil. They can use

it to identify areas where bedrock, wetness, or very

firm soil layers can cause difficulty in excavation.

Health officials, highway officials, engineers, and

others may also find this survey useful. The survey

can help them plan the safe disposal of wastes and

locate sites for pavements, sidewalks, campgrounds,

playgrounds, lawns, and trees and shrubs.

Woodland Management and

Productivity

Forest resources are of major importance in

Florence County. In 1983, about 82 percent of the land

area in the county was forested (USDA, 1984).

Approximately 96 percent of the forested acreage was

in commercial forest. About 47 percent of commercial

forests are publicly owned.

The composition of commercial forest land by

stand-size class in 1983 was about 34 percent

sawtimber, 46 percent poletimber, and 18 percent

saplings and seedlings. About 2 percent was

nonstocked. The sawtimber was mostly sugar maple,

eastern hemlock, and aspen and smaller numbers of

yellow birch, American basswood, red pine, white

spruce, northern whitecedar, and eastern white pine.

Poletimber, saplings, and seedlings were mostly

aspen and sugar maple, but birch, American

basswood, eastern hemlock, fir, pine, spruce, and

other species were also included.

The composition of forest land by timber type in

1983 was about 40 percent sugar maple-hemlockbasswood-yellow birch, 37 percent aspen-birch, 4

percent pine, 13 percent spruce-fir and other conifers,

3 percent oak, and 1 percent elm-ash and other

lowland hardwoods. About 2 percent was nonstocked.

In 1983, the volume of growing stock was

284,632,000 cubic feet, the annual growth was

7,850,000 cubic feet, and the annual removal was

6,145,000 cubic feet. For sawtimber, the volume was

676,752,000 board feet, the annual growth was

25,888,000 board feet, and the annual removal was

14,220,000 board feet.

Northern hardwoods are dominant in the upland

areas of Florence County. Sugar maple is the

dominant tree species in some areas of Goodwit,

Padus, Pence, Vanzile, and Wabeno soils, but also

northern hardwoods also grow in the stands. The

major species are sugar maple, American basswood,

yellow birch, northern red oak, and eastern hemlock

(fig. 5). Species that occur as minor components in

stands are balsam fir, red maple, American elm, black

cherry, white ash, eastern white pine, and white

spruce. Aspen and paper birch stands are common

but are often replaced by sugar maple and other

northern hardwoods.

Sugar maple and northern red oak are the

dominant species in most timber stands in areas of

Annalake, Ellwood, Goodwit, Iosco, Padus, Sarona,

Use and Management of the Soils
148 Soil Survey of

and Vilas soils. American basswood, eastern hemlock,

yellow birch, white ash, paper birch, red pine, eastern

white pine, red maple, white spruce, aspen, balsam fir,

and northern pin oak also occur.

Pine and aspen are dominant in some areas of

Pence and Vilas soils, but other species include jack

pine, red pine, eastern white pine, aspen, paper birch,

red maple, northern red oak, northern pin oak, white

spruce, and balsam fir. Many pine plantations are in

areas of these soils (fig. 6).

Species in areas of Metonga and Ishpeming soils

include sugar maple, yellow birch, red maple, aspen,

paper birch, balsam fir, northern red oak, northern pin

oak, American basswood, eastern hemlock, eastern

white pine, red pine, and jack pine.

Wooded swamps are mostly balsam fir, northern

whitecedar, and black ash. Red maple, American elm,

aspen, paper birch, and yellow birch are in some

stands. In the bogs that are scattered throughout the

county, the species are typically limited to stunted

black spruce and tamarack.

Management of the different soils for forest

products varies, but it should be governed by the

species in the stand, the suitability of the soils for the

Figure 5.—Mixed northern hardwoods in an area of Wabeno-Goodwit silt loams, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony.
Florence County, Wisconsin 149

species, and the objectives of the landowner. Current

management alternatives include a selection harvest

approach for sawlogs or an even-aged approach for

sawlog or pulpwood production. Even-aged

management that favors pine species and northern

red oak is desirable if the stand includes significant

amounts of these species. Management should

include controlling water erosion, planting trees where

natural regeneration is unreliable, controlling

vegetation that competes with natural or planted

regeneration, improving the seedling survival rate,

minimizing windthrow on the wetter sites, harvesting in

a timely manner, controlling damage by insects and

diseases, removing cull trees and undesirable species,

maintaining optimum basal area, overcoming soilrelated equipment limitations, preventing woodland

fires, and excluding livestock from the woodland.

Water erosion can occur as a result of site

preparation and cutting if the soil is exposed along

roads, skid trails, and fire lanes and on landings.

Figure 6.—A plantation of mixed pines in an area of Vilas loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes. Thinning this plantation would provide

pulpwood and permit the remaining trees to grow larger.
150 Soil Survey of

Burned areas also are subject to erosion. Erosion

generally is a hazard on forest land if the slope is 15

percent or more. It is a problem in the steeper areas of

such soils as Goodman, Padus, and Vilas soils.

Excessive soil loss can be prevented by using proper

logging techniques, planting trees, and establishing

roads and trails on the contour; yarding uphill with a

cable; removing water with water bars, out-sloping

road surfaces, and culverts; preventing fires; and

excluding livestock from the woodland. Drop structures

may be needed to stabilize highly erodible areas.

Seeding areas exposed by logging activities helps to

establish a protective cover of vegetation.

Soil strength can limit the use of equipment on

upland soils during the spring thaw and other

excessively wet periods. Upland soils, such as Fence,

Goodman, Goodwit, Metonga, Padus, Sarona,

Soperton, Stambaugh, Tipler, and Wabeno soils, have

low strength during wet periods. Ruts can form if

wheeled vehicles are used when these soils are wet

(fig. 7). Deep ruts tend to restrict lateral drainage and

result in damage to tree roots. Wheeled vehicles

Figure 7.—Ruts caused by the use of wheeled vehicles in an area of Padus sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes. Ruts can form easily

if wheeled forestry equipment is used during wet periods.
Florence County, Wisconsin 151

should be used only when the soil is dry or has a thick

snow cover. Stabilizing landings and roads with gravel

can help to prevent the damage caused by the

repeated use of heavy equipment.

Soil wetness is the result of a high water table,

flooding, or ponding. It causes seeding mortality, limits

the use of equipment, results in the invasion or growth

of undesirable plants following harvest, and increases

the likelihood of windthrow by restricting the rooting

depth of some tree species.

Seedling mortality is high in areas of poorly drained

soils, such as Capitola, Kinross, and Minocqua soils. It

can also be a problem in areas of somewhat poorly

drained soils, such as Au Gres soils, and in areas

where water ponds in the swales between cradleknolls. The seedling survival rate can be improved by

planting vigorous nursery stock on prepared ridges or

on the crest of cradle-knolls. In areas where

mechanical tree planters cannot be used because of

wetness during the tree planting season, hand

planting of trees is necessary if natural tree

regeneration is unreliable.

The use of wheeled vehicles in areas of somewhat

poorly drained, poorly drained, and very poorly

drained soils is frequently limited to the dry summer

months or to periods when the ground is frozen or

snow cover is thick. In these areas, a gravel base for

roads and landings can improve the ability of soils to

withstand the repeated use of heavy equipment.

Landings can also be established on suitable adjacent

soils that are better drained. Providing adequate

culverts for graveled roads helps to maintain the

natural drainage system.

Trees are shallow rooted where the water table is

near the surface, and they can be blown down during

periods of strong winds. Using a harvest method that

does not leave the remaining trees widely spaced,

such as a shelter-wood cut, can minimize the

windthrow of trees. This method of harvesting also

helps to ensure natural regeneration of trees by

controlling the extent of competing vegetation.

Plant competition is a problem on most of the

woodland in the county because soil productivity is so

high that undesirable plants grow when a harvest

creates openings in the tree canopy. Competition from

unwanted plants can delay or prevent natural

regeneration of the desired tree species and hinder

the establishment of planted trees. Plant competition is

more severe on the wetter soils than on other soils. It

can be controlled by using a method of selective

cutting that maintains most of the tree canopy, by

establishing the new forest soon after harvesting, or by

removing the undesirable plants with herbicides. In

areas where equipment can be used, the unwanted

plants can be removed by machinery. Skidding may

expose enough soil for adequate regeneration. Before

trees are planted, site preparation by mechanical or

chemical means generally is needed to control

competing vegetation. Subsequent control of invading

species may be needed on the more fertile soils,

especially the wetter ones.

Slope and rock outcrops can limit the use of

forestry equipment. Slope is a problem in areas where

it is 15 percent or more. Bedrock outcrops also

interfere with the use of equipment. Rock outcrop is

common in areas of Ishpeming and Metonga soils

(fig. 8). Trees should be planted by hand and yarded

with a cable in areas where the slope or rock outcrop

prohibits the use of equipment. Logging roads can be

built on the contour. Roads and landings can be

established in the less sloping areas.

Soil droughtiness can cause seedling mortality. The

steeper slopes facing south or west are especially

droughty because of high soil temperatures and

evaporation rates. Seedling mortality can be minimized

by using harvest methods that leave some mature

trees to provide shade and protection and by planting

vigorous nursery stock in the early spring when the

soil is moist. Reinforcement planting may be needed

on very dry sites.

Tables 5 and 6 can be used by woodland owners or

forest managers in planning the use of soils for wood

crops. Only those soils suitable for wood crops are

listed. Table 5 lists the ordination symbol for each soil.

Soils assigned the same ordination symbol require the

same general management and have about the same

potential productivity.

The first part of the ordination symbol, a number,

indicates the potential productivity of the soils for an

indicator tree species. The number indicates the

volume, in cubic meters per hectare per year, which

the indicator species can produce in a pure stand

under natural conditions. The number 1 indicates low

potential productivity; 2 or 3, moderate; 4 or 5,

moderately high; 6 to 8, high; 9 to 11, very high; and

12 to 39, extremely high. The second part of the

symbol, a letter, indicates the major kind of soil

limitation. The letter R indicates steep slopes; X,

stoniness or rockiness; W, excess water in or on the

soil; T, toxic substances in the soil; D, restricted rooting

depth; C, clay in the upper part of the soil; S, sandy

texture; F, a high content of rock fragments in the soil;

and L, low strength. The letter A indicates that

limitations or restrictions are insignificant. If a soil has

more than one limitation, the priority is as follows: R,

X, W, T, D, C, S, F, and L.
152 Soil Survey of

In table 5, slight, moderate, and severe indicate the

degree of the major soil limitations to be considered in

management.

Erosion hazard is the probability that damage will

occur as a result of site preparation and cutting where

the soil is exposed along roads, skid trails, and fire

lanes and in log-handling areas. Forests that have

been burned or overgrazed also are subject to erosion.

Ratings of the erosion hazard are based on the

percent of the slope and on the content of rock

fragments in the surface layer. A rating of slight

indicates that no particular prevention measures are

needed under ordinary conditions. A rating of

moderate indicates that erosion-control measures are

needed in certain silvicultural activities. A rating of

severe indicates that special precautions are needed

to control erosion in most silvicultural activities.

Seedling mortality refers to the death of naturally

occurring or planted tree seedlings, as influenced by

the kinds of soil, soil wetness, or topographic

conditions. The factors used in rating the soils for

seedling mortality are texture, depth to a seasonal

Figure 8.—Schist outcrop along State Highway 101.
Florence County, Wisconsin 153

high water table, rock fragments in the upper 20

inches of the soil, effective rooting depth, and slope

aspect. A rating of slight indicates that seedling

mortality is not likely to be a problem under normal

conditions. Expected mortality is less than 25 percent.

A rating of moderate indicates that some problems

from seedling mortality can be expected. Extra

precautions are advisable. Expected mortality is 25 to

50 percent. A rating of severe indicates that seedling

mortality is a serious problem. Extra precautions are

important. Replanting may be necessary. Expected

mortality is more than 50 percent.

Windthrow hazard is the likelihood that trees will be

uprooted by the wind because the soil is not deep

enough for adequate root anchorage. The main

restrictions that affect rooting are a seasonal high

water table and the depth to bedrock, a fragipan, or

other limiting layers. A rating of slight indicates that

under normal conditions no trees are blown down by

the wind. Strong winds may damage trees, but they do

not uproot them. A rating of moderate indicates that

some trees can be blown down during periods when

the soil is wet and winds are moderate or strong. A

rating of severe indicates that many trees can be

blown down during these periods.

Plant competition ratings indicate the degree to

which undesirable species are expected to invade and

grow when openings are made in the tree canopy. The

main factors that affect plant competition are depth to

the water table and the available water capacity. A

rating of slight indicates that competition from

undesirable plants is not likely to prevent natural

regeneration or suppress the more desirable species.

Planted seedlings can become established without

undue competition. A rating of moderate indicates that

competition may delay the establishment of desirable

species. Competition may hamper stand development,

but it will not prevent the eventual development of fully

stocked stands. A rating of severe indicates that

competition can be expected to prevent regeneration

unless precautionary measures are applied.

The potential productivity of merchantable or

common trees on a soil is expressed as a site index

and as a volume number. The site index is the average

height, in feet, that dominant and codominant trees of

a given species attain in 50 years. The site index

applies to fully stocked, even-aged, unmanaged

stands. Commonly grown trees are those that

woodland managers generally favor in intermediate or

improvement cuttings. They are selected on the basis

of growth rate, quality, value, and marketability.

The volume, a number, is the yield likely to be

produced by the most important trees. This number,

expressed as cubic feet per acre per year, indicates

the amount of fiber produced in a fully stocked, evenaged, unmanaged stand.

The first species listed under common trees for a

soil is the indicator species for that soil. It generally is

the most common species on the soil and is the one

that determines the ordination class.

Trees to plant are those that are suitable for

commercial wood production. Additional information

about these trees is available in the local office of the

Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Table 6 gives information about operating forestry

equipment in logging areas and along skid trails, on

log landings, along haul roads, and in site preparation

and planting, which includes row seeding. Limitations

are given for the most limiting season. In Florence

County the most limiting season generally is spring.

The limitations can also apply, however, during other

excessively wet periods, such as after a heavy rainfall.

The preferred operating season is the period when the

use of forestry equipment causes the least amount of

soil damage. This period generally is when the soil is

not too wet or when the ground is frozen.

In table 6, the equipment limitations reflect the

characteristics and conditions of the soil that restrict

use of the equipment generally needed in woodland

harvesting and regeneration activities. The chief

characteristics and conditions considered in the

ratings are soil wetness, the hazard of flooding, rock

outcrops, stones and boulders on the surface, texture

of the surface layer, slope, depth to hard bedrock,

traffic-supporting capacity (or soil strength), and the

potential for frost action. Soils that have a moderate or

high content of silt have low strength in the extended

spring thaw period and during extended periods of

high rainfall. Ruts can form easily in areas of these

soils during these wet periods.

The ratings of slight, moderate, or severe in the

table are based on the use of conventional equipment

and procedures. Special procedures or types of

equipment can sometimes be utilized to reduce or

overcome the site limitations. If wetness is a limitation,

for example, the use of high flotation equipment may

prevent the formation of ruts. Restrictions on the use

of equipment indicate the need for choosing the right

equipment to be used and the need for accurate timing

of operations to avoid seasonal limitations. The cost of

operations generally increases as the limitations

become more severe. The ratings for log landings and

haul roads can be used as a guide for establishing

them in the least costly locations.

Logging areas and skid trails include areas where

some or all of the trees are being cut. Generally,

equipment traffic is least intensive in the logging areas.

Skid trails, which generally are within the logging area,
154 Soil Survey of

are roads or trails over which the logs are dragged or

hauled from the stump to a log landing. A rating of

slight indicates that the use of conventional equipment

is not normally restricted by the physical site

conditions. A rating of moderate indicates that the use

of equipment or season of use is restricted because of

one or more soil factors. A rating of severe indicates

that special equipment or techniques are needed to

overcome the limitations or that the time of efficient

operation is very limited.

Log landings are areas where logs are assembled

for transportation (fig. 9). Wheeled equipment may be

used more frequently in these areas than in any other

areas affected by logging. Considerable soil

compaction can be expected in these areas. Good

areas for landings require little or no surface

preparation or cutting and filling. A rating of slight

indicates that the soil is a good site for landings and

the area can readily be returned to forest use. A rating

of moderate indicates that the season of use is

somewhat limited or that such practices as grading,

cutting, filling, or drainage are usually required to

make the site suitable for a landing and returning the

site to forest use is difficult. A rating of severe indicates

that the season of use is very limited or that special or

expensive techniques are needed to overcome the

limitations. There may also be significant risk of

environmental damage, which makes returning the

area to forest use very difficult or impossible.

Haul roads are access roads leading from log

landings to primary or surfaced roads. The haul roads

serve as transportation routes for wheeled logging

equipment. Generally, they are unpaved roads and are

not graveled. The wetter soils and the silty upland

soils, which are slippery and easily rutted during wet

periods, commonly provide poor locations for haul

Figure 9.—A log landing in an area of Padus-Pence sandy loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes.
Florence County, Wisconsin 155

roads. A rating of slight indicates that no serious

limitations affect the location, construction, and

maintenance of haul roads or the season of use. A

rating of moderate indicates some limitations, but the

limitations can be overcome with routine construction

techniques. A rating of severe indicates that it is

difficult and expensive to establish and maintain haul

roads on the soil or that the season of use may be

severely restricted.

Site preparation and planting are the mechanized

operations for establishing planted trees in an area.

The ratings are based on limitations that affect the

efficient use of equipment and the risk of damage to

the site caused by the equipment. Operating

techniques should not displace or remove topsoil from

the site or create channels that concentrate storm

runoff. A rating of slight indicates that no serious

limitations affect site preparation and planting. A rating

of moderate indicates that the site conditions prevent

the efficient use of the equipment or that the site may

be damaged by the equipment. A rating of severe

indicates that special equipment or techniques, such

as hand planting of trees, are needed to overcome the

limitations.

Additional information about woodland

management and productivity can be obtained from

the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, the

local office of the Natural Resources Conservation

Service, or the Cooperative Extension Service.

Forest Habitat Types

John Kotar, senior research scientist, Department of Forestry,

University of Wisconsin-Madison, helped prepare this section.

The forest habitat type system used in Florence

County is derived from a field guide developed for

northern Wisconsin (Kotar and others, 1988). The

system of habitat classification is based on the

concept that plants, including trees, normally occur in

predictable patterns or communities and that these

communities reflect differences in site characteristics,

primarily the moisture content and fertility of the soils.

A forest habitat type is an association of dominant tree

and ground flora species in a climax plant community.

It encompasses all soils capable of producing similar

plant communities at climax, which is the stage in

ecological development when the vegetative

community becomes stable and perpetuates itself.

A habitat type can be identified during most stages

of successional growth by examining the reproductive

success of various tree species and by inspecting the

ground flora, which becomes relatively stable soon

after the establishment of a forest canopy. In a young

forest, the patterns or associations of understory

plants can be used to predict the dominant tree

species in the climax forest.

The successional stages and trends also are

predictable for the various habitat types. This

predictability allows forest managers to make accurate

prescriptions for manipulating vegetation based on the

ecological potential of the soil rather than on the

current forest cover type, which can vary depending

largely on how the forest has been disturbed.

Additional management implications for each habitat

type are in the “Field Guide to Forest Habitat Types of

Northern Wisconsin” (Kotar and others, 1988).

Habitat types have been determined for most of the

soils in Florence County. They are specified at the end

of each map unit description in the section “Detailed

Soil Map Units.” Although soil map units do not

coincide exactly with habitat types, there is a strong

correlation between them. If more than one habitat

type is associated with a detailed soil map unit, the

habitat types are identified as primary and secondary.

The primary habitat type is the one that is most

common on the map unit. The secondary habitat type

is less common. The assigned habitat types may be

different in some small areas included in mapping. The

following paragraphs provide brief descriptions of the

habitat types in the county. The name of each habitat

type is derived from the potential climax vegetation on

a site. It represents a combination of tree species,

which are listed first, and ground flora species. The

descriptions provide information about the potential

climax tree species and some of the common

understory species.

AQV—Acer-Quercus/Vaccinium (Red Maple-Red

Oak/Low Sweet Blueberry) habitat type. The

presumed climax overstory of this habitat type is

dominated by red maple and northern red oak and

commonly includes some eastern white pine. Present

stands are dominated almost entirely by early

successional species, such as aspen, paper birch,

jack pine, red pine, and eastern white pine.

The understory vegetation consists primarily of

beaked hazelnut, brackenfern, blueberries, wild lily-ofthe-valley, and large-leaved aster.

This habitat type is suitable for management of the

native species, including pine, aspen, and paper birch.

Of the hardwoods, only northern red oak and red

maple are suitable for fiber production or wildlife

habitat.

PMV—Pinus/Maianthemum-Vaccinium (White

Pine/Wild Lily-of-the-Valley-Low Sweet Blueberry)

habitat type. The presumed climax overstory of this
156 Soil Survey of

habitat type is dominated by eastern white pine, but it

may include balsam fir, white spruce, red maple, or

northern red oak as a second canopy.

Present stands are largely dominated by mixtures

of jack pine, red pine, eastern white pine, aspen, red

maple, and northern red oak. The understory

vegetation is similar to that of the AQV habitat type,

but the herb layer generally is better developed.

This habitat type is considered optimal for

management of red pine or eastern white pine. Yields

are nearly as high as those of the more mesic habitat

types, but the potential for competition from hardwood

species is much lower. Except for northern red oak,

hardwoods are suitable only for fiber production or for

wildlife habitat. The potential for production of aspen is

very high.

AQVib—Acer-Quercus/Viburnum (Sugar MapleRed Oak/Mapleleaf Viburnum) habitat type. The

presumed climax species of this habitat type is

dominated by sugar maple. The succession to sugar

maple on logged-over sites, however, is less rapid

than on other habitat types where this species is

capable of growing. Present successional stands on

AQVib are most commonly dominated by mixtures of

northern red oak and red maple. Mixtures of aspen,

paper birch, and eastern white pine also are common.

Productivity potential is very high for eastern white

pine and red pine; high for northern red oak, red

maple, white ash, and American basswood; and

moderate to low for sugar maple.

Characteristic understory species are mapleleaf

viburnum, witch hazel, and pointed-leaved tick trefoil.

Other common species include beaked hazelnut, hog

peanut, large-leaved aster, and brackenfern.

ATM—Acer-Tsuga/Maianthemum (Sugar MapleHemlock/Wild Lily-of-the-Valley) habitat type. The

presumed climax overstory of this habitat type is

dominated by sugar maple, eastern hemlock, and

yellow birch. Successional stages, however, can be

very diverse because many native tree species grow

well in areas of this habitat type. Management options

generally are determined by the condition of current

stands rather than by site limitations.

The diversity of understory species is relatively low.

The most common species are wild lily-of-the-valley,

wild sarsaparilla, large-leaved aster, and beaked

hazelnut.

TMC—Tsuga/Maianthemum-Coptis (Hemlock/Wild

Lily-of-the-Valley-Goldthread) habitat type. The

presumed climax overstory of this habitat type

consists of eastern hemlock, yellow birch, red maple,

and sugar maple.

This habitat type commonly occurs in low areas

within many of the other habitat types and as a

transitional type in areas between lake shores or

swamps and upland areas. Conifers, such as balsam

fir, northern whitecedar, and white spruce, also occur

in areas of this habitat type. Characteristic understory

species are wild lily-of-the-valley, goldthread,

bunchberry, clubmoss, and yellow beadlily.

Blueberries, brackenfern, and large-leaved aster are

abundant in some areas.

Eastern hemlock and yellow birch have the highest

potential for forestry products, and northern

whitecedar, balsam fir, and white spruce are suitable

as wildlife habitat or for fiber production. Although

sugar maple reproduces in areas of this type, it grows

poorly and exhibits poor form. Areas of this type that

are in the better drained positions are well suited to

management for eastern white pine.

ATD—Acer-Tsuga/Dryopteris (Sugar MapleHemlock/Spinulose Shield Fern) habitat type. The

presumed climax overstory of this habitat type is

dominated by sugar maple, eastern hemlock, and

yellow birch.

Although most hardwoods grow well on this habitat

type once they are established, sugar maple tends to

dominate both the young and mature stands. For this

reason, management is difficult for intolerant and midtolerant species in areas of this habitat type.

The understory is typically poorly developed. A

shrub layer is normally absent, and ground vegetation

is sparse. The most conspicuous species are

spinulose shield fern, lady fern, wild lily-of-the-valley,

and sugar maple seedlings.

AVVib—Acer/Vaccinium-Viburnum (Sugar

Maple/Low Sweet Blueberry-Mapleleaf Viburnum)

habitat type. The presumed climax overstory of this

habitat type is dominated by sugar maple, red maple,

and northern red oak.

The shrub layer on this type consists of mapleleaf

viburnum, beaked hazelnut, and leatherwood. Ground

vegetation tends to be poorly developed. Large-leaved

aster, brackenfern, and wild sarsaparilla are the most

common species.

In pre-logging eras, this type was dominated by

eastern white pine and red pine and was

characterized by exceptional yields. Present stands

are most commonly dominated by aspen or mixtures

of northern red oak, red maple, and sugar maple.

Although sugar maple reproduces in areas of this

habitat type, it grows slowly and exhibits poor form.

The optimal species for management on this type are

northern red oak, eastern white pine, and aspen. Red

pine yields also are high, but competition is a serious

concern.

AViO—Acer/Viola-Osmorhiza (Sugar Maple/Yellow

Violet-Sweet Cicely) habitat type. The presumed
Florence County, Wisconsin 157

climax overstory of this habitat type is dominated by

sugar maple. Early and mid-successional stages may

have a mixture of several hardwood species, including

American basswood, white ash, yellow birch, and

northern red oak. With the exception of eastern

hemlock, conifers generally are absent from this

habitat type. The growth potential for all native

hardwoods is very high.

The understory vegetation in areas of this type

generally is well developed, and the diversity of

species is high. The most characteristic species are

sweet cicely, trillium, yellow violet, lady fern, spinulose

shield fern, hairy Solomon’s seal, false Solomon’s

seal, jack-in-the-pulpit, and blue cohosh.

Crops and Pasture

John W. Pingry, agronomist, Natural Resources Conservation

Service, helped prepare this section.

General management needed for crops and pasture

is suggested in this section. The estimated yields of

the main crops and pasture plants are listed, the

system of land capability classification used by the

Natural Resources Conservation Service is explained,

and prime farmland is described.

Planners of management systems for individual

fields or farms should consider the detailed

information given in the description of each soil under

the heading “Detailed Soil Map Units.” Specific

information can be obtained from the local office of the

Natural Resources Conservation Service or the

Cooperative Extension Service.

In 1990, about 23,000 acres in Florence County

was farmland (Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics

Service, 1991). Of this total, 11,000 acres was used

for corn, mainly corn for silage; 400 acres for oats; 200

acres for barley; 3,300 acres for alfalfa hay; 2,000

acres for other hay; and 450 acres for potatoes. The

rest of the acreage was used for other crops, pasture,

woodlots, or other farm uses.

The soils in Florence County have potential for

increased production of crops. Food production could

be increased by extending the latest crop production

technology to all cropland in the county. This soil

survey can greatly facilitate the application of such

technology. Some acreage currently being used as

woodland could be cleared and used for crop

production. However, climatic conditions and market

availability make this unlikely.

Management varies on the different kinds of soil in

Florence County. Basic management, however, is

needed on practically all of the soils. Basic

management of cropland includes controlling water

erosion, providing an adequate drainage system,

maintaining fertility, maintaining or improving tilth,

applying lime, preparing a good seedbed, and

harvesting in a timely manner. Basic management of

pasture includes pasture renovation, proper stocking

rates, and clipping or mowing where feasible. Clipping

and mowing remove weeds and brush and encourage

uniform regrowth and grazing. Timely deferment of

grazing is also needed to keep the pasture in good

condition.

The paragraphs that follow describe the major

management concerns in areas of cropland and

pasture in the county.

Water erosion is a major problem on much of the

cropland and pasture in the county. It generally is a

hazard in areas where the slope is more than about 2

percent. Much of the acreage in Florence County is

susceptible to water erosion, but most of this acreage

has a protective cover of vegetation. Erosion is a

concern in areas where erodible soils are used for row

crops.

Erosion is damaging for three main reasons. First,

productivity is reduced as the surface layer is lost and

the less fertile subsurface layer and part of the subsoil

are incorporated into the plow layer. Loss of the

organic-rich surface layer is especially damaging on

soils that have a layer in or below the subsoil that

limits the depth of the root zone. Wabeno soils, for

example, have such a layer in the subsoil. Second,

erosion adversely affects tilth and the infiltration of

water. Eroded soils are generally more difficult to till

than uneroded soils because the clay content of the

plow layer generally increases when part of the

subsoil is incorporated into the plow layer. Third,

erosion results in the sedimentation of lakes and

streams. Control of erosion helps to minimize this

sedimentation and improves the quality of water for

municipal use, for recreation, and for fish and wildlife.

Erosion-control practices should provide a

protective cover, reduce the runoff rate, and increase

the rate of water infiltration. A conservation cropping

system that keeps a vegetative cover on the soil for

extended periods can hold soil erosion to amounts

that do not reduce the productive capacity of the soils.

On livestock farms, which require pasture and hay,

including legumes or legume and grass forage crops

in the cropping system helps to control erosion and

also provides nitrogen and improves tilth for other

crops grown in rotation.

A conservation tillage system that leaves protective

amounts of plant residue on the surface after planting,

such as mulch tillage using a chisel or a disc,

increases the rate of water infiltration, reduces the

runoff rate, and helps to control water erosion.
158 Soil Survey of

Conservation tillage systems that clear a narrow band

of residue away from the seed help to overcome cool

soil temperatures in the spring.

Contour stripcropping and contour farming also

help to control runoff and erosion. These practices are

best suited to soils that generally have uniform slopes,

such as Goodman and Wabeno soils. Grassed

waterways remove excess surface water and reduce

the hazard of erosion along natural drainageways.

Diversions direct runoff away from erodible areas.

Terraces reduce the length of slopes and provide safe

outlets for runoff.

Critical-area plantings, such as those along

roadsides and in gravel pits, help to stabilize highly

erodible soils where vegetation is difficult to establish.

Soil blowing is a hazard on many of the soils in

Florence County, especially the sandy soils, such as

Croswell, Cublake, Rousseau, and Vilas soils. It can

result in soil loss and can damage young crops in a

few hours if winds are strong and the soils are dry and

bare of vegetation or crop residue. Windbreaks help to

prevent the damage to soils and crops caused by soil

blowing. They also conserve soil moisture. Small grain

crops can be planted as a cover, and green manure

crops and a system of conservation tillage can be

used to maintain surface cover, maintain the content

of organic matter, and reduce the hazard of soil

blowing.

Further information about the design of erosioncontrol practices for each kind of soil can be obtained

at the local office of the Natural Resources

Conservation Service.

Soil wetness is a major management concern on

some of the acreage used for crops and pasture in the

county. The poorly drained Kinross and Minocqua soils

are naturally so wet that the production of crops

commonly grown in the county is generally not

possible unless the soils are drained. Unless drained,

somewhat poorly drained soils, such as Gastrow and

Worcester soils, are so wet that crops are damaged

during most years.

If organic soils are drained and used as cropland,

they oxidize, subside, and are subject to soil blowing

when the pore space is filled with air. Special drainage

systems are needed to control the depth and period of

drainage. Keeping the water table at the level required

by crops during the growing season and raising it to

the surface during other times of the year can help to

minimize oxidation and subsidence and reduce the

hazard of soil blowing in areas of organic soils.

The design of both surface and subsurface

drainage systems varies with the kind of soil and with

particular site conditions. In some cases, artificial

drainage is impossible or impractical because of a lack

of suitable outlets.

Crops grown in most areas of poorly drained and

very poorly drained soils are subject to frost damage

because of the low position of these soils on the

landscape. The number of frost-free days per season

is lower in these areas than on adjacent uplands

because of cold air drainage to the lowlands.

Further information about the design of drainage

systems for each kind of soil can be obtained at the

local office of the Natural Resources Conservation

Service.

Soil fertility is naturally low or medium in most of the

soils in the county. Fertility can be improved by

applying nutrients and by choosing a cropping system

that adds organic material to the soil. On dairy farms,

a diversified cropping system and applications of

manure help to maintain the content of organic matter.

If specialty crops, such as potatoes, are grown, green

manure crops are needed to maintain the content of

organic matter.

The addition of nutrients increases the yields of

most crops. Most soils in the county are naturally acid

and require applications of lime, which can raise the

pH level sufficiently for good growth of alfalfa and other

crops that grow best on nearly neutral soils. Some

soils in the eastern part of the county, such as

Crossett and Ellwood soils, are naturally acid or

neutral in the upper layers and alkaline in the lower

layers. On all soils, additions of lime and nutrients

should be based on the results of soil tests, on the

needs of the crop, and on the expected level of yields.

The University of Wisconsin Extension Service can

help in determining the kind and amount of nutrients

and lime to be applied.

Soil tilth is an important factor affecting the

germination of seeds, the emergence of seedlings,

and the infiltration of water into the soil. Soils that have

good tilth are granular and porous. Tilling or grazing

when the soil is too wet can cause poor tilth,

especially if the surface layer is loam or silt loam.

Intense rainfall on bare soil can cause the formation of

a crust on the surface. The crust reduces the rate of

water infiltration and increases the runoff rate and the

hazard of erosion. Good soil tilth is more difficult to

maintain on eroded soils than in areas that are not

eroded because the eroded soils have a lower content

of organic matter. Returning crop residue to the soil,

growing green manure crops, and regularly adding

manure or other organic material improve soil

structure and tilth and minimize crusting.

Excessive tillage, use of heavy farm machinery,

overgrazing, and tilling or grazing when the soil is too
Florence County, Wisconsin 159

wet can result in surface compaction and, thus, in poor

tilth. Excessive tillage can be avoided by using a

system of conservation tillage. Proper stocking rates

and rotation grazing can prevent overgrazing. Chisel

plowing helps to loosen compacted soil.

Some soils in the survey area have stones on the

surface. Examples are areas of Goodman, Sarona,

and Wabeno soils. These areas cannot be tilled unless

the stones are removed.

Irrigation is well suited to some of the nearly level

and gently sloping soils that have a very low, low, or

moderate available water capacity, such as

Manitowish, Padus, Pence, Rousseau, Sayner, and

Vilas soils. Irrigation helps to maintain a sufficient

amount of available water for sustained crop yields.

Because of the rapid and very rapid permeability in

these soils, the irrigation rate should be limited.

Limiting the irrigation rate can minimize the leaching of

chemicals and nutrients, especially nitrogen, out of the

root zone and into the ground water. The water for

irrigation is generally drawn from wells or ponds.

Strong winds can prevent uniform applications of

water from sprinkler systems. Field windbreaks and

vegetative row barriers help to deflect the force of the

wind and conserve available water.

Further information about the design of irrigation

systems for each kind of soil can be obtained at the

local office of the Natural Resources Conservation

Service.

Field crops commonly grown in the county include

corn, oats, and barley (fig. 10). Most of the corn is

used for silage. Small acreages of wheat and rye are

grown in some years. Because of the beef and dairy

herds in the county, hay is an important crop. Mixtures

of bromegrass and alfalfa and mixtures of timothy and

red clover are the dominant hay crops (fig. 11).

Pastures are vegetated with the same grasslegume mixtures used for hay. A good system of

Figure 10.—Barley in an area of Pence sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes.
160 Soil Survey of

fertilization and a system of rotation grazing that

includes adequate rest periods would improve most

pastures substantially. Forage yields on droughty soils,

such as Pence and Vilas soils, are generally

somewhat limited. Planting early in spring, before the

surface layer has a chance to dry, is most effective in

areas of these soils. Restricted use during dry periods

helps to keep the pasture in good condition.

Overgrazing reduces the plant cover and thus can

increase the hazard of erosion. It also affects soil tilth.

Fertilization, renovation, and controlled grazing help to

maintain the plant cover. In areas of the finer textured

soils, restricting grazing during wet periods also helps

to keep the pasture in good condition.

Specialty crops, including potatoes (fig. 12), are

grown commercially in the county on a very limited

basis. Small acreages of sweet corn, tomatoes,

asparagus, strawberries, raspberries, and pumpkins

also are grown. The latest information about growing

specialty crops can be obtained from the local offices

of the Cooperative Extension Service and the Natural

Resources Conservation Service.

Yields per Acre

The average yields per acre that can be expected

of the principal crops under a high level of

management are shown in table 7. In any given year,

yields may be higher or lower than those indicated in

the table because of variations in rainfall and other

climatic factors. The land capability classification of

map units in the survey area also is shown in the

table.

The yields are based mainly on the experience and

Figure 11.—An area of Padus sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes, used as hayland.
Florence County, Wisconsin 161

records of farmers, conservationists, and extension

agents. Available yield data from nearby counties and

results of field trials and demonstrations also are

considered.

The management needed to obtain the indicated

yields of the various crops depends on the kind of soil

and the crop. Management can include drainage,

erosion control, and protection from flooding; the

proper planting and seeding rates; suitable highyielding crop varieties; appropriate and timely tillage;

control of weeds, plant diseases, and harmful insects;

favorable soil reaction and optimum levels of nitrogen,

phosphorus, potassium, and trace elements for each

crop; effective use of crop residue, barnyard manure,

and green manure crops; and harvesting that ensures

the smallest possible loss.

The estimated yields reflect the productive capacity

of each soil for each of the principal crops. Yields are

likely to increase as new production technology is

developed. The productivity of a given soil compared

with that of other soils, however, is not likely to

change.

Crops other than those shown in table 7 are grown

in the survey area, but estimated yields are not listed

because the acreage of such crops is small. The local

office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service

Figure 12.—Potatoes in an area of Padus-Pence sandy loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes.
162 Soil Survey of

or of the Cooperative Extension Service can provide

information about the management and productivity of

the soils for those crops.

Land Capability Classification

Land capability classification shows, in a general

way, the suitability of soils for most kinds of field crops.

Crops that require special management are excluded.

The soils are grouped according to their limitations for

field crops, the risk of damage if they are used for

crops, and the way they respond to management. The

criteria used in grouping the soils do not include major

and generally expensive landforming that would

change slope, depth, or other characteristics of the

soils, nor do they include possible but unlikely major

reclamation projects. Capability classification is not a

substitute for interpretations designed to show

suitability and limitations of groups of soils for

woodland or for engineering purposes.

In the capability system, soils are generally grouped

at three levels—capability class, subclass, and unit

(USDA, 1961). Only class and subclass are used in

this survey.

Capability classes, the broadest groups, are

designated by Roman numerals I through VIII. The

numerals indicate progressively greater limitations and

narrower choices for practical use. The classes are

defined as follows:

Class I soils have slight limitations that restrict their

use.

Class II soils have moderate limitations that restrict

the choice of plants or that require moderate

conservation practices.

Class III soils have severe limitations that restrict

the choice of plants or that require special

conservation practices, or both.

Class IV soils have very severe limitations that

restrict the choice of plants or that require very careful

management, or both.

Class V soils are subject to little or no erosion but

have other limitations, impractical to remove, that limit

their use.

Class VI soils have severe limitations that make

them generally unsuitable for cultivation.

Class VII soils have very severe limitations that

make them unsuitable for cultivation.

Class VIII soils and miscellaneous areas have

limitations that nearly preclude their use for

commercial crop production.

Capability subclasses are soil groups within one

class. They are designated by adding a small letter, e,

w, s, or c, to the class numeral, for example, IIe. The

letter e shows that the main hazard is the risk of

erosion unless close-growing plant cover is

maintained; w shows that water in or on the soil

interferes with plant growth or cultivation (in some soils

the wetness can be partly corrected by artificial

drainage); s shows that the soil is limited mainly

because it is shallow, droughty, or stony; and c, used

in only some parts of the United States, shows that the

chief limitation is climate that is very cold or very dry.

In class I there are no subclasses because the soils

of this class have few limitations. Class V contains only

the subclasses indicated by w, s, or c because the

soils in class V are subject to little or no erosion. They

have other limitations that restrict their use to pasture,

woodland, wildlife habitat, or recreation.

The capability classification of map units in this

survey area is given in the section “Detailed Soil Map

Units” and in the yields table.

Prime Farmland

Prime farmland is one of several kinds of important

farmland defined by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture. It is of major importance in meeting the

Nation’s short- and long-range needs for food and

fiber. Because the supply of high-quality farmland is

limited, the U.S. Department of Agriculture recognizes

that responsible levels of government, as well as

individuals, should encourage and facilitate the wise

use of our Nation’s prime farmland.

Prime farmland, as defined by the U.S. Department

of Agriculture, is land that has the best combination of

physical and chemical characteristics for producing

food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and is

available for these uses. It could be cultivated land,

pastureland, woodland, or other land, but it is not

urban or built-up land or water areas. The soil qualities,

growing season, and moisture supply are those

needed for the soil to economically produce sustained

high yields of crops when proper management,

including water management, and acceptable farming

methods are applied. In general, prime farmland has

an adequate and dependable supply of moisture from

precipitation or irrigation, a favorable temperature and

growing season, acceptable acidity or alkalinity, an

acceptable salt and sodium content, and few or no

rocks. It is permeable to water and air. It is not

excessively erodible or saturated with water for long

periods, and it either is not frequently flooded during

the growing season or is protected from flooding.

Slope ranges mainly from 0 to 6 percent. More

detailed information about the criteria for prime

farmland is available at the local office of the Natural

Resources Conservation Service.

About 80,472 acres in Florence County, or 25.9
Florence County, Wisconsin 163

percent of the land area, is prime farmland. This land

is in scattered areas throughout the county. Much of

this land remains wooded, but some is used for crops,

mainly corn, oats, hay, and potatoes.

A recent trend in land use in some parts of the

survey area has been the loss of some prime farmland

to industrial and urban uses. The loss of prime

farmland to other uses puts pressure on marginal

lands, which generally are more erodible, droughty,

and less productive and cannot be easily cultivated.

The map units in the survey area that are

considered prime farmland are listed in table 8. This

list does not constitute a recommendation for a

particular land use. On some soils included in the list,

measures that overcome a hazard or limitation, such

as flooding, wetness, and droughtiness, are needed.

Onsite evaluation is needed to determine whether or

not the hazard or limitation has been overcome by

corrective measures. The extent of each listed map

unit is shown in table 4. The location is shown on the

detailed soil maps. The soil qualities that affect use

and management are described under the heading

“Detailed Soil Map Units.”

Windbreaks and Environmental

Plantings

There are few windbreaks in Florence County

because the county is mostly wooded, and individual

tracts of cropland are surrounded by naturally

occurring woodland. Because most homesites also

are surrounded by woodland, there is little need for

windbreaks, shelterbelts, or environmental plantings.

Most windbreaks are used in areas of Padus,

Pence, Stambaugh, and Vanzile soils. Norway spruce,

white spruce, Colorado blue spruce, and red pine are

the most commonly planted species. The plantings are

mostly on the west or north sides of the protected

areas or are on both sides. Multi-row plantings,

ranging from two to six rows, are generally used.

Windbreaks protect livestock, buildings, yards, fruit

trees, gardens, and cropland from wind and snow;

help to keep snow on fields; and provide food and

cover for wildlife. Field windbreaks are narrow

plantings made at right angles to the prevailing wind

and at specific intervals across the field. The interval

depends on the erodibility of the soil.

Environmental plantings help to beautify and screen

houses and other buildings and to abate noise. The

plants, mostly evergreen shrubs and trees, are closely

spaced. To ensure plant survival, a healthy planting

stock of suitable species should be planted properly

on a well prepared site and maintained in good

condition.

Table 9 shows the height that locally grown trees

and shrubs are expected to reach in 20 years on

various soils. The estimates in table 9 are based on

measurements and observation of established

plantings that have been given adequate care. They

can be used as a guide in planning windbreaks and

screens. Additional information on planning

windbreaks and screens and planting and caring for

trees and shrubs can be obtained from the local office

of the Natural Resources Conservation Service or of

the Cooperative Extension Service or from a

commercial nursery.

Recreation

The lakes, rivers, streams, and woodlands in

Florence County have made the county a popular

vacation area. Water-based recreation, such as

fishing, boating, water skiing, and swimming, are

important. The rivers and streams in the county offer

excellent trout fishing. Three major rivers—the Brule,

Pine, and Popple Rivers—provide challenging

opportunities for the use of canoes, innertubes, and

kayaks. The Pine and Popple Rivers are designated by

the State as Wild Rivers (fig. 13).

The large wooded areas in Florence County attract

many ruffed grouse hunters during the bird season

and many deer and bear hunters during the archery

and gun seasons. Wild turkey hunting is also

becoming popular in the southeastern part of the

county. The Nicolet National Forest, the Florence

County Forest, and many State holdings provide areas

for sightseeing, camping, hiking, and hunting. There is

a public golf course along U.S. Highway 2-141

between Florence and Spread Eagle. During the

winter months, snowmobiling and cross-country skiing

are common on the many miles of groomed trails in

Florence County. Downhill skiing is also offered at

Keyes Peak Ski Hill, which is operated by the county.

Ice fishing is also a very popular winter sport.

The soils of the survey area are rated in table 10

according to limitations that affect their suitability for

recreation. The ratings are based on restrictive soil

features, such as wetness, slope, and texture of the

surface layer. Susceptibility to flooding is considered.

Not considered in the ratings, but important in

evaluating a site, are the location and accessibility of

the area, the size and shape of the area and its scenic

quality, vegetation, access to water, potential water

impoundment sites, and access to public sewer lines.

The capacity of the soil to absorb septic tank effluent
164 Soil Survey of

and the ability of the soil to support vegetation also are

important. Soils that are subject to flooding are limited

for recreational uses by the duration and intensity of

flooding and the season when flooding occurs. In

planning recreational facilities, onsite assessment of

the height, duration, intensity, and frequency of

flooding is essential.

In table 10, the degree of soil limitation is expressed

as slight, moderate, or severe. Slight means that soil

properties are generally favorable and that limitations

are minor and easily overcome. Moderate means that

limitations can be overcome or alleviated by planning,

design, or special maintenance. Severe means that

soil properties are unfavorable and that limitations can

be offset only by costly soil reclamation, special

design, intensive maintenance, limited use, or a

combination of these.

The information in table 10 can be supplemented by

other information in this survey, for example,

interpretations for septic tank absorption fields in table

13 and interpretations for dwellings without basements

and for local roads and streets in table 12.

Camp areas require site preparation, such as

shaping and leveling the tent and parking areas,

stabilizing roads and intensively used areas, and

installing sanitary facilities and utility lines. Camp

areas are subject to heavy foot traffic and some

vehicular traffic. The best soils have mild slopes and

are not wet or subject to flooding during the period of

use. The surface has few or no stones or boulders,

Figure 13.—The Popple River in southern Florence County provides good trout fishing and offers opportunities for other forms of

water-based recreational activities.
Florence County, Wisconsin 165

absorbs rainfall readily but remains firm, and is not

dusty when dry. Strong slopes and stones or boulders

can greatly increase the cost of constructing

campsites.

Picnic areas are subject to heavy foot traffic. Most

vehicular traffic is confined to access roads and

parking areas. The best soils for picnic areas are firm

when wet, are not dusty when dry, are not subject to

flooding during the period of use, and do not have

slopes or stones or boulders that increase the cost of

shaping sites or of building access roads and parking

areas.

Playgrounds require soils that can withstand

intensive foot traffic. The best soils are almost level

and are not wet or subject to flooding during the

season of use. The surface is free of stones and

boulders, is firm after rains, and is not dusty when dry.

If grading is needed, the depth of the soil over bedrock

or a hardpan should be considered.

Paths and trails for hiking and horseback riding

should require little or no cutting and filling. The best

soils are not wet, are firm after rains, are not dusty

when dry, and are not subject to flooding more than

once a year during the period of use. They have

moderate slopes and few or no stones or boulders on

the surface.

Golf fairways are subject to heavy foot traffic and

some light vehicular traffic. Cutting or filling may be

required. The best soils for use as golf fairways are

firm when wet, are not dusty when dry, and are not

subject to prolonged flooding during the period of use.

They have moderate slopes and no stones or boulders

on the surface. The suitability of the soil for tees or

greens is not considered in rating the soils.

Wildlife Habitat

Robert D. Weihrouch, biologist, Natural Resources

Conservation Service, helped prepare this section.

Soils affect the kind and amount of vegetation that

is available to wildlife as food and cover. They also

affect the construction of water impoundments. The

species and abundance of wildlife depend largely on

the amount and distribution of food, cover, and water.

The diversity of habitat types is of major importance.

Land use also is a factor. Florence County has a

diversity of wildlife habitats that sustain species suited

to wilderness forest areas as well as farmland. The

wooded wetlands scattered throughout the county add

to the diversity of habitats. The quality of wildlife

habitat improves where the upland forests are

associated with adjacent wetlands.

In general, the sandy soils have open areas, which

promote grass, shrub, and oak woodlands. Loamy and

silty soils favor sugar maple hardwood forests, which

have dense canopies and provide little understory food

and cover. Wildlife habitat can be created or improved

by maintaining the existing plant cover or by promoting

the natural establishment of desirable plants.

The majority of land in Florence County is forested.

The western one-third is part of the Nicolet National

Forest. Wildlife species in the densely canopied

hardwood forests include white-tailed deer, black bear,

gray wolf, bobcat, coyote, snowshoe hare, red squirrel,

flying squirrel, porcupine, and short-tailed shrew. The

fisher, reintroduced in the late 1960s, is now common

in the forests. Forest birds include thrushes, warblers,

vireos, pileated woodpeckers, great crested

flycatchers, broadwinged hawks, goshawks, bald

eagles, saw-whet owls, and barred owls.

The more open oak-aspen forest, which includes

scattered wetlands, provides excellent habitat for

white-tailed deer, black bear, coyote, bobcat,

snowshoe hare, red squirrels, gray squirrels,

porcupine, deer mice, and meadow voles. Maintaining

aspen of different age classes provides optimum food

and cover for these wildlife species. Birds that frequent

disturbed or open woodland areas include ruffed

grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, woodcock, upland

sandpipers, sparrows, towhee, indigo buntings,

chickadees, goldfinches, blue jays, red-tailed hawks,

and great horned owls.

Most agricultural land is in the eastern half of the

county. Cropland, pasture, hay fields, woodlots, and

edge areas provide specific habitat elements. Wildlife

species typical of agricultural areas include whitetailed deer, black bear, coyote, red fox, cottontail

rabbit, skunk, badger, woodchuck, raccoon, and

rodents. Grassland birds associated with agriculture

include meadowlarks, bluebirds, sparrows, and redtailed hawks. Ruffed grouse, wild turkeys, woodcock,

gray squirrels, and red squirrels are common in the

adjacent woodlots. Canada geese feed in the crop

fields during their annual migrations, and wild turkeys

rely on cropland for food during periods of deep snow.

Lakes, streams, wetlands, and riparian areas

provide important habitat for waterfowl, furbearers,

reptiles, and amphibians. Although the county is not on

a principal flyway, ducks and geese migrate through

the area. Wood ducks, mallards, black ducks, bluewinged teal, hooded mergansers, and great blue

herons are common in streams and beaver ponds

throughout the county. Loons, marsh birds, shore

birds, bald eagles, and osprey live and feed along the

larger lakes and rivers. White-tailed deer, black bear,

bobcat, snowshoe hare, red squirrels, raccoon, fisher,

otter, mink, beaver, muskrat, ruffed grouse, woodcock,
166 Soil Survey of

saw-whet owls, and red-shouldered hawks can be

found in areas of wetland and riparian habitat. Conifer

swamps and hemlock stands provide winter cover for

deer.

The paragraphs that follow provide some

generalized information about the kinds of wildlife and

wildlife habitat in areas of specific soils.

Most areas of the mucky organic soils, such as

Lupton soils, the loamy and silty lacustrine soils, such

as Annalake and Gastrow soils, and the loamy and

sandy soils that are relatively shallow over bedrock,

such as Metonga and Ishpeming soils, are woodland

or wetland. A few areas are cropland or pasture. The

major upland tree species are sugar maple, yellow

birch, American basswood, red maple, quaking aspen,

paper birch, balsam fir, northern red oak, eastern

white pine, red pine, jack pine, eastern hemlock, and

northern pin oak. Scattered wetlands contain northern

whitecedar, red maple, black spruce, balsam fir,

American elm, and tamarack. Areas of these soils

provide good habitat for wildlife species associated

with hardwood forest, open oak woodland, and

wetlands. Scattered areas of cropland and pasture

provide habitat for wildlife typical of agricultural areas.

Most areas of the silty and loamy till soils, such as

Goodwit, Sarona, and Wabeno soils, are private or

commercial woodland, county forest, or part of the

Nicolet National Forest. These soils support northern

hardwoods. The major tree species are sugar maple,

northern red oak, American basswood, white ash,

yellow birch, American elm, eastern hophornbeam,

red maple, eastern white pine, white spruce, black

cherry, and eastern hemlock. Aspen and paper birch

regenerate after logging, but these species are

commonly replaced by sugar maple and other

northern hardwoods. These upland areas produce

some of the best timber in the county but provide little

understory food and cover for wildlife. The habitat is

important for many canopy-nesting species of

songbirds and hardwood forest wildlife species.

Most areas of the loamy and silty outwash soils,

such as Padus, Pence, and Vanzile soils, are private

or commercial woodland or part of the Nicolet National

Forest. A few areas are wetland or cropland. The

variety of soil types and the pitted landscape result in

a diversity of wildlife habitats. The major tree species

are sugar maple, northern red oak, American

basswood, white ash, yellow birch, eastern hemlock,

American elm, red maple, black cherry, paper birch,

white spruce, eastern white pine, quaking aspen, and

balsam fir. Scattered wetlands, swales, and creek

bottoms support northern whitecedar, red maple,

American elm, balsam fir, black ash, tamarack, and

black spruce. Areas of these soils provide good habitat

for wildlife species associated with hardwood forest

and with some agricultural and wetland areas. The

endangered wood turtle has been observed in areas

of these soils.

Most areas of loamy, sandy, and silty soils, such as

Ellwood, Iosco, Padus, Sarona, and Vilas soils, are

private or commercial woodland, county forest, or

cropland. A few areas are wetland. The major tree

species are sugar maple, northern red oak, American

basswood, eastern hemlock, yellow birch, white ash,

paper birch, red pine, eastern white pine, red maple,

white spruce, quaking aspen, balsam fir, and northern

pin oak. Scattered wetlands support northern

whitecedar, balsam fir, black spruce, black ash, red

maple, American elm, and tamarack. These areas

provide good habitat for wildlife species associated

with hardwood forest, open oak woodland, agricultural

areas, and wetlands. Bald eagles feed below the dams

on the Menominee River. Most areas of the sandy and

loamy outwash soils, such as Pence and Vilas soils, are

private or commercial woodland or county forest. A few

areas are cropland or wetland. Areas of these soils

include a sandy “natural area” with unique vegetation.

The major tree species are jack pine and quaking

aspen. Northern pin oak (fig. 14), red pine, eastern white

pine, paper birch, red maple, northern red oak, white

spruce, and balsam fir are also included. Areas of these

soils provide excellent habitat for upland wildlife. Red

pine plantations are also common. Scattered wetlands

support northern whitecedar, balsam fir, black spruce,

tamarack, red maple, black ash, and American elm.

These soils provide habitat for wildlife species

associated with open oak woodland and with wetlands.

They are too sandy for woodcock, but they provide

habitat for the upland sandpiper, the sharp-tailed grouse,

and the endangered Karner blue butterfly. Scattered

areas of cropland provide habitat for wildlife typical of

agricultural areas.

The bogs scattered throughout much of the county

support some rare and interesting plants and wildlife

species that rely specifically on this type of habitat.

These areas generally support wetland plants, such

as leatherleaf, bog rosemary, pale laurel, Labrador

tea, and sphagnum moss. Tree species are generally

limited to scattered black spruce and tamarack

(fig. 15). Swamps generally support marsh grasses,

sedges, reeds, alder, and cattail. Tree species include

northern whitecedar, balsam fir, black ash, American

elm, and red maple. These areas provide good habitat

for wetland wildlife and are winter deer yarding areas.

In table 11, the soils in the survey area are rated

according to their potential for providing habitat for

various kinds of wildlife. This information can be used

in planning parks, wildlife refuges, nature study areas,
Florence County, Wisconsin 167

and other developments for wildlife; in selecting soils

that are suitable for establishing, improving, or

maintaining specific elements of wildlife habitat; and in

determining the intensity of management needed for

each element of the habitat.

The potential of the soil is rated good, fair, poor, or

very poor. A rating of good indicates that the element

or kind of habitat is easily established, improved, or

maintained. Few or no limitations affect management,

and satisfactory results can be expected. A rating of

fair indicates that the element or kind of habitat can be

established, improved, or maintained in most places.

Moderately intensive management is required for

satisfactory results. A rating of poor indicates that

limitations are severe for the designated element or

kind of habitat. Habitat can be created, improved, or

maintained in most places, but management is difficult

and must be intensive. A rating of very poor indicates

that restrictions for the element or kind of habitat are

very severe and that unsatisfactory results can be

expected. Creating, improving, or maintaining habitat

is impractical or impossible.

The elements of wildlife habitat are described in the

following paragraphs.

Grain and seed crops are domestic grains and

seed-producing herbaceous plants. Soil properties

and features that affect the growth of grain and seed

crops are depth of the root zone, texture of the surface

layer, available water capacity, wetness, slope, surface

stoniness, and flooding. Soil temperature and soil

Figure 14.—Northern pin oak in an area of Vilas loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes. Brackenfern is a common understory species on

this soil.
168 Soil Survey of

moisture also are considerations. Examples of grain

and seed crops are corn, wheat, oats, and barley.

Grasses and legumes are domestic perennial

grasses and herbaceous legumes. Soil properties and

features that affect the growth of grasses and legumes

are depth of the root zone, texture of the surface layer,

available water capacity, wetness, surface stoniness,

flooding, and slope. Soil temperature and soil moisture

also are considerations. Examples of grasses and

legumes are bluegrass, timothy, bromegrass, clover,

and alfalfa.

Wild herbaceous plants are native or naturally

established grasses and forbs, including weeds. Soil

properties and features that affect the growth of these

plants are depth of the root zone, texture of the

surface layer, available water capacity, wetness,

surface stoniness, and flooding. Soil temperature and

soil moisture also are considerations. Examples of wild

herbaceous plants are pigweed, lambsquarter,

goldenrod, and common yarrow.

Hardwood trees and woody understory produce

nuts or other fruit, buds, catkins, twigs, bark, and

foliage. Soil properties and features that affect the

growth of hardwood trees and shrubs are depth of the

Figure 15.—Leatherleaf and Labrador tea and stunted black spruce and tamarack in an area of Loxley, Beseman, and Dawson peats,

0 to 1 percent slopes.
Florence County, Wisconsin 169

root zone, available water capacity, and wetness.

Examples of these plants are oak, aspen, cherry,

dogwood, beaked hazelnut, raspberry, blackberry, and

blueberry. Examples of fruit-producing shrubs that are

suitable for planting on soils rated good are Russianolive, highbush cranberry, and crabapple.

Coniferous plants furnish browse and seeds. Soil

properties and features that affect the growth of

coniferous trees, shrubs, and ground cover are depth

of the root zone, available water capacity, and

wetness. Examples of coniferous plants are pine,

spruce, fir, cedar, and hemlock.

Wetland plants are annual and perennial wild

herbaceous plants that grow on moist or wet sites.

Submerged or floating aquatic plants are excluded.

Soil properties and features affecting wetland plants

are texture of the surface layer, wetness, reaction,

slope, and surface stoniness. Examples of wetland

plants are smartweed, wild millet, wild rice, cordgrass,

rushes, sedges, and reeds.

Shallow water areas have an average depth of less

than 5 feet. Some are naturally wet areas. Others are

created by dams, levees, or other water-control

structures. Soil properties and features affecting

shallow water areas are depth to bedrock, wetness,

surface stoniness, slope, and permeability. Examples

of shallow water areas are marshes, waterfowl feeding

areas, and ponds.

The habitat for various kinds of wildlife is described

in the following paragraphs.

Habitat for openland wildlife consists of cropland,

pasture, meadows, and areas that are overgrown with

grasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines. These areas

produce grain and seed crops, grasses and legumes,

and wild herbaceous plants. Wildlife attracted to these

areas include meadowlark, field sparrow, cottontail,

and red fox.

Habitat for woodland wildlife consists of areas of

deciduous and/or coniferous plants and associated

grasses, legumes, and wild herbaceous plants. Wildlife

attracted to these areas include ruffed grouse,

woodcock, thrushes, woodpeckers, squirrels,

snowshoe hare, raccoon, deer, and bear.

Habitat for wetland wildlife consists of open, marshy

or swampy shallow water areas. Some of the wildlife

attracted to such areas are ducks, geese, herons,

shore birds, muskrat, mink, and beaver.

Further information on habitat management for

different species of wildlife can be obtained from the

local office of the Natural Resources Conservation

Service or the Wisconsin Department of Natural

Resources.

Engineering

This section provides information for planning land

uses related to urban development and to water

management. Soils are rated for various uses, and the

most limiting features are identified. Ratings are given

for building site development, sanitary facilities,

construction materials, and water management. The

ratings are based on observed performance of the

soils and on the data in the tables described under the

heading “Soil Properties.”

Information in this section is intended for land use

planning, for evaluating land use alternatives, and for

planning site investigations prior to design and

construction. The information, however, has limitations.

For example, estimates and other data generally apply

only to that part of the soil within a depth of 5 or 6 feet.

Because of the map scale, small areas of different

soils may be included within the mapped areas of a

specific soil.

The information is not site specific and does not

eliminate the need for onsite investigation of the soils

or for testing and analysis by personnel experienced in

the design and construction of engineering works.

Government ordinances and regulations that

restrict certain land uses or impose specific design

criteria were not considered in preparing the

information in this section. Local ordinances and

regulations should be considered in planning, in site

selection, and in design.

Soil properties, site features, and observed

performance were considered in determining the

ratings in this section. During the fieldwork for this soil

survey, determinations were made about grain-size

distribution, liquid limit, plasticity index, soil reaction,

depth to bedrock, hardness of bedrock within 5 or 6

feet of the surface, soil wetness, depth to a seasonal

high water table, slope, likelihood of flooding, natural

soil structure aggregation, and soil density. Data were

collected about kinds of clay minerals, mineralogy of

the sand and silt fractions, and the kinds of adsorbed

cations. Estimates were made for erodibility,

permeability, corrosivity, shrink-swell potential,

available water capacity, and other behavioral

characteristics affecting engineering uses.

This information can be used to evaluate the

potential of areas for residential, commercial,

industrial, and recreational uses; make preliminary

estimates of construction conditions; evaluate

alternative routes for roads, streets, highways,

pipelines, and underground cables; evaluate

alternative sites for sanitary landfills, septic tank
170 Soil Survey of

absorption fields, and sewage lagoons; plan detailed

onsite investigations of soils and geology; locate

potential sources of gravel, sand, earthfill, and topsoil;

plan drainage systems, irrigation systems, ponds,

terraces, and other structures for soil and water

conservation; and predict performance of proposed

small structures and pavements by comparing the

performance of existing similar structures on the same

or similar soils.

The information in the tables, along with the soil

maps, the soil descriptions, and other data provided in

this survey, can be used to make additional

interpretations.

Some of the terms used in this soil survey have a

special meaning in soil science and are defined in the

Glossary.

Building Site Development

Table 12 shows the degree and kind of soil

limitations that affect shallow excavations, dwellings

with and without basements, small commercial

buildings, local roads and streets, and lawns and

landscaping. The limitations are considered slight if

soil properties and site features are generally

favorable for the indicated use and limitations are

minor and easily overcome; moderate if soil properties

or site features are not favorable for the indicated use

and special planning, design, or maintenance is

needed to overcome or minimize the limitations; and

severe if soil properties or site features are so

unfavorable or so difficult to overcome that special

design, significant increases in construction costs, and

possibly increased maintenance are required. Special

feasibility studies may be required where the soil

limitations are severe.

Shallow excavations are trenches or holes dug to a

maximum depth of 5 or 6 feet for basements, graves,

utility lines, open ditches, or other purposes. The

ratings are based on soil properties, site features, and

observed performance of the soils. The ease of

digging, filling, and compacting is affected by the depth

to bedrock, a cemented pan, or a very firm dense

layer; stone content; soil texture; and slope. The time

of the year that excavations can be made is affected

by the depth to a seasonal high water table and the

susceptibility of the soil to flooding. The resistance of

the excavation walls or banks to sloughing or caving is

affected by soil texture and depth to the water table.

Dwellings and small commercial buildings are

structures built on shallow foundations on undisturbed

soil. The load limit is the same as that for single-family

dwellings no higher than three stories. Ratings are

made for small commercial buildings without

basements, for dwellings with basements, and for

dwellings without basements. The ratings are based

on soil properties, site features, and observed

performance of the soils. A high water table, flooding,

shrinking and swelling, and organic layers can cause

the movement of footings. A high water table, depth to

bedrock or to a cemented pan, large stones, slope,

and flooding affect the ease of excavation and

construction. Landscaping and grading that require

cuts and fills of more than 5 or 6 feet are not

considered.

Local roads and streets have an all-weather surface

and carry automobile and light truck traffic all year.

They have a subgrade of cut or fill soil material; a base

of gravel, crushed rock, or stabilized soil material; and

a flexible or rigid surface. Cuts and fills are generally

limited to less than 6 feet. The ratings are based on

soil properties, site features, and observed

performance of the soils. Depth to bedrock or to a

cemented pan, a high water table, flooding, large

stones, and slope affect the ease of excavating and

grading. Soil strength (as inferred from the engineering

classification of the soil), shrink-swell potential, frost

action potential, and depth to a high water table affect

the traffic-supporting capacity.

Lawns and landscaping require soils on which turf

and ornamental trees and shrubs can be established

and maintained. The ratings are based on soil

properties, site features, and observed performance of

the soils. Soil reaction, a high water table, depth to

bedrock or to a cemented pan, and the available water

capacity in the upper 40 inches affect plant growth.

Flooding, wetness, slope, stoniness, and the amount

of sand, clay, or organic matter in the surface layer

affect trafficability after vegetation is established.

Sanitary Facilities

Table 13 shows the degree and kind of soil

limitations that affect septic tank absorption fields,

sewage lagoons, and sanitary landfills. The limitations

are considered slight if soil properties and site features

are generally favorable for the indicated use and

limitations are minor and easily overcome; moderate if

soil properties or site features are not favorable for the

indicated use and special planning, design, or

maintenance is needed to overcome or minimize the

limitations; and severe if soil properties or site features

are so unfavorable or so difficult to overcome that

special design, significant increases in construction

costs, and possibly increased maintenance are

required.
Florence County, Wisconsin 171

The table also shows the suitability of the soils for

use as daily cover for landfill. A rating of good

indicates that soil properties and site features are

favorable for the use and good performance and low

maintenance can be expected; fair indicates that soil

properties and site features are moderately favorable

for the use and one or more soil properties or site

features make the soil less desirable than the soils

rated good; and poor indicates that one or more soil

properties or site features are unfavorable for the use

and overcoming the unfavorable properties requires

special design, extra maintenance, or costly alteration.

Septic tank absorption fields are areas in which

effluent from a septic tank is distributed into the soil

through subsurface tiles or perforated pipe. Only that

part of the soil between depths of 24 and 72 inches is

evaluated. The ratings are based on soil properties,

site features, and observed performance of the soils.

Permeability, a high water table, depth to bedrock or to

a cemented pan, and flooding affect absorption of the

effluent. Large stones and bedrock or a cemented pan

interfere with installation.

Unsatisfactory performance of septic tank

absorption fields, including excessively slow

absorption of effluent, surfacing of effluent, and hillside

seepage, can affect public health. Ground water can

be polluted if highly permeable sand and gravel or

fractured bedrock is less than 4 feet below the base of

the absorption field, if slope is excessive, or if the

water table is near the surface. There must be

unsaturated soil material beneath the absorption field

to filter the effluent effectively. Many local ordinances

require that this material be of a certain thickness.

Sewage lagoons are shallow ponds constructed to

hold sewage while aerobic bacteria decompose the

solid and liquid wastes. Lagoons should have a nearly

level floor surrounded by cut slopes or embankments

of compacted soil. Lagoons generally are designed to

hold the sewage within a depth of 2 to 5 feet. Nearly

impervious soil material for the lagoon floor and sides

is required to minimize seepage and contamination of

ground water.

The table gives ratings for the natural soil that

makes up the lagoon floor. The surface layer and,

generally, 1 or 2 feet of soil material below the surface

layer are excavated to provide material for the

embankments. The ratings are based on soil

properties, site features, and observed performance of

the soils. Considered in the ratings are slope,

permeability, a high water table, depth to bedrock or to

a cemented pan, flooding, large stones, and content of

organic matter.

Excessive seepage resulting from rapid

permeability in the soil or a water table that is high

enough to raise the level of sewage in the lagoon

causes a lagoon to function unsatisfactorily. Pollution

results if seepage is excessive or if floodwater

overtops the lagoon. A high content of organic matter

is detrimental to proper functioning of the lagoon

because it inhibits aerobic activity. Slope, bedrock, and

cemented pans can cause construction problems, and

large stones can hinder compaction of the lagoon floor.

Sanitary landfills are areas where solid waste is

disposed of by burying it in soil. There are two types of

landfill—trench and area. In a trench landfill, the waste

is placed in a trench. It is spread, compacted, and

covered daily with a thin layer of soil excavated at the

site. In an area landfill, the waste is placed in

successive layers on the surface of the soil. The waste

is spread, compacted, and covered daily with a thin

layer of soil from a source away from the site.

Both types of landfill must be able to bear heavy

vehicular traffic. Both types involve a risk of groundwater pollution. Ease of excavation and revegetation

should be considered.

The ratings in the table are based on soil

properties, site features, and observed performance of

the soils. Permeability, depth to bedrock or to a

cemented pan, a high water table, slope, and flooding

affect both types of landfill. Texture, stones and

boulders, highly organic layers, and soil reaction affect

trench landfills. Unless otherwise stated, the ratings

apply only to that part of the soil within a depth of

about 6 feet. For deeper trenches, a limitation rated

slight or moderate may not be valid. Onsite

investigation is needed.

Daily cover for landfill is the soil material that is

used to cover compacted solid waste in an area

sanitary landfill. The soil material is obtained offsite,

transported to the landfill, and spread over the waste.

Soil texture, wetness, rock fragments, and slope

affect the ease of removing and spreading the material

during wet and dry periods. Loamy or silty soils that

are free of large stones or excess gravel are the best

cover for a landfill. Clayey soils are sticky or cloddy

and are difficult to spread; sandy soils are subject to

soil blowing.

After soil material has been removed, the soil

material remaining in the borrow area must be thick

enough over bedrock, a cemented pan, or the water

table to permit revegetation. The soil material used as

the final cover for a landfill should be suitable for

plants. The surface layer generally has the best

workability, more organic matter, and the best potential
172 Soil Survey of

for plants. Material from the surface layer should be

stockpiled for use as the final cover.

Construction Materials

Table 14 gives information about the soils as a

source of roadfill, sand, gravel, and topsoil. The soils

are rated good, fair, or poor as a source of roadfill and

topsoil. They are rated as a probable or improbable

source of sand and gravel. The ratings are based on

soil properties and site features that affect the removal

of the soil and its use as construction material. Normal

compaction, minor processing, and other standard

construction practices are assumed. Each soil is

evaluated to a depth of 5 or 6 feet.

Roadfill is soil material that is excavated in one

place and used in road embankments in another

place. In this table, the soils are rated as a source of

roadfill for low embankments, generally less than 6

feet high and less exacting in design than higher

embankments.

The ratings are for the soil material below the

surface layer to a depth of 5 or 6 feet. It is assumed

that soil layers will be mixed during excavating and

spreading. Many soils have layers of contrasting

suitability within their profile. The table showing

engineering index properties provides detailed

information about each soil layer. This information can

help to determine the suitability of each layer for use

as roadfill. The performance of soil after it is stabilized

with lime or cement is not considered in the ratings.

The ratings are based on soil properties, site

features, and observed performance of the soils. The

thickness of suitable material is a major consideration.

The ease of excavation is affected by large stones, a

high water table, and slope. How well the soil performs

in place after it has been compacted and drained is

determined by its strength (as inferred from the

engineering classification of the soil) and shrink-swell

potential.

Soils rated good contain significant amounts of

sand or gravel or both. They have at least 5 feet of

suitable material, a low shrink-swell potential, few

cobbles and stones, and slopes of 15 percent or less.

Depth to the water table is more than 3 feet. Soils

rated fair are more than 35 percent silt- and clay-sized

particles and have a plasticity index of less than 10.

They have a moderate shrink-swell potential, slopes of

15 to 25 percent, or many stones. Depth to the water

table is 1 to 3 feet. Soils rated poor have a plasticity

index of more than 10, a high shrink-swell potential,

many stones, or slopes of more than 25 percent. They

are wet and have a water table at a depth of less than

1 foot. They may have layers of suitable material, but

the material is less than 3 feet thick.

Sand and gravel are natural aggregates suitable for

commercial use with a minimum of processing. They

are used in many kinds of construction. Specifications

for each use vary widely. In table 14, only the

probability of finding material in suitable quantity is

evaluated. The suitability of the material for specific

purposes is not evaluated, nor are factors that affect

excavation of the material.

The properties used to evaluate the soil as a source

of sand or gravel are gradation of grain sizes (as

indicated by the engineering classification of the soil),

the thickness of suitable material, and the content of

rock fragments. Kinds of rock, acidity, and stratification

are given in the soil series descriptions. Gradation of

grain sizes is given in the table on engineering index

properties.

A soil rated as a probable source has a layer of

clean sand or gravel or a layer of sand or gravel that is

up to 12 percent silty fines. This material must be at

least 3 feet thick and less than 50 percent, by weight,

large stones. All other soils are rated as an improbable

source. Coarse fragments of soft bedrock, such as

shale and siltstone, are not considered to be sand and

gravel.

Topsoil is used to cover an area so that vegetation

can be established and maintained. The upper 40

inches of a soil is evaluated for use as topsoil. Also

evaluated is the reclamation potential of the borrow

area.

Plant growth is affected by toxic material and by

such properties as soil reaction, available water

capacity, and fertility. The ease of excavating, loading,

and spreading is affected by rock fragments, slope, a

water table, soil texture, and thickness of suitable

material. Reclamation of the borrow area is affected by

slope, a water table, rock fragments, bedrock, and

toxic material.

Soils rated good have friable, loamy material to a

depth of at least 40 inches. They are free of stones

and cobbles, have little or no gravel, and have slopes

of less than 8 percent. They are naturally fertile or

respond well to fertilizer and are not so wet that

excavation is difficult.

Soils rated fair are sandy soils, loamy soils that

have a relatively high content of clay, soils that have

only 20 to 40 inches of suitable material, soils that

have an appreciable amount of gravel or stones, or

soils that have slopes of 8 to 15 percent. The soils are

not so wet that excavation is difficult.

Soils rated poor are very sandy or clayey, have less

than 20 inches of suitable material, have a large
Florence County, Wisconsin 173

amount of gravel or stones, have slopes of more than

15 percent, or have a seasonal high water table at or

near the surface.

The surface layer of most soils is generally

preferred for topsoil because of its organic matter

content. Organic matter greatly increases the

absorption and retention of moisture and nutrients for

plant growth.

Water Management

Table 15 gives information on the soil properties

and site features that affect water management. The

degree and kind of soil limitations are given for pond

reservoir areas and for embankments, dikes, and

levees. The limitations are considered slight if soil

properties and site features are generally favorable for

the indicated use and limitations are minor and are

easily overcome; moderate if soil properties or site

features are not favorable for the indicated use and

special planning, design, or maintenance is needed to

overcome or minimize the limitations; and severe if soil

properties or site features are so unfavorable or so

difficult to overcome that special design, significant

increase in construction costs, and possibly increased

maintenance are required.

This table also gives for each soil the restrictive

features that affect drainage, irrigation, terraces and

diversions, and grassed waterways.

Pond reservoir areas hold water behind a dam or

embankment. Soils best suited to this use have low

seepage potential in the upper 60 inches. The

seepage potential is determined by the permeability of

the soil and the depth to fractured bedrock or other

permeable material. Excessive slope can affect the

storage capacity of the reservoir area.

Embankments, dikes, and levees are raised

structures of soil material, generally less than 20 feet

high, constructed to impound water or to protect land

against overflow. In this table, the soils are rated as a

source of material for embankment fill. The ratings

apply to the soil material below the surface layer to a

depth of about 5 feet. It is assumed that soil layers will

be uniformly mixed and compacted during

construction.

The ratings do not indicate the ability of the natural

soil to support an embankment. Soil properties to a

depth even greater than the height of the embankment

can affect performance and safety of the embankment.

Generally, deeper onsite investigation is needed to

determine these properties.

Soil material in embankments must be resistant to

seepage, piping, and erosion and have favorable

compaction characteristics. Unfavorable features

include less than 5 feet of suitable material and a high

content of stones or boulders or organic matter. A high

water table affects the amount of usable material. It

also affects trafficability.

Drainage is the removal of excess surface and

subsurface water from the soil. How easily and

effectively the soil is drained depends on the depth to

bedrock, to a cemented pan, or to other layers that

affect the rate of water movement; permeability; depth

to a high water table or depth of standing water if the

soil is subject to ponding; slope; susceptibility to

flooding; subsidence of organic layers; and the

potential for frost action. Excavating and grading and

the stability of ditchbanks are affected by depth to

bedrock or to a cemented pan, large stones, slope,

and the hazard of cutbanks caving. The productivity of

the soil after drainage is adversely affected by extreme

acidity or by toxic substances in the root zone.

Availability of drainage outlets is not considered in the

ratings.

Irrigation is the controlled application of water to

supplement rainfall and support plant growth. The

design and management of an irrigation system are

affected by depth to the water table, the need for

drainage, flooding, available water capacity, intake

rate, permeability, erosion hazard, and slope. The

construction of a system is affected by large stones

and depth to bedrock or to a cemented pan. The

performance of a system is affected by the depth of

the root zone and by soil reaction.

Terraces and diversions are embankments or a

combination of channels and ridges constructed

across a slope to control water erosion and conserve

moisture by intercepting runoff. Slope, wetness, large

stones, and depth to bedrock or to a cemented pan

affect the construction of terraces and diversions. A

restricted rooting depth, a severe hazard of soil

blowing or water erosion, an excessively coarse

texture, and restricted permeability adversely affect

maintenance.

Grassed waterways are natural or constructed

channels, generally broad and shallow, that conduct

surface water to outlets at a nonerosive velocity. Large

stones, wetness, slope, and depth to bedrock or to a

cemented pan affect the construction of grassed

waterways. A hazard of soil blowing, low available

water capacity, restricted rooting depth, toxic

substances, and restricted permeability adversely

affect the growth and maintenance of the grass after

construction.

175

Data relating to soil properties are collected during

the course of the soil survey.

Soil properties are ascertained by field examination

of the soils and by laboratory index testing of some

benchmark soils. Established standard procedures are

followed. During the survey, many shallow borings are

made and examined to identify and classify the soils

and to delineate them on the soil maps. Samples are

taken from some typical profiles and tested in the

laboratory to determine particle-size distribution,

plasticity, and compaction characteristics. These

results are reported in table 19.

Estimates of soil properties are based on field

examinations, on laboratory tests of samples from the

survey area, and on laboratory tests of samples of

similar soils in nearby areas. Tests verify field

observations, verify properties that cannot be

estimated accurately by field observation, and help to

characterize key soils.

The estimates of soil properties are shown in

tables. They include engineering index properties,

physical and chemical properties, and pertinent soil

and water features.

Engineering Index Properties

Table 16 gives the engineering classifications and

the range of index properties for the layers of each soil

in the survey area.

Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each

layer is indicated.

Texture is given in the standard terms used by the

U.S. Department of Agriculture. These terms are

defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and

clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2

millimeters in diameter (fig. 16). “Loam,” for example, is

soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt,

and less than 52 percent sand. If the content of

particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an

appropriate modifier is added, for example, “gravelly.”

Textural terms are defined in the Glossary.

Classification of the soils is determined according to

the Unified soil classification system (ASTM, 2001)

and the system adopted by the American Association

of State Highway and Transportation Officials

(AASHTO, 2000).

The Unified system classifies soils according to

properties that affect their use as construction

material. Soils are classified according to particle-size

distribution of the fraction less than 3 inches in

diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid limit,

and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils

are identified as GW, GP, GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and

SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and

OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting

engineering properties of two groups can have a dual

classification, for example, CL-ML.

The AASHTO system classifies soils according to

those properties that affect roadway construction and

maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral

soil that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified

in one of seven groups from A-1 through A-7 on the

basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and

plasticity index. Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained

and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At the other

Soil Properties

Figure 16.—Percentages of clay, silt, and sand in the basic

USDA soil textural classes.
176 Soil Survey of

extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly

organic soils are classified in group A-8 on the basis of

visual inspection.

If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and

A-7 groups are further classified as A-1-a, A-1-b,

A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an

additional refinement, the suitability of a soil as

subgrade material can be indicated by a group index

number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the

best subgrade material to 20 or higher for the poorest.

The AASHTO classification for soils tested, with group

index numbers in parentheses, is given in table 19.

Rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter

and 3 to 10 inches in diameter are indicated as a

percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The

percentages are estimates determined mainly by

converting volume percentage in the field to weight

percentage.

Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated

sieves is the percentage of the soil fraction less than 3

inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The

sieves, numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard

Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00, 0.420, and 0.074

millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on

laboratory tests of soils sampled in the survey area

and in nearby areas and on estimates made in the

field.

Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits)

indicate the plasticity characteristics of a soil. The

estimates are based on test data from the survey area

or from nearby areas and on field examination.

The estimates of particle-size distribution, liquid

limit, and plasticity index are generally rounded to the

nearest 5 percent. Thus, if the ranges of gradation and

Atterberg limits extend a marginal amount (1 or 2

percentage points) across classification boundaries,

the classification in the marginal zone is generally

omitted in the table.

Physical and Chemical Properties

Table 17 shows estimates of some characteristics

and features that affect soil behavior. These estimates

are given for the major layers of each soil in the survey

area. The estimates are based on field observations

and on test data for these and similar soils.

Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each

layer is indicated.

Clay as a soil separate consists of mineral soil

particles that are less than 0.002 millimeter in

diameter. In the table, the estimated clay content of

each major soil layer is given as a percentage, by

weight, of the soil material that is less than 2

millimeters in diameter.

The amount and kind of clay greatly affect the

fertility and physical condition of the soil. They

determine the ability of the soil to adsorb cations and

to retain moisture. They influence shrink-swell

potential, permeability, plasticity, the ease of soil

dispersion, and other soil properties. The amount and

kind of clay in a soil also affect tillage and earthmoving

operations.

Moist bulk density is the weight of soil (ovendry) per

unit volume. Volume is measured when the soil is at

field moisture capacity, that is, the moisture content at

1

/3-bar moisture tension. Weight is determined after the

soil is dried at 105 degrees C. In table 17, the

estimated moist bulk density of each major soil

horizon is expressed in grams per cubic centimeter of

soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter.

Bulk density data are used to compute shrink-swell

potential, available water capacity, total pore space,

and other soil properties. The moist bulk density of a

soil indicates the pore space available for water and

roots. A bulk density of more than 1.6 can restrict

water storage and root penetration. Moist bulk density

is influenced by texture, kind of clay, content of organic

matter, and soil structure.

Permeability (Ksat ) refers to the ability of a soil to

transmit water or air. The term “permeability,” as used

in soil surveys, indicates saturated hydraulic

conductivity (Ksat ). The estimates in the table indicate

the rate of water movement, in inches per hour, when

the soil is saturated. They are based on soil

characteristics observed in the field, particularly

structure, porosity, and texture. Permeability is

considered in the design of soil drainage systems and

septic tank absorption fields.

Available water capacity refers to the quantity of

water that the soil is capable of storing for use by

plants. The capacity for water storage is given in

inches of water per inch of soil for each major soil

layer. The capacity varies, depending on soil

properties that affect retention of water and depth of

the root zone. The most important properties are the

content of organic matter, soil texture, bulk density,

and soil structure. Available water capacity is an

important factor in the choice of plants or crops to be

grown and in the design and management of irrigation

systems. Available water capacity is not an estimate of

the quantity of water actually available to plants at any

given time.

Soil reaction is a measure of acidity or alkalinity and

is expressed as a range in pH values. The range in pH

of each major horizon is based on many field tests. For

many soils, values have been verified by laboratory

analyses. Soil reaction is important in selecting crops

and other plants, in evaluating soil amendments for
Florence County, Wisconsin 177

fertility and stabilization, and in determining the risk of

corrosion.

Shrink-swell potential is the potential for volume

change in a soil with a loss or gain in moisture. Volume

change occurs mainly because of the interaction of

clay minerals with water and varies with the amount

and type of clay minerals in the soil. The size of the

load on the soil and the magnitude of the change in

soil moisture content influence the amount of swelling

of soils in place. Laboratory measurements of swelling

of undisturbed clods were made for many soils. For

others, swelling was estimated on the basis of the kind

and amount of clay minerals in the soil and on the

basis of measurements of similar soils.

If the shrink-swell potential is rated moderate to

very high, shrinking and swelling can cause damage

to buildings, roads, and other structures. Special

design is often needed.

Shrink-swell potential classes are based on the

change in length of an unconfined clod as moisture

content is increased from air-dry to field capacity. The

classes are low, a change of less than 3 percent;

moderate, 3 to 6 percent; high, 6 to 9 percent; and

very high, greater than 9 percent.

Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil

to sheet and rill erosion by water. Factor K is one of six

factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation

(USLE) to predict the average annual rate of soil loss

by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year. The

estimates are based primarily on percentage of silt,

sand, and organic matter (up to 4 percent) and on soil

structure and permeability. Values of K range from

0.02 to 0.64. Other factors being equal, the higher the

value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill

erosion by water.

Erosion factor Kf indicates the erodibility of the fineearth fraction, or the material less than 2 millimeters in

size.

Erosion factor T is an estimate of the maximum

average annual rate of soil erosion by wind or water

that can occur without affecting crop productivity over

a sustained period. The rate is in tons per acre per

year.

Wind erodibility groups are made up of soils that

have similar properties affecting their resistance to soil

blowing in cultivated areas. The groups indicate the

susceptibility to soil blowing. The soils assigned to

group 1 are the most susceptible to soil blowing, and

those assigned to group 8 are the least susceptible.

The groups are as follows:

1. Coarse sands, sands, fine sands, and very fine

sands.

2. Loamy coarse sands, loamy sands, loamy fine

sands, loamy very fine sands, ash material, and sapric

soil material.

3. Coarse sandy loams, sandy loams, fine sandy

loams, and very fine sandy loams.

4L. Calcareous loams, silt loams, clay loams, and

silty clay loams.

4. Clays, silty clays, noncalcareous clay loams,

and silty clay loams that are more than 35 percent

clay.

5. Noncalcareous loams and silt loams that are

less than 20 percent clay and sandy clay loams, sandy

clays, and hemic soil material.

6. Noncalcareous loams and silt loams that are

more than 20 percent clay and noncalcareous clay

loams that are less than 35 percent clay.

7. Silts, noncalcareous silty clay loams that are

less than 35 percent clay, and fibric soil material.

8. Soils that are not subject to soil blowing

because of rock fragments on the surface or because

of surface wetness.

Organic matter is the plant and animal residue in

the soil at various stages of decomposition. In table

17, the estimated content of organic matter is

expressed as a percentage, by weight, of the soil

material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter.

The content of organic matter in a soil can be

maintained or increased by returning crop residue to

the soil. Organic matter affects the available water

capacity, infiltration rate, and tilth. It is a source of

nitrogen and other nutrients for crops.

Soil and Water Features

Table 18 gives estimates of various soil and water

features. The estimates are used in land use planning

that involves engineering considerations.

Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of

runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four

groups according to the rate of water infiltration when

the soils are not protected by vegetation, are

thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from longduration storms.

The four hydrologic soil groups are:

Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low

runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist

mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained

sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate

of water transmission.

Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate

when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of

moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or
178 Soil Survey of

well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to

moderately coarse texture. These soils have a

moderate rate of water transmission.

Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when

thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a

layer that impedes the downward movement of water

or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.

These soils have a slow rate of water transmission.

Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate

(high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These

consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell

potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that

have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface,

and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious

material. These soils have a very slow rate of water

transmission.

If a soil is assigned to two hydrologic groups in the

table, the first letter is for drained areas and the

second is for undrained areas.

Flooding, the temporary inundation of an area, is

caused by overflowing streams or by runoff from

adjacent slopes. Water standing for short periods after

rainfall or snowmelt is not considered flooding, and

water standing in swamps and marshes is considered

ponding rather than flooding.

The table gives the frequency and duration of

flooding and the time of year when flooding is most

likely.

Frequency, duration, and probable dates of

occurrence are estimated. Frequency is expressed as

none, rare, occasional, and frequent. None means that

flooding is not probable; rare that it is unlikely but

possible under unusual weather conditions (the

chance of flooding is nearly 0 percent to 5 percent in

any year); occasional that it occurs, on the average,

once or less in 2 years (the chance of flooding is 5 to

50 percent in any year); and frequent that it occurs, on

the average, more than once in 2 years (the chance of

flooding is more than 50 percent in any year). Duration

is expressed as very brief if less than 2 days, brief if 2

to 7 days, long if 7 days to 1 month, and very long if

more than 1 month. Probable dates are expressed in

months. About two-thirds to three-fourths of all flooding

occurs during the stated period.

The information is based on evidence in the soil

profile, namely thin strata of gravel, sand, silt, or clay

deposited by floodwater; irregular decrease in organic

matter content with increasing depth; and little or no

horizon development.

Also considered are local information about the

extent and levels of flooding and the relation of each

soil on the landscape to historic floods. Information on

the extent of flooding based on soil data is less

specific than that provided by detailed engineering

surveys that delineate flood-prone areas at specific

flood frequency levels.

High water table (seasonal) is the highest level of a

saturated zone in the soil in most years. The estimates

are based mainly on observations of the water table at

selected sites and on the evidence of a saturated

zone, namely grayish colors or mottles (redoximorphic

features) in the soil. Indicated in the table are depth to

the seasonal high water table, the kind of water table,

and the months of the year that the water table

commonly is high. A water table that is seasonally high

for less than 1 month is not indicated in the table.

An apparent water table is a thick zone of free water

in the soil. It is indicated by the level at which water

stands in an uncased borehole after adequate time is

allowed for adjustment in the surrounding soil. A

perched water table is water standing above an

unsaturated zone. In places an upper, or perched,

water table is separated from a lower one by a dry

zone.

Two numbers in the column showing depth to the

water table indicate the normal range in depth to a

saturated zone. Depth is given to the nearest half foot.

The first numeral in the range indicates the highest

water level. A plus sign preceding the range in depth

indicates that the water table is above the surface of

the soil. “More than 6.0” indicates that the water table

is below a depth of 6 feet or that it is within a depth of

6 feet for less than a month.

Depth to bedrock is given if bedrock is within a

depth of 5 feet. The depth is based on many soil

borings and on observations during soil mapping. The

rock is either soft or hard. If the rock is soft or

fractured, excavations can be made with trenching

machines, backhoes, or small rippers. If the rock is

hard or massive, blasting or special equipment

generally is needed for excavation.

Subsidence is the settlement of organic soils or of

saturated mineral soils of very low density. Subsidence

generally results from either desiccation and

shrinkage or oxidation of organic material, or both,

following drainage. Subsidence takes place gradually,

usually over a period of several years. The table shows

the expected total subsidence, which usually is a

result of drainage and oxidation.

Potential frost action is the likelihood of upward or

lateral expansion of the soil caused by the formation of

segregated ice lenses (frost heave) and the

subsequent collapse of the soil and loss of strength on

thawing. Frost action occurs when moisture moves

into the freezing zone of the soil. Temperature, texture,

density, permeability, content of organic matter, and
Florence County, Wisconsin 179

depth to the water table are the most important factors

considered in evaluating the potential for frost action. It

is assumed that the soil is not insulated by vegetation

or snow and is not artificially drained. Silty and highly

structured, clayey soils that have a high water table in

winter are the most susceptible to frost action. Well

drained, very gravelly, or very sandy soils are the least

susceptible. Frost heave and low soil strength during

thawing cause damage mainly to pavements and other

rigid structures.

Risk of corrosion pertains to potential soil-induced

electrochemical or chemical action that dissolves or

weakens uncoated steel or concrete. The rate of

corrosion of uncoated steel is related to such factors

as soil moisture, particle-size distribution, acidity, and

electrical conductivity of the soil. The rate of corrosion

of concrete is based mainly on the texture, moisture

content, and acidity of the soil. Special site

examination and design may be needed if the

combination of factors results in a severe hazard of

corrosion. The steel in installations that intersect soil

boundaries or soil layers is more susceptible to

corrosion than steel in installations that are entirely

within one kind of soil or within one soil layer.

For uncoated steel, the risk of corrosion, expressed

as low, moderate, or high, is based on soil drainage

class, total acidity, electrical resistivity near field

capacity, and electrical conductivity of the saturation

extract.

For concrete, the risk of corrosion also is expressed

as low, moderate, or high. It is based on soil texture,

acidity, and amount of sulfates in the saturation

extract.

Engineering Index Test Data

Table 19 shows laboratory test data for several

pedons sampled at carefully selected sites in the

survey area. The pedons are representative of the

series described in the section “Soil Series and Their

Morphology.” The soil samples were tested by the

Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Division of

Highways and Transportation Facilities.

The testing methods generally are those of the

American Association of State Highway and

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) or the American

Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).

The tests and methods are Moisture density—T 99

(AASHTO), D 698 (ASTM); Mechanical analysis—T 88

(AASHTO), D 422 (ASTM), D 2217 (ASTM); Liquid

limit—T 89 (AASHTO), D 4318 (ASTM); Plasticity

index—T 90 (AASHTO), D 4318 (ASTM); AASHTO

classification—M 145 (AASHTO), D 3282 (ASTM); and

Unified classification—D 2487 (ASTM).

181

The system of soil classification used by the

National Cooperative Soil Survey has six categories

(Soil Survey Staff, 1999). Beginning with the broadest,

these categories are the order, suborder, great group,

subgroup, family, and series. Classification is based on

soil properties observed in the field or inferred from

those observations or from laboratory measurements.

Table 20 shows the classification of the soils in the

survey area. The categories are defined in the

following paragraphs.

ORDER. Twelve soil orders are recognized. The

differences among orders reflect the dominant soilforming processes and the degree of soil formation.

Each order is identified by a word ending in sol. An

example is Spodosol.

SUBORDER. Each order is divided into suborders

primarily on the basis of properties that influence soil

genesis and are important to plant growth or

properties that reflect the most important variables

within the orders. The last syllable in the name of a

suborder indicates the order. An example is Aquod

(Aqu, meaning water, plus od, from Spodosol).

GREAT GROUP. Each suborder is divided into

great groups on the basis of close similarities in kind,

arrangement, and degree of development of

pedogenic horizons; soil moisture and temperature

regimes; type of saturation; and base status. Each

great group is identified by the name of a suborder

and by a prefix that indicates a property of the soil. An

example is Endoaquods (Endo, referring to

endosaturation, plus aquod, the suborder of the

Spodosols that has aquic conditions).

SUBGROUP. Each great group has a typic

subgroup. Other subgroups are intergrades or

extragrades. The typic subgroup is the central concept

of the great group; it is not necessarily the most

extensive. Intergrades are transitions to other orders,

suborders, or great groups. Extragrades have some

properties that are not representative of the great

group but do not indicate transitions to any other

taxonomic class. Each subgroup is identified by one or

more adjectives preceding the name of the great

group. The adjective Typic identifies the subgroup that

typifies the great group. An example is Typic

Endoaquods.

FAMILY. Families are established within a

subgroup on the basis of physical and chemical

properties and other characteristics that affect

management. Generally, the properties are those of

horizons below plow depth where there is much

biological activity. Among the properties and

characteristics considered are particle-size class,

mineralogy class, cation-exchange activity class, soil

temperature regime, soil depth, and reaction class. A

family name consists of the name of a subgroup

preceded by terms that indicate soil properties. An

example is sandy, mixed, frigid Typic Endoaquods.

SERIES. The series consists of soils within a

family that have horizons similar in color, texture,

structure, reaction, consistence, mineral and chemical

composition, and arrangement in the profile.

Soil Series and Their Morphology

In this section, each soil series recognized in the

survey area is described. Characteristics of the soil

and the material in which it formed are identified for

each series. A pedon, a small three-dimensional area

of soil, that is typical of the series in the survey area is

described. The detailed description of each soil

horizon follows standards in the “Soil Survey Manual”

(Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993). Many of the

technical terms used in the descriptions are defined in

“Soil Taxonomy” (Soil Survey Staff, 1999) and in “Keys

to Soil Taxonomy” (Soil Survey Staff, 1994). Unless

otherwise indicated, colors in the descriptions are for

moist soil. Following the pedon description is the range

of important characteristics of the soils in the series.

Annalake Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderate

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Primarily loamy deposits underlain by

stratified lacustrine deposits

Slope range: 0 to 15 percent

Classification of the Soils
182 Soil Survey of

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Annalake fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 1,800 feet south and 1,650 feet east of

the northwest corner of sec. 33, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

A—0 to 3 inches; very dark gray (10YR 3/1) fine sandy

loam, gray (10YR 5/1) dry; moderate medium and

coarse granular structure; friable; many very fine

and fine roots; strongly acid; abrupt broken

boundary.

E—3 to 6 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) fine sandy loam,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak very thick platy

structure parting to moderate medium subangular

blocky; friable; many very fine and fine roots;

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs1—6 to 9 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) fine sandy

loam; moderate medium and coarse subangular

blocky structure; friable; many very fine and fine

roots; very strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—9 to 17 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) fine sandy

loam; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; common very fine and fine roots;

very strongly acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

E/B—17 to 31 inches; 75 percent brown (10YR 5/3)

fine sandy loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3)

dry; moderate thin platy structure; friable; tonguing

into and surrounding remnants of dark yellowish

brown (10YR 4/4) fine sandy loam (Bt); moderate

medium subangular blocky structure; friable; few

very fine and fine roots; few distinct dark brown

(7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of some peds; very

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bt—31 to 39 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam;

moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; few faint dark brown (7.5YR 3/4)

clay films on faces of some peds; few fine distinct

strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron

accumulation; strongly acid; abrupt wavy

boundary.

C—39 to 60 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4 and 5/4),

stratified fine sand, very fine sand, loamy very fine

sand, very fine sandy loam, and silt loam;

massive; friable; few fine distinct strong brown

(7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron accumulation;

moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 30 to more than 60 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—fine sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—5

Chroma—2

Texture—fine sandy loam or loamy fine sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sandy loam or fine sandy loam

E ́ part of E/B horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—5

Chroma—3

Texture—loamy sand, loamy fine sand, sandy

loam, or fine sandy loam

Bt horizon and Bt part of E/B horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4

Chroma—4

Texture—fine sandy loam or sandy loam

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—3 or 4

Texture—stratified fine sand, very fine sand, loamy

very fine sand, very fine sandy loam, and silt

loam

Au Gres Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Permeability: Rapid

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Parent material: Primarily sandy glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 2 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid Typic

Endoaquods
Florence County, Wisconsin 183

Typical Pedon

Au Gres loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes,

approximately 2,000 feet north and 300 feet east of

the southwest corner of sec. 14, T. 38 N., R. 17 E.

Oa—0 to 2 inches; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 40

percent fiber, 10 percent rubbed; weak medium

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and few medium and coarse roots; extremely

acid (pH 4.3 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth

boundary.

E—2 to 7 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) loamy

sand, light gray (10YR 7/1) dry; weak thick platy

structure; very friable; common very fine and fine

and few medium and coarse roots; very strongly

acid; abrupt irregular boundary.

Bhs—7 to 8 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/3) loamy

sand; weak fine subangular blocky structure; very

friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; few fine distinct strong

brown (7.5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation;

very strongly acid; abrupt broken boundary.

Bs—8 to 17 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) loamy

sand; weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common very fine and fine

and few medium and coarse roots; many medium

and coarse distinct strong brown (7.5YR 4/6)

masses of iron accumulation; strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

BC—17 to 26 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) sand;

weak coarse subangular blocky structure; very

friable; few very fine and fine roots; many medium

and coarse distinct yellowish red (5YR 4/6)

masses of iron accumulation and common fine

and medium distinct brown (7.5YR 4/2) iron

depletions; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

C—26 to 62 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4)

sand; single grain; loose; many coarse prominent

yellowish red (5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation and many medium and coarse

brown (7.5YR 5/2) iron depletions; moderately

acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—loamy sand

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—loamy sand

Bhs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—2 or 3

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—loamy sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand or sand

C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 8

Texture—sand

Beseman Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

organic material; moderately slow in the

substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Sphagnum moss and herbaceous

organic material 16 to 51 inches thick over loamy

or silty deposits

Slope range: 0 to 1 percent

Taxonomic classification: Loamy, mixed, dysic Terric

Borosaprists

Typical Pedon

Beseman peat, in an area of Loxley, Beseman, and

Dawson peats, 0 to 1 percent slopes, approximately

1,995 feet west and 1,200 feet south of the northeast

corner of sec. 28, T. 38 N., R. 13 E., in Forest County,

Wisconsin:
184 Soil Survey of

Oi—0 to 12 inches; peat, dark brown (10YR 3/3)

broken face and rubbed; about 90 percent fiber, 50

percent rubbed; weak coarse subangular blocky

structure; very friable; many fine roots; fibers are

primarily sphagnum moss; extremely acid (pH 4.0

in water 1:1); clear wavy boundary.

Oa1—12 to 22 inches; muck, dark reddish brown (5YR

2.5/2) broken face and rubbed; about 45 percent

fiber, 5 percent rubbed; weak coarse subangular

blocky structure; friable; few fine roots; fibers are

primarily herbaceous; extremely acid (pH 4.0 in

water 1:1); gradual wavy boundary.

Oa2—22 to 36 inches; muck, black (5YR 2.5/1) broken

face and rubbed; about 40 percent fiber, 5 percent

rubbed; moderate coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; few fine roots; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 10 percent mineral material;

extremely acid (pH 4.0 in water 1:1); abrupt wavy

boundary.

Cg—36 to 60 inches; dark gray (5Y 4/1) silt loam;

massive; friable; about 3 percent gravel; few highly

decomposed root fibers in channels; very strongly

acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the organic material: 16 to 51 inches

Kind of organic material: Upper layer—peat; lower

layers—dominantly muck (thin layers of mucky

peat or peat in some pedons)

Content of woody fragments: 0 to 10 percent

Oi horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—peat

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—muck

C horizon:

Hue—5Y, 2.5Y, 10YR, or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 to 3

Texture—silt loam, loam, sandy loam, or fine

sandy loam

Capitola Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate or moderately slow in the

solum and moderately slow in the substratum

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

sandy or loamy glacial till or glacial mudflow

sediment

Slope range: 0 to 2 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Mollic Epiaqualfs

Typical Pedon

Capitola muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes, very stony,

approximately 1,900 feet north and 2,110 feet west of

the southeast corner of sec. 25, T. 40 N., R. 16 E.

Oa—0 to 5 inches; muck, black (10YR 2/1) broken

face, very dark brown (10YR 2/2) rubbed; about

30 percent fiber, 5 percent rubbed; weak medium

subangular blocky structure; very friable; many

very fine and fine roots; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; very strongly acid (pH 4.7 in water

1:1); abrupt smooth boundary.

Bg—5 to 20 inches; dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) silt

loam; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; few very fine and fine roots; few

fine prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/6)

masses of iron accumulation; about 1 percent

gravel and 1 percent cobbles; very strongly acid;

clear wavy boundary.

2Btg—20 to 34 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/2) sandy loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; few faint dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) clay films

on faces of some peds; many medium prominent

yellowish red (5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation and common fine and medium

prominent grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) iron

depletions; about 5 percent gravel and 1 percent

cobbles; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

2C—34 to 60 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) gravelly

sandy loam; massive; friable; many medium

prominent yellowish red (5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation and common medium prominent

grayish brown (10YR 5/2) iron depletions; about

20 percent gravel and 1 percent cobbles;

moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 40 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 15 to 36 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 10 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 5 to 25 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 15 percent throughout the

profile
Florence County, Wisconsin 185

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 or 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—muck

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR

Value—2 or 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

Bg horizon:

Hue—2.5Y, 10YR, or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

2Btg horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—sandy loam or gravelly sandy loam

2C horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 to 4

Texture—sandy loam, loamy sand, gravelly sandy

loam, or gravelly loamy sand

Cathro Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Permeability: Moderately slow to moderately rapid in

the organic material; moderately slow or moderate

in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Herbaceous organic material 16 to 51

inches thick over loamy or silty deposits

Slope range: 0 to 1 percent

Taxonomic classification: Loamy, mixed, euic Terric

Borosaprists

Typical Pedon

Cathro muck, in an area of Lupton, Cathro, and

Markey mucks, 0 to 1 percent slopes, approximately

150 feet east and 2,300 feet south of the northwest

corner of sec. 30, T. 35 N., R. 15 E., in Forest County,

Wisconsin:

Oa1—0 to 8 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken face

and rubbed; about 45 percent fiber, 9 percent

rubbed; moderate fine granular structure; very

friable; many fine and very fine and common

medium roots; fibers are primarily herbaceous;

neutral (pH 7.0 in water 1:1); clear wavy

boundary.

Oa2—8 to 16 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken

face, black (10YR 2/1) rubbed; about 40 percent

fiber, 4 percent rubbed; moderate fine granular

structure; very friable; common fine and very fine

and few medium roots; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; neutral (pH 6.9 in water 1:1); clear

wavy boundary.

Oa3—16 to 30 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken

face, black (10YR 2/1) rubbed; about 40 percent

fiber, 4 percent rubbed; weak medium subangular

blocky structure; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 3 percent mineral material;

neutral (pH 7.2 in water 1:1); abrupt wavy

boundary.

Cg1—30 to 37 inches; gray (5Y 5/1) silt loam; massive;

friable; black (10YR 2/1) organic staining in the

upper one-half inch; slightly alkaline; abrupt wavy

boundary.

Cg2—37 to 45 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2)

sandy loam; massive; friable; few fine distinct

yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) masses of iron

accumulation; about 4 percent gravel; slightly

alkaline; gradual wavy boundary.

C—45 to 60 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) sandy loam;

massive; friable; common medium distinct dark

yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) masses of iron

accumulation; about 4 percent gravel; slightly

alkaline.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the organic material: 16 to 51 inches

Kind of organic material: Dominantly muck; thin layers

of mucky peat or peat in some pedons

Content of woody fragments: 0 to 10 percent

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—muck

C horizon:

Hue—5Y, 2.5Y, 10YR, or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 to 3

Texture—sandy loam, fine sandy loam, very fine

sandy loam, silt loam, silty clay loam, clay loam,

or loam
186 Soil Survey of

Crossett Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Permeability: Moderately slow

Landform: Moraines

Parent material: Silty deposits underlain by silty, loamy,

or clayey glacial till

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Fine-loamy, mixed

Glossaquic Eutroboralfs

Typical Pedon

Crossett silt loam, in an area of Ellwood-Crossett silt

loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes, approximately 1,420 feet

north and 1,170 feet west of the southeast corner of

sec. 3, T. 38 N., R. 18 E.

Ap—0 to 9 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/2) silt loam, pinkish

gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak fine subangular blocky

structure; friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; about 4 percent gravel;

neutral; abrupt smooth boundary.

E/B—9 to 19 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 5/2) silt

loam (E), pinkish gray (7.5YR 7/2) dry; moderate

thick platy structure; friable; many fine and

medium prominent yellowish red (5YR 4/6)

masses of iron accumulation; extending into and

surrounding remnants of reddish brown (5YR 4/4)

silty clay loam (Bt); moderate medium prismatic

structure parting to strong fine angular blocky;

firm; common very fine and fine and few medium

and coarse roots; common fine and medium

distinct yellowish red (5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation; about 4 percent gravel; slightly acid;

clear wavy boundary.

Bt1—19 to 30 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; moderate medium prismatic

structure parting to strong fine and medium

angular blocky; firm; few very fine, fine, medium,

and coarse roots; common faint dark reddish

brown (5YR 3/4) and reddish brown (5YR 4/3) clay

films on faces of peds and in some pores; few fine

and medium distinct yellowish red (5YR 4/6)

masses of iron accumulation; few fine prominent

grayish brown (10YR 5/2) iron depletions; few soft

black (N 2.5/0) masses (iron-manganese oxides);

about 5 percent gravel; slightly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

Bt2—30 to 38 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; moderate medium prismatic

structure parting to strong fine and medium

angular blocky; firm; few very fine, fine, and

medium roots; common faint reddish brown (5YR

4/3) clay films on faces of some peds and in some

pores; few fine distinct yellowish red (5YR 4/6)

masses of iron accumulation; few soft black (N

2.5/0) masses (iron-manganese oxides); about 5

percent gravel; neutral; clear wavy boundary.

Btk1—38 to 62 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; weak coarse prismatic structure

parting to strong medium and coarse angular

blocky; firm; few very fine and fine roots; few faint

reddish brown (5YR 4/3) clay films on faces of

some peds and in some pores; few soft black (N

2.5/0) masses (iron-manganese oxides); about 10

percent gravel; strongly effervescent; slightly

alkaline; gradual wavy boundary.

Btk2—62 to 80 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; weak coarse prismatic structure

parting to strong medium and coarse angular

blocky; firm; few very fine and fine roots; few faint

reddish brown (5YR 4/3) clay films on faces of

peds; few soft black (N 2.5/0) masses (ironmanganese oxides); about 5 percent gravel;

strongly effervescent; moderately alkaline.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 40 to more than 80 inches

Depth to carbonates: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent throughout the

profile

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Ap horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam

E part of E/B horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam, loam, or fine sandy loam

Bt horizon, Bt part of E/B horizon, and Btk horizon:

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty clay

loam, silty clay, or clay

C horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam, loam, clay loam, silty clay

loam, silty clay, or clay
Florence County, Wisconsin 187

Croswell Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Rapid

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Parent material: Primarily sandy glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid

Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Croswell loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes,

approximately 100 feet north and 3,050 feet east of

the southwest corner of sec. 13, T. 38 N., R. 17 E.

Oa—0 to 2 inches; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 35

percent fiber, 10 percent rubbed; weak medium

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and few medium and coarse roots; extremely

acid (pH 4.3 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth

boundary.

E—2 to 5 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) loamy sand,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak fine subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine and few medium roots; extremely acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs1—5 to 12 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) loamy

sand; weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common very fine and fine

and few medium roots; very strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

Bs2—12 to 21 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sand; weak

medium and coarse subangular blocky structure;

very friable; few very fine and fine roots;

moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

BC—21 to 27 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) sand;

weak coarse subangular blocky structure; very

friable; moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

C—27 to 62 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) sand;

many coarse prominent strong brown (7.5YR 5/8)

masses of iron accumulation; single grain; loose;

slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 42 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—loamy sand

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—loamy sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand or sand

C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—sand

Cublake Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the upper

layers; moderate or moderately slow in the lower

layer

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

stream terraces

Parent material: Sandy glacial outwash underlain by

stratified lacustrine deposits

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid

Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Cublake loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes,

approximately 3,800 feet north and 3,000 feet east of

the southwest corner of sec. 7, T. 38 N., R. 18 E.

A—0 to 3 inches; black (10YR 2/1) loamy sand, dark

gray (10YR 4/1) dry; weak fine granular structure;

very friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; about 1 percent gravel;

very strongly acid; clear smooth boundary.
188 Soil Survey of

E—3 to 4 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/2) loamy sand,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak fine subangular

blocky structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and few medium and coarse roots; about 1

percent gravel; very strongly acid; abrupt broken

boundary.

Bs1—4 to 10 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) loamy

sand; weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common very fine and fine

and few medium and coarse roots; about 3

percent gravel; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—10 to 23 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) loamy sand;

weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common very fine and fine

and few medium and coarse roots; about 3

percent gravel; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

BC—23 to 32 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4)

sand; single grain; loose; few fine roots; about 8

percent gravel; moderately acid; abrupt wavy

boundary.

C1—32 to 40 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4)

sand; single grain; loose; few fine prominent strong

brown (7.5YR 5/8) masses of iron accumulation;

about 8 percent gravel; moderately acid; abrupt

wavy boundary.

C2—40 to 48 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) fine

sand with thin strata of very fine sand; massive;

very friable; few fine and medium prominent strong

brown (7.5YR 5/8) masses of iron accumulation;

moderately acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

2C3—48 to 60 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4), stratified

very fine sandy loam and silt loam with a few thin

strata of very fine sand; massive; friable; many fine

distinct strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron

accumulation; strongly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 40 inches

Thickness of the sandy mantle: 40 to 60 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent in the sandy glacial

outwash and 0 to 5 percent in the stratified

lacustrine deposits

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—loamy sand

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—sand or loamy sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sand or loamy sand

C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sand or fine sand with thin strata of very

fine sand

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—stratified very fine sandy loam and silt

loam with a few thin strata of very fine sand

Dawson Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Permeability: Moderately slow to moderately rapid in

the organic material; rapid in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Sphagnum moss and herbaceous

organic material 16 to 51 inches thick over sandy

or sandy and gravelly deposits

Slope range: 0 to 1 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy or sandy-skeletal,

mixed, dysic Terric Borosaprists

Typical Pedon

Dawson peat, in an area of Loxley, Beseman, and

Dawson peats, 0 to 1 percent slopes, approximately

3,000 feet north and 10 feet west of the southeast

corner of sec. 7, T. 38 N., R. 18 E.

Oi—0 to 10 inches; peat, dark reddish brown (5YR

3/4) broken face and rubbed; about 95 percent

fiber, 90 percent rubbed; massive; very friable;

fibers are primarily sphagnum moss; extremely

acid (pH 4.3 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth

boundary.

Oa1—10 to 29 inches; muck, dark reddish brown (5YR

2.5/2) broken face and rubbed; about 40 percent
Florence County, Wisconsin 189

fiber, 5 percent rubbed; massive; very friable;

fibers are primarily herbaceous; extremely acid

(pH 4.3 in water 1:1); clear smooth boundary.

Oa2—29 to 44 inches; muck, dark reddish brown (5YR

2.5/2) broken face and rubbed; about 30 percent

fiber, 7 percent rubbed; massive; very friable;

fibers are primarily herbaceous; about 5 percent

sand; extremely acid (pH 4.3 in water 1:1); abrupt

smooth boundary.

C—44 to 60 inches; brown (10YR 4/3) sand; single

grain; loose; few thin strata and pockets of loamy

fine sand; very strongly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the organic material: 16 to 51 inches

Kind of organic material: Upper layer—peat; lower

layers—dominantly muck (thin layers of mucky

peat or peat in some pedons)

Content of woody fragments: 0 to 10 percent

Oi horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—2 to 4

Texture—peat

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—muck

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—0 to 4

Texture—sand, fine sand, loamy fine sand, loamy

sand, gravelly loamy sand, or gravelly sand

Ellwood Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderately slow

Landform: Moraines

Parent material: Silty deposits underlain by silty, loamy,

or clayey glacial till

Slope range: 1 to 15 percent

Taxonomic classification: Fine-loamy, mixed

Oxyaquic Eutroboralfs

Typical Pedon

Ellwood silt loam (fig. 17), in an area of EllwoodCrossett silt loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 1,290 feet west and 1,500 feet north of

the southeast corner of sec. 3, T. 38 N., R. 18 E.

Ap—0 to 8 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) silt loam,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak medium

subangular blocky structure; friable; common fine

and few medium and coarse roots; about 8

percent gravel; moderately acid; abrupt smooth

boundary.

B/E—8 to 15 inches; 80 percent dark reddish brown

(5YR 3/4) clay loam (Bt); moderate medium

prismatic structure parting to strong fine angular

blocky; firm; many faint reddish brown (5YR 4/4)

clay films on faces of peds and in some pores;

penetrated by reddish brown (5YR 4/3) silt loam

(E), pink (5YR 7/3) dry; moderate medium platy

structure; friable; common fine and few medium

and coarse roots; few fine distinct yellowish red

(5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation; few soft

black (N 2.5/0) masses (iron-manganese oxides);

about 3 percent gravel; neutral; clear wavy

boundary.

Bt1—15 to 25 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

clay loam; moderate medium prismatic structure

parting to strong fine angular blocky; firm;

common fine and few medium and coarse roots;

many faint reddish brown (5YR 4/4) clay films on

faces of peds and in pores; few fine distinct

yellowish red (5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation; few soft black (N 2.5/0) masses

(iron-manganese oxides); about 2 percent gravel;

slightly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bt2—25 to 35 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; moderate medium prismatic

structure parting to strong very fine and fine

angular blocky; firm; many faint reddish brown

(5YR 4/4) clay films on faces of peds and in pores;

few soft black (N 2.5/0) masses (iron-manganese

oxides); about 2 percent gravel; neutral; abrupt

smooth boundary.

Btk1—35 to 42 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; moderate medium prismatic

structure parting to strong very fine and fine

angular blocky; firm; common faint reddish brown

(5YR 4/4) clay films on faces of peds and in pores;

few soft black (N 2.5/0) masses (iron-manganese

oxides); few reddish brown (5YR 5/4) calcium

carbonate accumulations in soft mycelial masses;

about 2 percent gravel; slightly effervescent;

moderately alkaline; abrupt smooth boundary.

Btk2—42 to 51 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; moderate medium prismatic

structure parting to strong very fine and fine

angular blocky; firm; common faint reddish brown
190 Soil Survey of

(5YR 4/4) clay films on faces of some peds and in

some pores; few soft black (N 2.5/0) masses (ironmanganese oxides); common reddish brown (5YR

5/4) calcium carbonate accumulations in soft

mycelial masses; about 11 percent gravel; slightly

effervescent; moderately alkaline; abrupt smooth

boundary.

Btk3—51 to 80 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; weak coarse prismatic structure

parting to strong medium and coarse angular

blocky; firm; common faint reddish brown (5YR

4/4) clay films on faces of some peds and in some

pores; few soft black (N 2.5/0) masses (ironmanganese oxides); common reddish brown (5YR

5/4) calcium carbonate accumulations in soft

mycelial masses; about 5 percent gravel; slightly

effervescent; moderately alkaline.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 40 to more than 80 inches

Depth to carbonates: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent throughout the

profile

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Ap horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam

E part of B/E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 to 3

Texture—silt loam or loam

Bt horizon, Bt part of B/E horizon, and Btk horizon:

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam, loam, silty clay loam, clay

loam, silty clay, or clay

C horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam, loam, silty clay loam, clay

loam, silty clay, or clay

Fence Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the solum; moderately slow

in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

stratified lacustrine deposits

Slope range: 0 to 6 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-silty, mixed, frigid

Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Fence silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes, approximately

2,370 feet east and 1,080 feet north of the southwest

corner of sec. 12, T. 40 N., R. 15 E.

A—0 to 2 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) silt loam,

brown (7.5YR 5/2) dry; moderate fine granular

structure; friable; many fine roots; moderately acid;

clear wavy boundary.

E—2 to 6 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) silt loam, pinkish

gray (7.5YR 7/2) dry; moderate fine subangular

blocky structure; friable; many fine roots; very

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs—6 to 14 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate fine subangular blocky structure; friable;

common fine roots; very strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

E ́—14 to 20 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/3) silt loam, pink

(7.5YR 7/3) dry; moderate thin platy structure;

friable; few fine roots; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

E/B—20 to 25 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 5/3)

silt loam (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry; moderate thin

platy structure; friable; tonguing into and

surrounding remnants of reddish brown (5YR 4/4)

silt loam (Bt); moderate fine subangular blocky

structure; friable; few fine roots; few distinct

yellowish red (5YR 4/6) clay films on faces of

some peds; strongly acid; clear irregular boundary.

B/E—25 to 42 inches; 70 percent reddish brown (5YR

4/4) silt loam (Bt); strong coarse prismatic

structure parting to moderate medium subangular

blocky; friable; common distinct yellowish red (5YR

4/6) clay films on faces of prisms and some peds;

penetrated by tongues of brown (7.5YR 5/3) silt

loam (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry; moderate fine

subangular blocky structure; friable; few fine roots;

many fine prominent and distinct strong brown

(7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron accumulation; few thin

strata of very fine sand; strongly acid; abrupt

smooth boundary.

C—42 to 60 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/4), stratified silt

loam and very fine sandy loam; massive; breaks to

weak thick plates along depositional strata; friable;
Florence County, Wisconsin 191

common fine distinct strong brown (7.5YR 5/6)

masses of iron accumulation and few fine faint

brown (7.5YR 5/3) iron depletions; few thin strata

of very fine sand; strongly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 5 to 50 inches

Content of gravel: Less than 2 percent throughout the

profile

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam, silt, or very fine sandy

loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam, silt, or very fine sandy

loam

E ́ horizon and E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—very fine sandy loam, silt loam, or

silt

Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—silt loam, silt, or very fine sandy loam

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—stratified silt loam and very fine sandy

loam with thin strata of very fine sand or

stratified silt loam, fine sandy loam, and fine

sand

Fordum Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper layers; rapid or very rapid in the lower layer

Landform: Flood plains

Parent material: Primarily loamy alluvium underlain by

sandy or sandy and gravelly deposits

Slope range: 0 to 2 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

nonacid, frigid Mollic Fluvaquents

Typical Pedon

Fordum loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, approximately 20

feet north and 1,100 feet west of the southeast corner

of sec. 22, T. 40 N., R. 18 E.

A—0 to 9 inches; black (10YR 2/1) loam, dark gray

(10YR 4/1) dry; weak fine and medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; many very fine and fine

and few medium roots; neutral; abrupt smooth

boundary.

Cg—9 to 15 inches; dark gray (10YR 4/1) very fine

sandy loam; common fine and medium prominent

olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) masses of iron

accumulation; massive; very friable; few very fine

and fine roots; slightly alkaline; abrupt smooth

boundary.

Oa—15 to 17 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken

face and rubbed; about 20 percent fiber, 5 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 5 percent sand; neutral (pH 7.0

in water 1:1); abrupt smooth boundary.

C ́g1—17 to 29 inches; dark gray (10YR 4/1) fine

sandy loam, common fine and medium prominent

olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) masses of iron

accumulation; massive; friable; about 5 percent

gravel and 1 percent cobbles; moderately alkaline;

abrupt smooth boundary.

C ́g2—29 to 60 inches; dark gray (10YR 4/1) sand;

single grain; loose; about 10 percent gravel and 4

percent cobbles; moderately alkaline.

Range in Characteristics

Depth to sand or sandy and gravelly deposits: 24 to 40

inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent in the upper part; 0

to 60 percent in the lower part

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

A horizon:

Hue—2.5Y, 10YR, 7.5YR, or N
192 Soil Survey of

Value—2 or 3

Chroma—0 to 3

Texture—loam

Cg and C ́g1 horizons:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 to 4

Texture—silt loam, loam, sandy loam, fine sandy

loam, or very fine sandy loam; some pedons

contain thin strata of fine sand, very fine sand,

loamy fine sand, or loamy very fine sand or the

gravelly or mucky analogs of these textures

C ́g2 horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 to 4

Texture—sand, coarse sand, or fine sand or the

gravelly or very gravelly analogs of these

textures

Gastrow Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

stratified lacustrine deposits

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Argic Endoaquods

Typical Pedon

Gastrow silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes,

approximately 1,000 feet west and 1,350 feet north of

the southeast corner of sec. 32, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

A—0 to 3 inches; very dark gray (10YR 3/1) silt loam,

gray (10YR 5/1) dry; weak medium and fine

granular structure; friable; many very fine and fine

and few medium and coarse roots; very strongly

acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

E—3 to 6 inches; dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) silt

loam, light gray (10YR 7/2) dry; weak medium and

thick platy structure; friable; many very fine and

fine and few medium and coarse roots; few fine

and medium distinct yellowish brown (10YR 5/6)

masses of iron accumulation; very strongly acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs—6 to 10 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; few fine and medium

prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) masses of

iron accumulation; strongly acid; abrupt wavy

boundary.

E/B—10 to 21 inches; 70 percent brown (10YR 5/3)

silt loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate thin platy structure; friable; tonguing into

and surrounding remnants of brown (7.5YR 4/4)

silt loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; few faint dark brown

(7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of some peds;

common very fine and fine and few medium and

coarse roots; few fine prominent and distinct

strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

B/E—21 to 31 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

silt loam (Bt); moderate medium and coarse

subangular blocky structure; friable; few faint dark

brown (7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of peds;

penetrated by tongues of brown (10YR 5/3) silt

loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry; weak

fine subangular blocky structure; friable; few fine

roots; many medium distinct and prominent strong

brown (7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron accumulation

and few fine prominent reddish gray (5YR 5/2) iron

depletions; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bt—31 to 37 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) fine sandy

loam; moderate medium and coarse subangular

blocky structure; friable; few fine dark brown

(7.5YR 4/4) clay films on faces of peds; many

medium prominent grayish brown (10YR 5/2) iron

depletions and many medium distinct strong

brown (7.5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation;

moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

C—37 to 60 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) and yellowish

brown (10YR 5/4), stratified fine sand, fine sandy

loam, very fine sandy loam, and silt loam;

massive; friable; many medium distinct strong

brown (7.5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation;

moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 45 inches

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 193

E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—silt loam or very fine sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam or very fine sandy loam

E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or very fine sandy loam

Bt horizon and Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—3 or 4

Texture—silt loam, very fine sandy loam, or fine

sandy loam

C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—3 or 4

Texture—stratified fine sand, fine sandy loam, very

fine sandy loam, and silt loam

Goodman Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the upper layers; moderate

or moderately rapid in the lower layer

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

sandy or loamy glacial till or glacial mudflow

sediment

Slope range: 6 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Alfic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Goodman silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony,

approximately 950 feet north and 200 feet west of the

southeast corner of sec. 24, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

Oa—0 to 2 inches; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 25

percent fiber, 10 percent rubbed; weak fine

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and few medium and coarse roots; very

strongly acid (pH 5.0 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth

boundary.

E—2 to 4 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) silt loam,

light gray (10YR 7/2) dry; weak thick platy

structure; friable; common very fine and fine and

few medium and coarse roots; moderately acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs—4 to 15 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam; weak

medium subangular blocky structure; friable;

common very fine and fine and few medium and

coarse roots; strongly acid; abrupt wavy

boundary.

E ́—15 to 20 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) silt loam, very

pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry; weak medium and

thick platy structure; friable; few very fine and fine

roots; moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

B/E—20 to 31 inches; 80 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

silt loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; few faint dark brown

(7.5YR 4/3) clay films on faces of some peds;

penetrated by tongues of brown (10YR 5/3) silt

loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate fine subangular blocky structure; friable;

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

2Bt—31 to 35 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; few faint dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) clay films

on faces of some peds; about 10 percent gravel

and 1 percent cobbles; strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

2C—35 to 62 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) gravelly

sandy loam; massive; friable; about 20 percent

gravel and 2 percent cobbles; moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 30 to more than 60 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 12 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 3 to 30 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material
194 Soil Survey of

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

E ́ horizon and E ́ part of B/E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—5 or 6

Chroma—3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bt part of B/E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—silt loam

2Bt horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—loamy sand, sandy loam, fine sandy

loam, or loam or the gravelly analogs of these

textures

2C horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam, loamy sand, gravelly sandy

loam, or gravelly loamy sand

Goodwit Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderate

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

sandy or loamy glacial till or glacial mudflow

sediment

Slope range: 1 to 6 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Goodwit silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony,

approximately 2,520 feet south and 390 feet west of

the northeast corner of sec. 34, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

Oe—0 to 2 inches; very dark grayish brown (10YR

3/2) (broken face and rubbed) mucky peat (hemic

material, which is a mat of partially decomposed

forest litter); about 45 percent fiber, 20 percent

rubbed; weak fine granular structure; very friable;

common very fine and fine roots; strongly acid (pH

5.2 in water 1:1); abrupt wavy boundary.

A—2 to 5 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) silt loam,

brown (7.5YR 5/2) dry; moderate fine and medium

granular structure; friable; many fine roots; about 1

percent gravel; very strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

E—5 to 6 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) silt loam, pinkish

gray (7.5YR 7/2) dry; weak thick platy structure

parting to moderate fine subangular blocky; friable;

many fine roots; about 1 percent gravel; very

strongly acid; abrupt broken boundary.

Bs—6 to 17 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; many fine roots; about 1 percent gravel;

very strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

E/B—17 to 21 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 5/3)

silt loam (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry; weak thick

platy structure; friable; tonguing into and

surrounding remnants of brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt

loam (Bt); moderate fine subangular blocky

structure; friable; common fine roots; about 1

percent gravel; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

B/E—21 to 40 inches; 60 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

silt loam (Bt); moderate fine and medium

subangular blocky structure; friable; few faint dark

brown (7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of some

peds; penetrated by tongues of brown (7.5YR 5/3)

silt loam (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry; moderate fine

subangular blocky structure; friable; common fine

roots; few fine distinct strong brown (7.5YR 5/6)

masses of iron accumulation; about 1 percent

gravel; strongly acid; clear smooth boundary.

2Bt—40 to 47 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) sandy

loam; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; few fine roots; few distinct

yellowish red (5YR 5/6) clay films on faces of

some peds; about 3 percent gravel and 2 percent

cobbles; strongly acid; clear irregular boundary.

2C—47 to 62 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) gravelly
Florence County, Wisconsin 195

sandy loam; massive; friable; about 12 percent

gravel and 3 percent cobbles; moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 30 to more than 60 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 12 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 3 to 30 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—5 or 6

Chroma—3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—silt loam

2Bt horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam, loam, fine sandy loam, or

loamy sand or the gravelly analogs of these

textures

2C horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam, loamy sand, gravelly sandy

loam, or gravelly loamy sand

Iosco Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Permeability: Rapid in the upper layers; moderately

slow in the lower layers

Landform: Moraines

Parent material: Sandy deposits underlain by loamy or

silty glacial till

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy over loamy, mixed,

frigid Argic Endoaquods

Typical Pedon

Iosco loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes,

approximately 150 feet east and 2,600 feet north of

the southwest corner of sec. 3, T. 39 N., R. 18 E.

Ap—0 to 9 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) loamy fine

sand, brown (7.5YR 5/2) dry; weak medium

granular structure; very friable; common fine roots;

neutral; clear wavy boundary.

E—9 to 11 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) loamy fine sand,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak fine subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common fine roots;

neutral; abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs1—11 to 19 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

loamy sand; weak fine subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common fine roots; few

medium distinct red (2.5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

Bs2—19 to 33 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) loamy

sand; weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; few fine roots; common

medium prominent reddish gray (5YR 5/2) iron

depletions and common fine distinct red (2.5YR

4/6) masses of iron accumulation; about 1 percent

gravel; moderately acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

2Bt—33 to 44 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) silty

clay loam; moderate medium angular blocky
196 Soil Survey of

structure; firm; few faint dark reddish brown (5YR

3/3) clay films on faces of peds; common medium

distinct dark reddish gray (5YR 4/2) iron

depletions; about 5 percent gravel; slightly acid;

clear wavy boundary.

2C—44 to 60 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) silty

clay loam; massive; firm; about 5 percent gravel;

neutral.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the sandy mantle: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Ap horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—loamy fine sand

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—loamy sand, loamy fine sand, fine sand,

or sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand, loamy fine sand, fine sand,

or sand

2Bt and 2C horizons:

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam, loam, silty clay loam, or clay

loam

Ishpeming Series

Depth class: Moderately deep to hard igneous or

metamorphic bedrock

Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained

Permeability: Rapid in the solum; very slow to rapid in

the bedrock

Landform: Outwash plains and moraines

Parent material: Primarily sandy deposits underlain by

igneous or metamorphic bedrock

Slope range: 1 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic

Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Ishpeming loamy sand, in an area of Rock outcropIshpeming-Vilas complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes,

approximately 2,300 feet south and 700 feet east of

the northwest corner of sec. 4, T. 38 N., R. 18 E.

Oe—0 to 1 inch; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) (broken face

and rubbed) mucky peat (hemic material, which is

a mat of partially decomposed forest litter); about

40 percent fiber, 20 percent rubbed; weak fine

granular structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine roots; strongly acid (pH 5.2 in water 1:1);

abrupt wavy boundary.

E—1 to 4 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) loamy sand, light

gray (10YR 7/1) dry; weak fine and medium

subangular blocky structure; very friable; common

very fine and fine roots; very strongly acid; abrupt

wavy boundary.

Bs1—4 to 8 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

loamy sand; weak fine and medium subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine roots; few small pieces of ortstein;

moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—8 to 16 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) loamy sand;

weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; few fine roots; few small

pieces of ortstein; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

BC—16 to 32 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) sand;

weak coarse subangular blocky structure; very

friable; about 3 percent gravel; moderately acid;

abrupt smooth boundary.

2R—32 inches; schist bedrock.

Range in Characteristics

Depth to bedrock: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

solum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

solum

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—loamy sand
Florence County, Wisconsin 197

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—5

Chroma—2

Texture—loamy sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand or sand

2R layer:

Type of bedrock—igneous or metamorphic

Kinross Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Permeability: Rapid

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Parent material: Primarily sandy glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 2 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid Typic

Endoaquods

Typical Pedon

Kinross muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes, approximately

200 feet east and 3,100 feet north of the southwest

corner of sec. 28, T. 38 N., R. 18 W.

Oa—0 to 2 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken face

and rubbed; about 40 percent fiber, 5 percent

rubbed; weak thin platy structure; very friable;

many very fine and fine roots; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; extremely acid (pH 4.0 in water 1:1);

abrupt smooth boundary.

E—2 to 9 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) sand, pinkish

gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak medium subangular

blocky structure; very friable; few very fine and fine

roots; very strongly acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

Bhs—9 to 12 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/2)

sand; many fine and medium prominent strong

brown (7.5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation;

weak medium subangular blocky structure; very

friable; few brittle peds; few very fine and fine

roots; very strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs—12 to 17 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) sand;

common fine distinct strong brown (7.5YR 4/6)

masses of iron accumulation; weak medium

subangular blocky structure; very friable; strongly

acid; clear wavy boundary.

BC—17 to 39 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sand; many

fine and medium prominent yellowish red (5YR

5/8) masses of iron accumulation; weak medium

and coarse subangular blocky structure; very

friable; moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

C—39 to 60 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4)

sand; single grain; loose; moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 50 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—muck

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—loamy sand or sand

E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—loamy sand or sand

Bhs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—loamy sand or sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand or sand

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—sand

Loxley Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Permeability: Moderately slow to moderately rapid

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Sphagnum moss and herbaceous

organic material more than 51 inches thick

Slope range: 0 to 1 percent
198 Soil Survey of

Taxonomic classification: Dysic Typic Borosaprists

Typical Pedon

Loxley peat, in an area of Loxley, Beseman, and

Dawson peats, 0 to 1 percent slopes, approximately

2,000 feet south and 650 feet west of the northeast

corner of sec. 32, T. 39 N., R. 15 E.

Oi—0 to 9 inches; peat, dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

broken face and rubbed; about 90 percent fiber, 75

percent rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are

primarily sphagnum moss; few branches and

twigs; extremely acid (pH 4.0 in water 1:1); clear

smooth boundary.

Oa1—9 to 36 inches; muck, dark reddish brown (5YR

2.5/2) broken face and rubbed; about 30 percent

fiber, 8 percent rubbed; massive; very friable;

fibers are primarily herbaceous; few branches and

twigs; extremely acid (pH 4.0 in water 1:1); clear

smooth boundary.

Oa2—36 to 60 inches; muck, black (5YR 2.5/1) broken

face and rubbed; about 20 percent fiber, 5 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; extremely acid (pH 4.4 in water 1:1).

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the organic material: More than 51

inches

Kind of organic material: Upper layer—peat; lower

layers—dominantly muck (thin layers of mucky

peat or peat in some pedons)

Content of woody fragments: 0 to 10 percent

Oi horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—2 to 4

Texture—peat

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 to 3

Texture—muck

Lupton Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Permeability: Moderately slow to moderately rapid

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Herbaceous and woody organic

material more than 51 inches thick

Slope range: 0 to 1 percent

Taxonomic classification: Euic Typic Borosaprists

Typical Pedon

Lupton muck, in an area of Lupton, Cathro, and

Markey mucks, 0 to 1 percent slopes, approximately

1,350 feet west and 1,300 feet south of the northeast

corner of sec. 20, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

Oa1—0 to 6 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken face

and rubbed; about 10 percent fiber, 4 percent

rubbed; weak fine and medium granular structure;

very friable; fibers are primarily herbaceous; about

10 percent woody fragments; slightly alkaline (pH

7.5 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth boundary.

Oa2—6 to 22 inches; muck, black (10YR 2/1) broken

face and rubbed; about 25 percent fiber, 7 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 10 percent woody fragments;

neutral (pH 7.0 in water 1:1); clear smooth

boundary.

Oa3—22 to 28 inches; muck, black (10YR 2/1) broken

face and rubbed; about 35 percent fiber, 8 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 10 percent woody fragments;

neutral (pH 7.0 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth

boundary.

Oa4—28 to 40 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken

face and rubbed; about 20 percent fiber, 5 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 10 percent woody fragments;

neutral (pH 7.0 in water 1:1); clear smooth

boundary.

Oa5—40 to 60 inches; muck, black (10YR 2/1) broken

face and rubbed; about 25 percent fiber, 8 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 10 percent woody fragments;

slightly alkaline (pH 7.5 in water 1:1).

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the organic material: More than 51

inches

Kind of organic material: Dominantly muck; thin layers

of mucky peat or muck in some pedons

Content of woody fragments: 5 to 30 percent

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—muck

Manitowish Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Florence County, Wisconsin 199

Figure 17.—Profile of an Ellwood soil. The dark plow layer is

underlain, between depths of about 8 and 15 inches, by a

light-colored zone of degradation from which clay and

free iron oxides have been removed. Calcium carbonate

accumulations occur below a depth of about 35 inches.

Depth is marked in feet.

Figure 18.—Profile of a Markey soil. The herbaceous organic

material is underlain by lighter colored sandy deposits at

a depth of about 36 inches. Depth is marked in feet.
200 Soil Survey of

Figure 19.—Profile of a Padus soil. The dark surface layer is

underlain by a lighter colored subsurface layer. Sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash is at a depth of about 30

inches. Depth is marked in feet.

Figure 20.—Profile of a Pence soil. The thin, light-colored

subsurface layer is underlain by a subsoil that has a high

content of organic matter and iron and aluminum

compounds. Depth is marked in feet.
Florence County, Wisconsin 201

Figure 21.—Profile of a Sarona soil. The top arrow indicates

the leached subsurface layer. The substratum, which has

undergone relatively little change since it was deposited,

begins at a depth of about 48 inches and is indicated by

the lower arrow. Depth is marked in feet.

Figure 22.—Profile of a Tipler soil. The wetness characteristics

are apparent in the lower part of the subsoil, where

yellowish red mottles occur. Depth is marked in feet.
202 Soil Survey of

Figure 23.—Profile of a Vanzile soil. The light-colored layer

between depths of about 12 and 24 inches is an eluvial

layer that overlies mottled subsoil layers that have a

higher content of clay. Depth is marked in feet.

Figure 24.—Profile of a Vilas soil. The top arrow indicates the

surface layer. The next arrow is at the top of the

subsurface layer. The third arrow indicates the upper part

of the subsoil, and the bottom arrow indicates the lighter

colored lower part of the subsoil. Depth is marked in

feet.
Florence County, Wisconsin 203

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper layers; moderately rapid or very rapid in the

lower layers

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Parent material: Primarily loamy deposits underlain by

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid

Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Manitowish sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes,

approximately 750 feet east and 1,850 feet north of

the southwest corner of sec. 31, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

Oi—0 to 2 inches; very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)

(broken face and rubbed) peat (fibric material,

which is a mat of partially decomposed forest

litter); about 80 percent fiber, 45 percent rubbed;

massive; very friable; many very fine and fine and

few medium and coarse roots; extremely acid (pH

4.3 in water 1:1); abrupt wavy boundary.

E—2 to 4 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) sandy loam,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak medium

subangular blocky structure; very friable; many

very fine and fine and few medium and coarse

roots; about 5 percent gravel; very strongly acid;

abrupt smooth boundary.

Bs1—4 to 13 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) sandy

loam; weak medium subangular blocky structure;

very friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; about 10 percent

gravel; very strongly acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

2Bs2—13 to 18 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) loamy

sand; weak medium subangular blocky structure;

very friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; about 10 percent

gravel; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

2BC—18 to 29 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/6)

gravelly sand; single grain; loose; few very fine and

fine roots; about 15 percent gravel and 3 percent

cobbles; moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

2C—29 to 62 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 4/6),

stratified sand and gravelly sand; few fine distinct

strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) masses of iron

accumulation; single grain; loose; about 15 percent

gravel and 3 percent cobbles; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 18 to 36 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 35 percent in the solum; 15 to

35 percent in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric, hemic, or fibric material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—2

Texture—sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sandy loam

2Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand or gravelly loamy sand

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—gravelly sand, gravelly coarse sand,

stratified sand and gravelly sand, or stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Markey Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Very poorly drained

Permeability: Moderately slow to moderately rapid in

the organic material; very rapid in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Herbaceous organic material 16 to 51

inches thick over sandy or sandy and gravelly

deposits

Slope range: 0 to 1 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy or sandy-skeletal,

mixed, euic Terric Borosaprists
204 Soil Survey of

Typical Pedon

Markey muck (fig. 18), in an area of Lupton, Cathro,

and Markey mucks, 0 to 1 percent slopes,

approximately 150 feet south and 200 feet east of the

northwest corner of sec. 12, T. 38 N., R. 17 E.

Oa—0 to 17 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken face

and rubbed; about 35 percent fiber, 5 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 5 percent sand; neutral (pH 6.8

in water 1:1); clear wavy boundary.

Oe—17 to 21 inches; mucky peat, black (N 2.5/0)

broken face and rubbed; about 50 percent fiber, 15

percent rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are

primarily herbaceous; about 10 percent sand;

neutral (pH 6.8 in water 1:1); clear smooth

boundary.

O ́a—21 to 36 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken

face and rubbed; about 30 percent fiber, 8 percent

rubbed; massive; very friable; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; about 10 percent sand; neutral (pH

6.9 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth boundary.

2C—36 to 60 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) sand;

single grain; loose; few thin strata and pockets of

loamy sand; about 3 percent gravel; neutral.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the organic material: 16 to 51 inches

Kind of organic material: Dominantly muck; thin layers

of mucky peat or peat in most pedons

Content of woody fragments: 0 to 10 percent

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 3

Texture—muck

2C horizon:

Hue—2.5Y, 10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—0 to 4

Texture—sand, fine sand, loamy fine sand, or

gravelly sand

Metonga Series

Depth class: Moderately deep to hard igneous or

metamorphic bedrock

Drainage class: Well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the solum; very slow to rapid

in the bedrock

Landform: Moraines

Parent material: Primarily loamy deposits over loamy

glacial till underlain by igneous or metamorphic

bedrock

Slope range: 1 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Entic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Metonga fine sandy loam, in an area of Rock outcropMetonga-Sarona complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes,

approximately 300 feet south of the northwest corner

of sec. 2, T. 38 N., R. 17 E.

Oe—0 to 1 inch; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) (broken face

and rubbed) mucky peat (hemic material, which is

a mat of partially decomposed forest litter); about

50 percent fiber, 20 percent rubbed; weak fine

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine roots; very strongly acid (pH 4.9 in water 1:1);

abrupt wavy boundary.

A—1 to 2 inches; black (10YR 2/1) fine sandy loam,

dark gray (10YR 4/1) dry; weak fine granular

structure; very friable; many very fine and fine

roots; very strongly acid; abrupt smooth boundary.

E—2 to 4 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) fine sandy loam,

light gray (10YR 7/1) dry; weak fine subangular

blocky structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine roots; strongly acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs1—4 to 9 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4) fine

sandy loam; moderate fine and medium

subangular blocky structure; friable; many very

fine and fine roots; about 5 percent gravel; strongly

acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—9 to 17 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) fine sandy

loam; moderate fine and medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; common fine roots; about

5 percent gravel; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

2Bw—17 to 39 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

gravelly sandy loam; weak medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; few fine roots; about 15

percent gravel; moderately acid; abrupt irregular

boundary.

3R—39 inches; granite bedrock.

Range in Characteristics

Depth to bedrock: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent in the upper layers; 5

to 35 percent in the till

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent in the upper layers;

0 to 10 percent in the till

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.
Florence County, Wisconsin 205

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—fine sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—fine sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—fine sandy loam or sandy loam

2Bw horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—3 or 4

Texture—sandy loam or gravelly sandy loam

3R layer:

Type of bedrock—igneous or metamorphic

Minocqua Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate in the upper layers; rapid or

very rapid in the lower layers

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Parent material: Primarily loamy deposits underlain by

sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 2 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy over sandy

or sandy-skeletal, mixed, nonacid, frigid Typic

Endoaquepts

Typical Pedon

Minocqua muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes, approximately

2,900 feet south and 1,650 feet east of the northwest

corner of sec. 26, T. 38 N., R. 19 E.

Oa—0 to 5 inches; muck, black (N 2.5/0) broken face

and rubbed; about 30 percent fiber, 2 percent

rubbed; weak fine granular structure; very friable;

many very fine and fine roots; fibers are primarily

herbaceous; few branches and twigs; moderately

acid (pH 6.0 in water 1:1); abrupt wavy boundary.

Eg—5 to 13 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) fine

sandy loam, light gray (10YR 7/2) dry; weak thick

platy structure parting to weak fine subangular

blocky; friable; common fine and very fine roots;

few very dark gray (10YR 3/1) root channels;

about 1 percent gravel; strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

Bg—13 to 21 inches; gray (5Y 6/1) fine sandy loam;

moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; few very fine and fine roots;

many fine and medium prominent dark yellowish

brown (10YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation;

about 1 percent gravel; very strongly acid; abrupt

wavy boundary.

2BCg—21 to 25 inches; olive gray (5Y 4/2) gravelly

loamy coarse sand; weak medium and coarse

subangular blocky structure; very friable; few fine

prominent light yellowish brown (2.5Y 6/4) masses

of iron accumulation; about 15 percent gravel;

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

2Cg—25 to 60 inches; grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) sand

with a few thin strata of gravelly sand; single grain;

loose; few fine distinct light yellowish brown (2.5Y

6/4) masses of iron accumulation; about 3 percent

gravel; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 40 inches

Thickness of the loamy mantle: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent in the solum; 3 to 50

percent in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Oa horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—muck

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam, loam, sandy loam, or fine

sandy loam or the mucky analogs of these

textures

Eg horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam, loam, sandy loam, or fine

sandy loam
206 Soil Survey of

Bg horizon:

Hue—5Y, 2.5Y, 10YR, or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam, loam, sandy loam, or fine

sandy loam

2C horizon:

Hue—5Y, 2.5Y, 10YR, or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 to 4

Texture—sand or coarse sand or the gravelly or

very gravelly analogs of these textures

Morganlake Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the upper

layers; moderately slow in the lower layers

Landform: Moraines

Parent material: Sandy deposits underlain by silty or

loamy glacial till

Slope range: 0 to 6 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy over loamy, mixed,

frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Morganlake loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 1,800 feet west and 1,800 feet north of

the southeast corner of sec. 16, T. 39 N., R. 18 E.

Ap—0 to 7 inches; dark brown (10YR 3/3) loamy fine

sand, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) dry; weak

medium granular structure; very friable; many very

fine and fine and few medium roots; strongly acid;

abrupt smooth boundary.

E—7 to 8 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) loamy fine sand,

light gray (5YR 7/1) dry; weak fine subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine roots; moderately acid; abrupt broken

boundary.

Bs1—8 to 11 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) loamy

fine sand; weak fine and medium subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine roots; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—11 to 26 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) loamy fine

sand; weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common very fine and fine

roots; moderately acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

Bw—26 to 31 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) loamy

fine sand; weak thick platy structure; very friable;

few very fine and fine roots; common fine and

medium distinct strong brown (7.5YR 5/6 and 5/8)

masses of iron accumulation; about 3 percent

gravel; moderately acid; abrupt smooth boundary.

2B/E—31 to 40 inches; about 80 percent dark reddish

brown (5YR 3/4) silty clay loam (2Bt); moderate

medium prismatic structure parting to strong

medium angular blocky; firm; common distinct

dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces

of some peds and in some pores; penetrated by

tongues of brown (7.5YR 5/3) silt loam (2E ́), pink

(7.5YR 7/3) dry; weak medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; few very fine and fine roots; few

fine and medium prominent and distinct strong

brown (7.5YR 5/6 and 5/8) masses of iron

accumulation; about 4 percent gravel; moderately

acid; clear wavy boundary.

2C—40 to 60 inches; dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4)

silty clay loam; massive; firm; about 4 percent

gravel; neutral.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the sandy mantle: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 3 to 15 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Ap horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—loamy fine sand

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—sand, loamy sand, loamy fine sand, or

fine sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sand, loamy sand, loamy fine sand, or

fine sand

Bw horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sand, loamy sand, or loamy fine sand

2E ́ part of 2B/E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR, 5YR, or 2.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam, loam, sandy loam, fine sandy

loam, clay loam, or silty clay loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 207

2Bt part of 2B/E horizon and 2C horizon:

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam, loam, silty clay loam, or clay

loam

Mudlake Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate in the upper layers; moderate

or moderately rapid in the lower layers

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Parent material: Silty deposits underlain by sandy or

loamy glacial till or glacial mudflow sediment

Slope range: 1 to 6 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Alfic Epiaquods

Typical Pedon

Mudlake silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony,

approximately 1,200 feet east and 2,800 feet south of

the northwest corner of sec. 32, T. 39 N., R. 17 E.

A—0 to 4 inches; very dark gray (10YR 3/1) silt loam,

gray (10YR 5/1) dry; moderate fine and medium

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and common medium and coarse roots; about

1 percent gravel and 1 percent cobbles;

moderately acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

E—4 to 5 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) silt loam, pinkish

gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; moderate medium platy

structure; friable; common very fine and fine and

few medium and coarse roots; about 1 percent

gravel and 1 percent cobbles; strongly acid; abrupt

broken boundary.

Bs—5 to 12 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; few very fine and fine roots; common fine

distinct strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron

accumulation; about 1 percent gravel and 1

percent cobbles; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

E/B—12 to 27 inches; 70 percent brown (10YR 5/3)

silt loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; tonguing into and surrounding remnants of

brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam (Bt); moderate

medium subangular blocky structure; friable; few

very fine and fine roots; few fine distinct and

prominent strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) masses of

iron accumulation and few fine distinct brown

(7.5YR 5/2) iron depletions; about 1 percent gravel

and 1 percent cobbles; moderately acid; clear

wavy boundary.

Bt1—27 to 34 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; few faint brown (7.5YR 4/3) clay films on

faces of some peds; common medium distinct

strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron

accumulation and few fine distinct brown (7.5YR

5/2) iron depletions; about 1 percent gravel and 1

percent cobbles; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

2Bt2—34 to 43 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) sandy

loam; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; few faint brown (7.5YR 4/3) clay

films on faces of some peds; few fine distinct

yellowish red (5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation; about 12 percent gravel and 1

percent cobbles; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

2C—43 to 70 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) sandy

loam; massive; friable; about 12 percent gravel

and 1 percent cobbles; moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 30 to more than 60 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 12 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 5 to 35 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 15 percent throughout the

profile

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4
208 Soil Survey of

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

E ́ part of E/B horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—5 or 6

Chroma—3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bt horizon and Bt part of E/B horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—silt loam

2Bt horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—loam, fine sandy loam, sandy loam, or

loamy sand or the gravelly or cobbly analogs of

these textures

2C horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam or loamy sand or the

gravelly or cobbly analogs of these textures

Padus Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the solum; rapid or very

rapid in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

kames, drumlins, and moraines

Parent material: Loamy deposits underlain by sandy or

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Alfic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Padus sandy loam (fig. 19), 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 2,100 feet west and 150 feet north of

the southeast corner of sec. 30, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

A—0 to 2 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) sandy loam,

gray (N 5/0) dry; moderate medium and fine

granular structure; friable; many very fine and fine

and few medium and coarse roots; very strongly

acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

E—2 to 3 inches; pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) sandy

loam, pinkish gray (7.5YR 7/2) dry; weak medium

subangular blocky structure; very friable; many

very fine and fine and few medium and coarse

roots; very strongly acid; abrupt broken boundary.

Bs1—3 to 8 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) sandy

loam; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; common very fine and fine and

few medium and coarse roots; very strongly acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs2—8 to 19 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; very strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

E/B—19 to 26 inches; about 85 percent brown (10YR

5/3) sandy loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3)

dry; weak very thick platy structure; friable;

extending into and surrounding remnants of brown

(7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam (Bt); moderate medium

subangular blocky structure; friable; few fine roots;

very strongly acid; gradual wavy boundary.

B/E—26 to 38 inches; about 80 percent brown (7.5YR

4/4) sandy loam (Bt); moderate medium and

coarse subangular blocky structure; friable; few

faint dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of

peds; penetrated by tongues of brown (10YR 5/3)

sandy loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate fine subangular blocky structure; friable;

about 12 percent gravel; very strongly acid; abrupt

wavy boundary.

2C—38 to 60 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4),

stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand; single

grain; loose; about 20 percent gravel; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 24 to 40 inches

Thickness of the loamy mantle: 24 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 3 to 50 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 or 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR
Florence County, Wisconsin 209

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sandy loam

E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—3

Texture—sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or loam

Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or loam

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—stratified sand or coarse sand or the

gravelly or very gravelly analogs of these

textures

Pence Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid in the

upper layers; moderately rapid to very rapid in the

lower layers

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

and kames

Parent material: Loamy deposits underlain by sandy

and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic

Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Pence sandy loam (fig. 20), 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 3,100 feet north and 2,400 feet east of

the southwest corner of sec. 8, T. 39 N., R. 19 E.

A—0 to 3 inches; black (N 2.5/0) sandy loam, dark

gray (10YR 4/1) dry; weak fine and medium

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and few medium roots; many uncoated sand

grains; few charcoal fragments; strongly acid;

abrupt smooth boundary.

E—3 to 4 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) sandy loam,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 7/2) dry; weak fine subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine roots; strongly acid; abrupt smooth

boundary.

Bs1—4 to 7 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) sandy

loam; weak medium subangular blocky structure;

very friable; common very fine and fine roots; few

black (10YR 2/1) wormcasts; about 1 percent

gravel; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—7 to 15 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam;

weak medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; very friable; few very fine and fine roots;

about 1 percent gravel; strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

2BC—15 to 31 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 4/6)

gravelly coarse sand; weak coarse subangular

blocky structure; very friable; about 25 percent

gravel; slightly acid; clear wavy boundary.

2C—31 to 60 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/4), stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand; single grain; loose;

about 20 percent gravel; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 18 to 36 inches

Thickness of the loamy mantle: 10 to 20 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 35 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 3 to 35 percent in the lower part of the

solum; 15 to 35 percent in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—hemic or sapric material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sandy loam, loam, gravelly sandy loam,

or gravelly loam
210 Soil Survey of

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—gravelly sand, gravelly coarse sand,

stratified sand and gravelly sand, or stratified

sand and gravelly coarse sand

Robago Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate

Landform: Outwash plains, glacial lake plains, and

moraines

Parent material: Primarily loamy deposits underlain by

stratified lacustrine deposits

Slope range: 0 to 2 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Argic Endoaquods

Typical Pedon

Robago fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes,

approximately 1,350 feet south and 700 feet east of

the northwest corner of sec. 36, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

Oa—0 to 2 inches; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 40

percent fiber, 10 percent rubbed; weak fine

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and few medium and coarse roots; extremely

acid (pH 4.3 in water 1:1); abrupt wavy boundary.

E—2 to 7 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) fine sandy

loam, light gray (10YR 7/1) dry; weak medium

platy structure; friable; few very fine and fine roots;

very strongly acid; clear broken boundary.

Bs1—7 to 11 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) fine

sandy loam; weak medium and coarse subangular

blocky structure; friable; few fine prominent

yellowish red (5YR 5/6) masses of iron

accumulation; very strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

Bs2—11 to 17 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) fine sandy

loam; weak medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; many fine distinct strong brown

(7.5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation; strongly

acid; clear wavy boundary.

E ́—17 to 20 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) fine sandy

loam, very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry; weak very

thick platy structure; friable; many fine prominent

strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) masses of iron

accumulation; moderately acid; clear wavy

boundary.

E/B—20 to 27 inches; 70 percent brown (10YR 5/3)

fine sandy loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3)

dry; weak very thick platy structure; friable;

tonguing into and surrounding remnants of brown

(7.5YR 4/4) fine sandy loam (Bt); moderate

medium and coarse subangular blocky structure;

friable; few faint brown (7.5YR 4/3) clay films on

faces of some peds; many medium prominent

yellowish red (5YR 4/6) masses of iron

accumulation and few fine faint and prominent light

brownish gray (10YR 6/2) iron depletions; slightly

acid; clear wavy boundary.

B/E—27 to 38 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

fine sandy loam (Bt); moderate medium and coarse

subangular blocky structure; friable; few faint brown

(7.5YR 4/3) clay films on faces of some peds;

penetrated by tongues of brown (10YR 5/3) fine

sandy loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate fine subangular blocky structure; friable;

many medium prominent red (2.5YR 4/8) masses of

iron accumulation and few fine prominent and faint

light brownish gray (10YR 6/2) iron depletions;

slightly acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

C—38 to 62 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4),

stratified very fine sandy loam and silt loam with

thin strata of very fine sand and fine sand;

massive; friable; many medium distinct grayish

brown (10YR 5/2) iron depletions and many

medium prominent strong brown (7.5YR 4/6)

masses of iron accumulation; neutral.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 24 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—fine sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—5 or 6

Chroma—2

Texture—fine sandy loam
Florence County, Wisconsin 211

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—fine sandy loam or sandy loam

E ́ horizon and E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—5

Chroma—3

Texture—sandy loam or fine sandy loam

Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4

Chroma—4

Texture—fine sandy loam or sandy loam

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4

Texture—stratified fine sand, very fine sand, very

fine sandy loam, and silt loam

Rousseau Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Well drained

Permeability: Rapid

Landform: Outwash plains, moraines, and glacial lake

plains

Parent material: Sandy glacial outwash or lacustrine

deposits

Slope range: 0 to 15 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic

Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Rousseau loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 1,200 feet south and 100 feet east of

the northwest corner of sec. 3, T. 38 N., R. 19 E.

A—0 to 3 inches; very dark gray (10YR 3/1) loamy fine

sand, dark gray (10YR 4/1) dry; weak fine granular

structure; very friable; many very fine and fine and

few medium and coarse roots; moderately acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

E—3 to 6 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/2) loamy fine sand,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak fine subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine and few medium and coarse roots; very

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs—6 to 12 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) loamy fine

sand; weak fine subangular blocky structure; very

friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

BC1—12 to 31 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) fine sand;

weak fine subangular blocky structure; very

friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

BC2—31 to 36 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/4) fine sand;

weak coarse subangular blocky structure; very

friable; few very fine and fine roots; strongly acid;

clear wavy boundary.

C—36 to 60 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) fine

sand; single grain; loose; strongly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 45 inches

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—loamy fine sand

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—fine sand or loamy fine sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—fine sand or loamy fine sand

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—5 or 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—fine sand

Sarona Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Well drained

Permeability: Moderate or moderately rapid

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Parent material: Primarily loamy deposits underlain by
212 Soil Survey of

loamy or sandy glacial till or glacial mudflow

sediment

Slope range: 1 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Alfic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Sarona fine sandy loam (fig. 21), 1 to 6 percent

slopes, very stony, approximately 70 feet east and 300

feet north of the southwest corner of sec. 24, T. 38 N.,

R. 17 E.

Oa—0 to 1 inch; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 25

percent fiber, 5 percent rubbed; weak fine granular

structure; very friable; extremely acid (pH 4.3 in

water 1:1); abrupt wavy boundary.

E—1 to 3 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) fine sandy loam,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak thick platy

structure; friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; about 5 percent gravel

and 2 percent cobbles; very strongly acid; abrupt

wavy boundary.

Bs—3 to 17 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) fine sandy

loam; weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; many very fine and fine and

common medium and coarse roots; about 5

percent gravel and 2 percent cobbles; moderately

acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

E/B—17 to 29 inches; about 60 percent brown (7.5YR

5/3) fine sandy loam (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry;

weak thick platy structure; friable; tonguing into

and surrounding remnants of brown (7.5YR 4/4)

sandy loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; common very fine and

fine roots; about 8 percent gravel and 2 percent

cobbles; slightly brittle; moderately acid; clear

wavy boundary.

B/E—29 to 48 inches; about 60 percent dark reddish

brown (5YR 3/4) gravelly sandy loam (Bt); weak

fine subangular blocky structure; friable; breaks to

weak thick plates along horizontal cleavage planes

inherited from the parent material; common faint

reddish brown (5YR 4/4) clay films on faces of

peds; penetrated by tongues of brown (7.5YR 5/3)

gravelly loamy sand (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry;

weak medium platy structure; friable; few very fine

and fine roots; many very fine and fine and few

medium vesicular pores; about 15 percent gravel

and 5 percent cobbles; slightly brittle; moderately

acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

Bt—48 to 66 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

gravelly sandy loam; weak fine subangular blocky

structure; friable; breaks to weak thick plates along

horizontal cleavage planes inherited from the

parent material; many very fine and fine and few

medium vesicular pores; common faint reddish

brown (5YR 4/4) clay films on faces of peds and in

some pores; about 15 percent gravel and 5

percent cobbles; slightly brittle; moderately acid;

gradual wavy boundary.

C—66 to 73 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) gravelly

sandy loam; massive; friable; about 20 percent

gravel and 5 percent cobbles; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 35 to more than 60 inches

Content of gravel: 1 to 35 percent throughout the

profile

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—fine sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—fine sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—fine sandy loam or sandy loam

E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—5 or 6

Chroma—3

Texture—fine sandy loam, sandy loam, loamy

sand, or loamy fine sand or the gravelly analogs

of these textures
Florence County, Wisconsin 213

Bt horizon and Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—loamy sand, sandy loam, gravelly loamy

sand, or gravelly sandy loam

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or 2.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—loamy sand, sandy loam, gravelly loamy

sand, or gravelly sandy loam

Sayner Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Excessively drained

Permeability: Moderately rapid or rapid in the solum;

rapid or very rapid in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, kames,

and eskers

Parent material: Primarily sandy deposits underlain by

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 30 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic

Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Sayner loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent slopes,

approximately 400 feet west and 2,200 feet south of

the northeast corner of sec. 4, T. 40 N., R. 15 E.

Oe—0 to 3 inches; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) mucky peat (hemic material, which is a

mat of partially decomposed forest litter); about 50

percent fiber, 20 percent rubbed; weak fine

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine roots; extremely acid (pH 4.2 in water 1:1);

abrupt wavy boundary.

E—3 to 4 inches; dark reddish gray (5YR 4/2) loamy

sand, pinkish gray (5YR 6/2) dry; weak fine and

medium subangular blocky structure; very friable;

common very fine and fine roots; about 5 percent

gravel; very strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs1—4 to 7 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

loamy sand; weak fine and medium subangular

blocky structure; very friable; common very fine

and fine roots; about 5 percent gravel; strongly

acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—7 to 17 inches; reddish brown (5YR 4/4) loamy

sand; weak fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common very fine and fine

roots; about 5 percent gravel; strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

Bs3—17 to 27 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) gravelly

sand; weak coarse subangular blocky structure;

very friable; few very fine and fine roots; about 15

percent gravel; moderately acid; abrupt wavy

boundary.

C—27 to 63 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) gravelly

sand; single grain; loose; about 25 percent gravel;

moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 12 to 36 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 35 percent in the solum; 15 to

35 percent in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—loamy sand

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—loamy sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand, sand, gravelly loamy sand,

or gravelly sand

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—gravelly sand, stratified sand and

gravelly sand, or stratified sand and gravelly

coarse sand
214 Soil Survey of

Soperton Series

Depth class: Moderately deep to a fragipan

Drainage class: Well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the upper layers, slow in the

fragipan, and moderate or moderately rapid in the

substratum

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

loamy or sandy glacial till or glacial mudflow

sediment

Slope range: 15 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Alfic Fragiorthods

Typical Pedon

Soperton silt loam, in an area of Soperton-Goodman

silt loams, 15 to 35 percent slopes, very stony,

approximately 1,100 feet east and 20 feet south of the

northwest corner of sec. 8, T. 40 N., R. 15 E.

Oa—0 to 1 inch; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 25

percent fiber, 10 percent rubbed; weak fine

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and common medium roots; extremely acid

(pH 4.1 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth boundary.

A—1 to 3 inches; black (10YR 2/1) silt loam, gray

(10YR 5/1) dry; moderate fine and medium

granular structure; friable; many very fine and fine

and common medium roots; moderately acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

E—3 to 5 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) silt loam, pinkish

gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; weak thick platy structure;

friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium roots; moderately acid; abrupt broken

boundary.

Bs1—5 to 9 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) silt loam;

moderate fine and medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; few very fine, fine, and medium

roots; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—9 to 15 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate fine subangular blocky structure; friable;

few very fine, fine, and medium roots; moderately

acid; clear wavy boundary.

E ́—15 to 22 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) silt loam, very

pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry; moderate thick platy

structure; friable; few very fine and fine roots;

moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

2B/Ex—22 to 31 inches; 80 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

sandy loam (2Bt); strong coarse prismatic

structure parting to moderate medium subangular

blocky; firm; brittle; few faint dark brown (7.5YR

3/4) clay films on faces of some peds and in some

pores; penetrated by tongues of brown (10YR 5/3)

sandy loam (2E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

firm; brittle; common very fine vesicular pores;

about 10 percent gravel and 2 percent cobbles;

moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

2BCx—31 to 42 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy

loam; moderate coarse prismatic structure parting

to moderate medium and coarse subangular

blocky; firm; brittle; common very fine vesicular

pores; about 10 percent gravel and 2 percent

cobbles; moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

2C—42 to 61 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) gravelly

loamy sand with a few chunks of sandy loam;

massive; friable; about 20 percent gravel and 3

percent cobbles; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 40 to more than 60 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 12 to 36 inches

Depth to the fragipan: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 10 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 5 to 25 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 0 to 20 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 or 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 7

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4
Florence County, Wisconsin 215

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

E ́ horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 7

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

2E ́ part of 2B/Ex horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 7

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—sandy loam, loamy sand, or loam or the

gravelly or cobbly analogs of these textures

2Bt part of 2B/Ex horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—3 to 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam or loam or the gravelly or

cobbly analogs of these textures

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam or loamy sand or the

gravelly or cobbly analogs of these textures

Stambaugh Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Well drained

Permeability: Moderately slow in the solum; very rapid

in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, drumlins,

and moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 6 to 25 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-silty over sandy or

sandy-skeletal, mixed, frigid Alfic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Stambaugh silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes,

approximately 2,660 feet south and 1,600 feet west of

the northeast corner of sec. 36, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

Oi—0 to 1 inch; very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)

(broken face and rubbed) peat (fibric material,

which is a mat of partially decomposed forest

litter); about 80 percent fiber, 55 percent rubbed;

massive; very friable; many very fine and fine and

few medium and coarse roots; strongly acid (pH

5.5 in water 1:1); abrupt smooth boundary.

A—1 to 4 inches; black (10YR 2/1) silt loam, gray

(10YR 5/1) dry; moderate medium granular

structure; friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; moderately acid; abrupt

wavy boundary.

E—4 to 6 inches; grayish brown (10YR 5/2) silt loam,

light gray (10YR 7/2) dry; weak medium platy

structure; friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; moderately acid; abrupt

irregular boundary.

Bs1—6 to 9 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) silt loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; many very fine and fine and few medium

and coarse roots; very strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

Bs2—9 to 17 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; very strongly acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

E/B—17 to 24 inches; 70 percent brown (10YR 5/3)

silt loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

weak thin platy structure; friable; tonguing into and

surrounding remnants of brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt

loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; few very fine and fine roots;

about 1 percent gravel; very strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

B/E—24 to 33 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

silt loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; few faint dark brown

(7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of some peds;

penetrated by tongues of brown (10YR 5/3) silt

loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate fine subangular blocky structure; friable;

about 2 percent gravel; very strongly acid; clear

wavy boundary.

2C—33 to 61 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR

4/4), stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand;

single grain; loose; about 25 percent gravel;

slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 24 to 40 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 24 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent in the solum; 25 to 55

percent in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N
216 Soil Survey of

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric, hemic, or fibric material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—2

Texture—silt loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or very fine sandy loam

Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—gravelly sand, very gravelly sand, or

stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand

Tipler Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the solum; rapid or very

rapid in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Parent material: Loamy deposits underlain by sandy or

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Tipler sandy loam (fig. 22), 0 to 3 percent slopes,

approximately 2,100 feet east and 400 feet north of

the southwest corner of sec. 22, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

A—0 to 2 inches; very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)

sandy loam, gray (10YR 5/1) dry; moderate

medium granular structure; friable; many very fine

and fine and few medium roots; very strongly acid;

abrupt wavy boundary.

E—2 to 4 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) sandy loam,

pinkish gray (7.5YR 6/2) dry; moderate medium

and coarse subangular blocky structure; friable;

many very fine and fine and few medium roots;

common dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) wormcasts; very

strongly acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs1—4 to 8 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

sandy loam; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; many very fine and fine and few

medium roots; very strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

Bs2—8 to 15 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam;

moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; common very fine and fine roots;

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

E/B—15 to 22 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 5/3)

sandy loam (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry; weak very

thick platy structure; friable; tonguing into and

surrounding remnants of brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy

loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; few very fine and fine roots;

about 5 percent gravel; strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

B/E—22 to 31 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

sandy loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; few faint dark brown

(7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of some peds;

penetrated by tongues of brown (7.5YR 5/3) sandy

loam (E ́), pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry; moderate fine

subangular blocky structure; friable; few fine

prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) masses of

iron accumulation; about 5 percent gravel; strongly

acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

2C—31 to 60 inches; brown (10YR 5/3 and 4/3),

stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand; single

grain; loose; few fine prominent yellowish brown

(10YR 5/8) masses of iron accumulation; about 15

percent gravel; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 24 to 40 inches

Thickness of the loamy mantle: 24 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 3 to 35 percent in the lower part of the

solum; 3 to 50 percent in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile
Florence County, Wisconsin 217

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sandy loam

E ́ part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—sandy loam or fine sandy loam

Bt part of E/B and B/E horizons:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or loam

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—stratified sand or coarse sand or the

gravelly or very gravelly analogs of these

textures

Vanzile Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderate or moderately slow in the

solum; rapid or very rapid in the substratum

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, drumlins,

and moraines

Parent material: Silty deposits underlain by sandy or

sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 6 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-silty over sandy or

sandy-skeletal, mixed, frigid Alfic Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Vanzile silt loam (fig. 23), 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 1,700 feet east and 100 feet north of

the southwest corner of sec. 2, T. 38 N., R. 15 E.

A—0 to 1 inch; black (10YR 2/1) silt loam, gray (10YR

5/1) dry; weak fine granular structure; friable;

many fine and few medium roots; very strongly

acid; abrupt smooth boundary.

E—1 to 4 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/2) silt loam, pinkish

gray (7.5YR 7/2) dry; weak thin platy structure;

friable; many fine and few medium roots; very

strongly acid; abrupt irregular boundary.

Bs1—4 to 9 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) silt loam;

moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; many fine and few medium roots;

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—9 to 13 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate medium and coarse subangular blocky

structure; friable; few fine roots; very strongly acid;

clear wavy boundary.

E ́—13 to 17 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) silt loam, very

pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry; weak thin platy

structure; friable; about 1 percent gravel; strongly

acid; clear wavy boundary.

B/E—17 to 33 inches; 70 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)

silt loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; few faint dark brown

(7.5YR 3/4) clay films on faces of some peds;

penetrated by tongues of brown (10YR 5/3) silt

loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR 7/3) dry;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; few medium prominent yellowish brown

(10YR 5/8) masses of iron accumulation; about 1

percent gravel; very strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

2C—33 to 60 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR

4/4), stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand;

single grain; loose; about 3 percent gravel; strongly

acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 20 to 40 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 5 percent in the solum; 3 to 45

percent in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N
218 Soil Survey of

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

E ́ horizon and E ́ part of B/E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bt part of B/E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—stratified sand or coarse sand or the

gravelly or very gravelly analogs of these

textures

Vilas Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Excessively drained

Permeability: Rapid

Landform: Outwash plains, stream terraces, eskers,

kames, and moraines

Parent material: Primarily sandy glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 35 percent

Taxonomic classification: Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic

Haplorthods

Typical Pedon

Vilas loamy sand (fig. 24), 0 to 6 percent slopes,

approximately 500 feet south and 100 feet west of the

northeast corner of sec. 14, T. 38 N., R. 17 E.

Oi—0 to 2 inches; very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)

(broken face and rubbed) peat (fibric material,

which is a mat of partially decomposed forest

litter); about 90 percent fiber, 40 percent rubbed;

massive; very friable; many fine and medium

roots; very strongly acid (pH 5.0 in water 1:1);

abrupt smooth boundary.

A—2 to 4 inches; black (N 2.5/0) loamy sand, very

dark gray (N 3/0) dry; weak medium granular

structure; very friable; many fine and medium

roots; many uncoated sand grains; few charcoal

fragments; very strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

E—4 to 5 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/2) loamy sand,

brown (7.5YR 5/2) dry; weak fine and medium

subangular blocky structure; very friable; many

fine and medium roots; very strongly acid; abrupt

broken boundary.

Bs1—5 to 8 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

loamy sand; weak medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; many fine and medium

roots; very strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—8 to 19 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) loamy sand;

weak coarse subangular blocky structure; very

friable; common fine and medium roots; very

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

BC—19 to 37 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) sand;

weak coarse subangular blocky structure; very

friable; few medium and coarse roots; slightly acid;

clear wavy boundary.

C—37 to 62 inches; yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) sand;

single grain; loose; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 18 to 40 inches

Thickness of the loamy sand mantle: 10 to 20 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric, hemic, or fibric material

A horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 3

Texture—loamy sand
Florence County, Wisconsin 219

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2

Texture—loamy sand

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—loamy sand or sand

C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sand

Wabeno Series

Depth class: Moderately deep to a fragipan

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the upper layers, slow in the

fragipan, and moderate in the substratum

Landform: Drumlins and moraines

Parent material: Primarily silty deposits underlain by

sandy or loamy glacial till or glacial mudflow

sediment

Slope range: 1 to 15 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Oxyaquic Fragiorthods

Typical Pedon

Wabeno silt loam, in an area of Wabeno-Goodwit silt

loams, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony,

approximately 600 feet west and 1,100 feet north of

the southeast corner of sec. 26, T. 40 N., R. 15 E.

Oa—0 to 3 inches; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 20

percent fiber, 5 percent rubbed; weak fine granular

structure; very friable; many fine and few medium

roots; strongly acid (pH 5.3 in water 1:1); abrupt

wavy boundary.

E—3 to 5 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) silt loam, pink

(7.5YR 7/3) dry; weak thin platy structure; friable;

many fine and few medium roots; about 1 percent

gravel and 5 percent cobbles; strongly acid; clear

broken boundary.

Bs—5 to 11 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) silt loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; many fine and few medium roots; about 1

percent gravel and 5 percent cobbles; very

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

E ́—11 to 15 inches; brown (10YR 5/3) silt, very pale

brown (10YR 7/3) dry; moderate thin platy

structure; friable; common fine and medium roots;

about 1 percent gravel and 5 percent cobbles;

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

B/E—15 to 24 inches; about 65 percent dark brown

(7.5YR 3/4) silt loam (Bt); moderate fine

subangular and angular blocky structure; friable;

few distinct reddish brown (5YR 4/4) clay films on

faces of peds; penetrated by tongues of brown

(10YR 5/3) silt loam (E ́), very pale brown (10YR

7/3) dry; moderate fine subangular blocky

structure; friable; common fine and medium roots;

few fine and medium prominent yellowish red

(5YR 5/6) masses of iron accumulation; about 1

percent gravel and 5 percent cobbles; strongly

acid; clear wavy boundary.

2Btx1—24 to 29 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4)

gravelly sandy loam; strong coarse prismatic

structure parting to moderate fine and medium

subangular and angular blocky; firm; brittle; few

fine roots; few prominent yellowish red (5YR 4/6)

clay films on faces of some peds and in some

pores; common very fine vesicular pores; about 15

percent gravel and 5 percent cobbles; strongly

acid; gradual irregular boundary.

2Btx2—29 to 55 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4)

gravelly sandy loam with strata of brown (7.5YR

4/4) gravelly loamy sand and sand 1

/2 inch to 11/2

inches thick; moderate coarse prismatic structure;

firm; brittle; breaks to strong medium plates of

depositional strata; common very fine vesicular

pores; few prominent yellowish red (5YR 4/6) clay

films on faces of peds; about 16 percent gravel

and 5 percent cobbles; strongly acid; gradual

irregular boundary.

2C—55 to 63 inches; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) gravelly

sandy loam with strata of brown (7.5YR 4/4)

gravelly loamy sand and sand 1/2 inch to 11/2

inches thick; massive; friable; common very fine

vesicular pores in the sandy loam; about 15

percent gravel and 5 percent cobbles; moderately

acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 35 to more than 60 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 12 to 36 inches

Depth to the fragipan: 20 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 10 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 5 to 25 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 10 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 0 to 20 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum
220 Soil Survey of

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

E ́ horizon and E ́ part of B/E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam or silt

Bt part of B/E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—silt loam

2Btx horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam or loam or the gravelly or

cobbly analogs of these textures

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—sandy loam or loamy sand or the

gravelly or cobbly analogs of these textures

Wakefield Series

Depth class: Shallow to a fragipan

Drainage class: Moderately well drained

Permeability: Moderate in the upper layers, very slow

in the fragipan, and moderate in the lower layers

Landform: Moraines

Parent material: Silty deposits underlain by loamy

glacial till

Slope range: 1 to 15 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Oxyaquic Fragiorthods

Typical Pedon

Wakefield silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony,

approximately 700 feet west and 2,500 feet south of

the northeast corner of sec. 22, T. 40 N., R. 17 E.

A—0 to 5 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/2) silt

loam, pinkish gray (5YR 6/2) dry; moderate fine

and medium granular structure; friable; many very

fine and fine and common medium and coarse

roots; about 3 percent gravel; very strongly acid;

clear wavy boundary.

E—5 to 6 inches; brown (7.5YR 5/3) silt loam, pink

(7.5YR 7/3) dry; weak medium platy structure;

friable; many very fine and fine and common

medium and coarse roots; about 3 percent gravel;

very strongly acid; abrupt broken boundary.

Bs—6 to 16 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4) silt

loam; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; friable; common very fine and fine and

few medium and coarse roots; about 3 percent

gravel; very strongly acid; abrupt smooth

boundary.

2E/Bx—16 to 20 inches; 80 percent reddish brown

(5YR 5/3) fine sandy loam (2E ́), pink (5YR 7/3)

dry; moderate thick platy structure; firm; brittle;

tonguing into and surrounding remnants of dark

reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4) loam (2Bt); moderate

thick platy structure; firm; brittle; few fine roots; few

fine prominent yellowish red (5YR 5/8) masses of

iron accumulation; about 8 percent gravel; very

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

2B/Ex—20 to 27 inches; 80 percent dark reddish

brown (2.5YR 3/4) loam (2Bt); moderate medium

subangular blocky structure; firm; brittle; many

faint dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/3) clay films on

faces of peds; penetrated by tongues of reddish

brown (5YR 5/3) fine sandy loam (2E ́), pink (5YR

7/3) dry; moderate medium subangular blocky

structure; firm; brittle; few fine roots; few fine

prominent yellowish red (5YR 5/8) masses of iron
Florence County, Wisconsin 221

accumulation; about 8 percent gravel and 2

percent cobbles; strongly acid; clear wavy

boundary.

2Bt—27 to 50 inches; dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4)

loam; strong medium and coarse subangular

blocky structure; firm; few fine roots; many faint

dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/3) clay films on faces

of peds; about 8 percent gravel and 2 percent

cobbles; moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

2C—50 to 60 inches; reddish brown (2.5YR 4/3) loam;

massive; friable; about 8 percent gravel and 2

percent cobbles; slightly acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 30 to 64 inches

Thickness of the silty mantle: 12 to 18 inches

Depth to the fragipan: 12 to 20 inches

Content of gravel: 3 to 15 percent throughout the

profile

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Content of stones: 0 to 5 percent throughout the profile

Percent of surface covered by stones: 0.1 to 3.0

percent

O horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—2 or 3

Chroma—1 or 2

Texture—silt loam

E horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—silt loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—silt loam

2E ́ part of 2E/Bx and 2B/Ex horizons:

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—fine sandy loam or sandy loam

2Bt horizon and 2Bt part of 2E/Bx and 2B/Ex horizons:

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—3 or 4

Texture—loam or clay loam

2C horizon:

Hue—5YR or 2.5YR

Value—4 or 5

Chroma—3 or 4

Texture—loam or fine sandy loam

Worcester Series

Depth class: Very deep

Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained

Permeability: Moderate in the upper layers; rapid or

very rapid in the lower layers

Landform: Outwash plains and stream terraces

Parent material: Primarily loamy deposits underlain by

sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial outwash

Slope range: 0 to 3 percent

Taxonomic classification: Coarse-loamy, mixed,

frigid Argic Endoaquods

Typical Pedon

Worcester sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes,

approximately 1,800 feet east and 400 feet south of

the northwest corner of sec. 27, T. 38 N., R. 16 E.

Oa—0 to 2 inches; black (10YR 2/1) (broken face and

rubbed) muck (sapric material, which is a mat of

partially decomposed forest litter); about 25

percent fiber, 10 percent rubbed; weak fine

granular structure; very friable; many very fine and

fine and common medium and coarse roots;

common charcoal fragments; extremely acid (pH

4.3 in water 1:1); abrupt wavy boundary.

E—2 to 5 inches; reddish gray (5YR 5/2) sandy loam,

pinkish gray (5YR 7/2) dry; weak medium platy

structure; very friable; common very fine, fine,

medium, and coarse roots; about 1 percent gravel;

very strongly acid; abrupt wavy boundary.

Bs1—5 to 9 inches; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/4)

sandy loam; weak medium subangular blocky

structure; very friable; common very fine, fine,

medium, and coarse roots; about 1 percent gravel;

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

Bs2—9 to 21 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam;

moderate medium subangular blocky structure;

friable; common very fine and fine and few

medium and coarse roots; few fine distinct strong

brown (7.5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation;

about 1 percent gravel; moderately acid; clear

wavy boundary.

B/E—21 to 30 inches; 60 percent brown (7.5YR 4/4)
222

sandy loam (Bt); moderate medium subangular

blocky structure; friable; common faint dark brown

(7.5YR 4/3) clay films on faces of peds; penetrated

by tongues of brown (7.5YR 5/3) sandy loam (E ́),

pink (7.5YR 7/3) dry; weak medium platy

structure; friable; few very fine, fine, medium, and

coarse roots; many fine and medium distinct

strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) masses of iron

accumulation and few fine faint brown (7.5YR 5/2)

iron depletions; about 2 percent gravel; very

strongly acid; clear wavy boundary.

2Bt—30 to 34 inches; brown (7.5YR 4/4) gravelly

loamy sand; moderate medium and coarse

subangular blocky structure; very friable; few very

fine, fine, medium, and coarse roots; common faint

dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) clay bridging between

sand grains; many fine and medium prominent

yellowish red (5YR 4/6 and 5/8) masses of iron

accumulation and few fine distinct brown (7.5YR

5/2) iron depletions; about 15 percent gravel;

moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.

2C—34 to 62 inches; dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4),

stratified sand and gravelly coarse sand; single

grain; loose; many medium prominent yellowish red

(5YR 4/6) masses of iron accumulation; about 25

percent gravel; moderately acid.

Range in Characteristics

Thickness of the solum: 24 to 40 inches

Thickness of the loamy mantle: 24 to 40 inches

Content of gravel: 0 to 15 percent in the upper part of

the solum; 3 to 50 percent in the lower part of the

solum and in the substratum

Content of cobbles: 0 to 5 percent throughout the

profile

Note: Unless otherwise indicated, depths and

thicknesses are measured from the top of the

mineral soil.

O horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 2

Texture—sapric or hemic material

A horizon (if it occurs):

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, 5YR, or N

Value—2 to 3

Chroma—0 to 3

Texture—sandy loam

E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—sandy loam

Bs horizon:

Hue—7.5YR or 5YR

Value—3 or 4

Chroma—4

Texture—sandy loam

E ́ part of B/E horizon:

Hue—10YR or 7.5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—2 or 3

Texture—sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or loamy

sand

Bt part of B/E horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or loam or

the gravelly analogs of these textures

2Bt horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—3 to 6

Chroma—4 or 6

Texture—loamy sand or loamy coarse sand or the

gravelly or very gravelly analogs of these

textures

2C horizon:

Hue—10YR, 7.5YR, or 5YR

Value—4 to 6

Chroma—3 to 6

Texture—stratified sand or coarse sand or the

gravelly or very gravelly analogs of these

textures
223

This section describes the geology and underlying

material in Florence County, relates the factors of soil

formation to the soils in the county, and explains the

processes of soil formation.

Geology and Underlying Material

Thomas J. Alvarez and Michael T. McCawley, geologists,

Natural Resources Conservation Service, helped prepare this

section.

Florence County, which is in the Northern Highland

of Wisconsin, is underlain by a variety of igneous and

metamorphic rock types that formed during the

Precambrian (Clayton, 1986). These rocks are overlain

in most places by glacial till, glacial outwash, or

lacustrine deposits deposited during the Pleistocene.

The surface of the Precambrian rock in Florence

County is irregular, with relief of over 655 feet. As a

result, the thickness of the Pleistocene material is

irregular, ranging from 0 to more than 160 feet within a

distance of less than a mile. Similarly, the lithologic

composition of the Pleistocene material changes

conspicuously within short distances, depending on

the nature of the Precambrian or Pleistocene material

the glacier overrode.

Bedrock outcrops occur mostly in a zone about 9

miles wide extending from the northeast corner of the

county, to the center of the county, and then to the

southeast corner of the county. Rock types exposed in

this zone range mainly from dense metavolcanic rocks

in the northeastern part to slaty metasediments in the

middle part to schists and various metamorphic rocks

in the southeastern part (fig. 25).

Florence County was glaciated many times during

the Pleistocene epoch, but little is known about any

but the last few of these events. During the last part of

the Wisconsin glaciation, the ice sheet readvanced

several times, reaching Langlade County (southwest

of Florence County) between about 20,000 and

15,000 years ago. The ice sheet then wasted back

across the survey area, with several minor readvances

between about 14,000 and 12,000 years ago. During

this time, the Langlade Lobe deposited units of the

Copper Falls Formation in western Florence County

and the Green Bay Lobe deposited units of the

Kewaunee Formation in the eastern part of the

county.

The Copper Falls Formation, which occurs over

about the western two-thirds of the survey area,

consists of two units—the Nashville Member and

Member W. The glacial till of these two units is

associated with the early Mountain advances of late

Wisconsin glaciation. The Nashville Member consists

mainly of glacial till and glacial outwash deposits. The

texture of the Nashville till is mainly sandy loam or

loamy sand or the gravelly analogs of these textures.

In the glacial outwash deposits, the amount of sand

and gravel varies widely. In north-central Florence

County just west of the community of Florence, the

glacial till of the Nashville Member grades laterally into

the glacial till of Member W. This till contains slightly

more clay, is a little redder, and contains more rock

fragments than the adjacent Nashville till.

The Kewaunee Formation, which occurs over about

the eastern third of Florence County, consists of three

units—the Florence Member, Member E, and the

Silver Cliff Member. The Florence Member and

Member E were deposited during the middle Mountain

advance of the late Wisconsin glaciation, and the

Silver Cliff Member is associated with the late

Mountain and early Athelstane advances. The

Florence Member is interpreted to be glacial till with

dark reddish brown or reddish brown colors and a

dominant texture of silty clay loam. It is typically

leached of carbonates to a depth of about 40 inches.

Member E of the Kewaunee Formation resembles

Member W to the west in color and texture but

contains more dolomite. Throughout Florence County,

Member E is apparently overlain by the Silver Cliff

Member. The Silver Cliff Member consists mainly of

glacial till, glacial outwash, and lacustrine deposits.

The glacial till is generally sandy loam, loam, or loamy

sand or the gravelly analogs of these textures. Both

the glacial till and glacial outwash of the Silver Cliff

Member have typically been leached of carbonates to

a depth of more than 80 inches. The lacustrine

material consists of sand, silt, and clay, which in some

places are overlain by windblown sand.

Formation of the Soils
224 Soil Survey of

Factors of Soil Formation

Soil is produced by soil-forming processes acting

on materials deposited or accumulated by geologic

agencies. The characteristics of the soil at any given

point are determined by the climate under which the

soil material has accumulated and existed since

accumulation; the plant and animal life on and in the

soil; the relief, or lay of the land; the physical and

mineralogical composition of the parent material; and

the length of time the forces of soil formation have

acted on the soil material (Jenny, 1941).

Climate and plant and animal life, chiefly plants, are

the active factors of soil formation. They act on the

parent material that has accumulated through the

weathering or physical disintegration of rocks and

slowly change it into a natural body that has

genetically related horizons. Relief conditions the

effects of climate and plant and animal life. The parent

material affects the kind of soil profile that forms; in

some areas it is almost entirely responsible for the

kind of soil profile that forms. Finally, time is needed for

the transformation of the parent material into a soil.

Some time is always required for the differentiation of

soil horizons. Usually, a long time is required for the

development of distinct horizons.

Figure 25.—A recumbent fold in the slate bedrock south of Florence.
Florence County, Wisconsin 225

The factors of soil formation are so closely

interrelated in their effects on the soil that few

generalizations can be made regarding the effects of

any one factor unless conditions are specified for the

other four. Many of the processes of soil development

are still unknown.

Climate

Climate directly affects soil formation through the

weathering of rocks. It also alters the parent material

through the mechanical action of freezing and thawing.

It indirectly affects the accumulation of organic matter

by supplying energy and a suitable environment for the

growth of both plant and animal organisms.

Precipitation and temperature are the chief

elements of climate responsible for soil features.

These elements determine the amount of water

available for percolation and the formation and

decomposition of organic matter, the major processes

in the formation of soils.

Percolating water from rainfall and snowmelt affects

both the solution and hydration of mineral material and

the organic substances. The movement of this water

also controls the distribution of substances throughout

the soil.

Florence County has a continental type of climate in

which variations in temperature are great from

summer to winter. During the winter the soil-forming

processes are largely inactive, although some

alternate freezing and thawing activity continues.

The physical action of frost heave also affects

profile development. The high temperature in summer

increases the evaporation and transpiration of

moisture, thus limiting the amount of percolating water

available for soil formation. Temperature also affects

the growth and decomposition of organic matter.

Decomposition is much slower in cooler climates than

in warmer ones.

Wind indirectly affects the moisture content of soils

by influencing the rate of evaporation. In addition, the

wind often blows away particles of soil and organic

material, thereby eroding the surface layer. These

particles are deposited elsewhere as new parent

material.

Climate is modified by variations in slope aspect.

The soils on south- or west-facing slopes are warmed

and dried by the sun and wind more thoroughly than

those on north- and east-facing slopes. The soils on

cooler, more humid north- and east-facing slopes

generally contain more moisture and are frozen for a

longer period.

Plant and Animal Life

Living organisms, such as plants, bacteria, fungi,

insects, earthworms, and rodents, influence the

formation of soils. Plants generally have the greatest

influence on soil formation. Plant roots penetrate the

soil body, thereby creating channels for percolating

water. The roots excrete a number of acid substances

that act on rocks and minerals and bring nutrients or

mineral substances into solution. These nutrients are

absorbed and translocated upward to stems and

leaves. When the plants die, the translocated minerals

are released to the upper soil layers. The organic acids

formed from the decaying plant residue accelerate soil

formation by reacting with rock and mineral

constituents.

Plants indirectly affect soil formation by modifying

the effects of climate. For example, they reduce the

force of winds, thereby influencing the evaporation rate

of percolating water and the deposition of windblown

parent material. Most of the soils in Florence County

formed under forest vegetation. As a result, they have

a lighter colored or a thinner surface layer than the

soils that formed under grass.

Animals burrow into the soil and mix the material of

the different layers. Roots and percolating water follow

the channels created by the animals. Animal life

affects soil structure, helps to decompose organic

matter, and carries nutrients upward in the soil profile.

When these animals die, they contribute to the supply

of organic matter in the soil.

Human activities recently have had important

effects on the soils in the county. The original condition

of some soils has been altered by these activities,

which include removing the native vegetation, mixing

the upper layers through cultivation, and planting

crops that are different from the native vegetation.

Removal of the native vegetation has accelerated

erosion on sloping soils. Applications of lime and

fertilizer have altered the pH value and fertility of soils.

Some cropping practices have reduced the content of

organic matter. The content of soil moisture has been

altered by irrigation and artificial drainage. Some of the

effects of human activities, such as the addition of

fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide, and fungicide, may not

be known for many years.

Relief and Drainage

Relief influences soil formation by affecting the

amount of precipitation absorbed in the soil, by

influencing the erosion rate, and by directing the
226 Soil Survey of

movement of materials in suspension or solution from

one part of the profile to another. Generally, the

steeper soils have a thinner solum and less well

developed profiles than gently sloping soils, which

have more water percolating through the profile.

Relief directly affects external and internal drainage

in the soils. In Florence County, the Vilas, Croswell, Au

Gres, and Kinross soils form a drainage sequence.

The excessively drained Vilas soils are on linear and

slightly convex summits, toeslopes, and side slopes

and are nearly level to steep. The moderately well

drained Croswell soils are in linear areas, on

toeslopes, and on footslopes and are nearly level and

gently sloping. The somewhat poorly drained Au Gres

soils and the poorly drained Kinross soils are in linear

areas and in depressions and drainageways and are

nearly level.

Parent Material

The parent material of most soils in Florence

County was deposited by glaciers or by meltwater as

the glaciers receded. The parent material of some

soils on flood plains is recent alluvium. The parent

material of organic soils consists of plant remains that

accumulated and were preserved under water in

swamps or shallow lakes. Some soils formed in more

than one kind of parent material. The nature of the

parent material has much to do with the texture,

mineral composition, and chemical properties of the

soil.

Glacial outwash was deposited by running water

from melting glaciers. The size of the particles that

make up outwash varies, depending on the speed of

the stream of water that carried the material. As the

swiftly flowing water slowed down, the coarser

particles were deposited. The more slowly moving

water could carry the finer particles, such as very fine

sand and silt. Glacial outwash deposits generally are

stratified, and the layers contain particles of similar

size (fig. 26). Padus soils formed in loamy deposits

underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly glacial

outwash. Vilas soils formed primarily in sandy glacial

outwash.

The glacial till soils formed in unsorted, nonstratified

glacial drift consisting of clay, silt, sand, gravel,

cobbles, stones, and boulders transported and

deposited by glacial ice. Most glacial till in Florence

County is loamy sand or sandy loam or the gravelly

analogs of these textures. The glacial till in some parts

of eastern Florence County is predominantly silty clay

loam, but a small area of till that is mainly loam occurs

in the north-central part of the county. Glacial mudflow

sediment is material that was let down from the ice

surface and has undergone some flow or mass

movement. Ellwood, Crossett, and Wakefield soils are

examples of soils that formed in silty deposits

underlain by glacial till.

Lacustrine deposits were laid down in still water in

former glacial lake basins. These deposits are

characterized by stratified deposits ranging from sand

to clay. Fence and Gastrow soils are examples of soils

that formed primarily in silty deposits underlain by

stratified lacustrine deposits. Cublake soils formed in

sandy glacial outwash underlain by stratified lacustrine

deposits.

Organic material consists of deposits of plant

remains. After the glaciers receded from Florence

County, water stood in depressions. Grasses, reeds,

sedges, and trees grew and died at the edges of these

bodies of water, and their remains fell to the bottom.

These bodies of water were eventually filled with

organic material and thus developed into areas of

peat. In some areas the peat subsequently

decomposed to muck. In other areas it has changed

little since deposition. Cathro soils formed in

herbaceous organic material 16 to 51 inches thick

over loamy or silty deposits. Loxley soils formed in

sphagnum moss and herbaceous organic material

more than 51 inches thick.

Alluvial deposits are of recent origin. They were

deposited on flood plains and in drainageways by

floodwater. Soils that formed in alluvium generally

show little or no horizon development. Fordum soils

formed primarily in loamy alluvium underlain by sandy

or sandy and gravelly deposits.

Time

Time is needed for the parent material to change

into a soil. Some time is always required for horizon

differentiation. Soils can have horizons that are well

developed, horizons that are poorly developed, or

horizons that are somewhere in between, depending

on the length of time the soil-forming factors have

been active. Padus soils, for example, have

moderately distinct horizons and are considered to be

fairly mature. Soils that formed in recently deposited

alluvium, on the other hand, show little or no horizon

development. Fordum soils are examples.

Processes of Soil Formation

Horizons are differentiated in a soil as a result of

the action of certain basic soil-forming processes.

These processes are gains, losses, transfers, and

transformations. They generally do not act alone.

Some changes promote horizon differentiation, and
Florence County, Wisconsin 227

others retard or offset it. The balance among the

changes determines the nature of the soil at any given

point.

The interaction among these soil-forming processes

is evident in Vanzile soils. These soils formed in silty

deposits underlain by sandy or sandy and gravelly

glacial outwash. The climate of Florence County

favored the growth of plants. Plants and animals

contribute to the accumulation of organic matter and

organic acids, and they mixed the soil to some extent.

These processes accelerated as more and higher

forms of organisms grew in the soil and produced

more organic residue and acids. The decomposed

organic matter darkened the surface layer of these

soils.

While organic matter was being decomposed,

minerals within the Vanzile soils were being chemically

weathered by organic acids. Also, iron was being

oxidized. Percolating water then translocated the

weathered minerals, oxidized iron, and some organic

matter to the lower parts of the profile. The result was

the formation of a thin, bleached, brown subsurface

layer and a subsoil of accumulated dark brown

minerals.

The percolating water also translocated suspended

particles of clay downward. As a result, the lower part

of the subsoil has more clay than other parts of the

profile. The underlying glacial outwash, which typically

is at a depth of about 33 inches, is unweathered. It has

changed little since it was deposited.

Figure 26.—A pit exposure of stratified glacial outwash. The amount of sand and gravel varies widely in these deposits.
228

The processes that were active in the formation of

the Vanzile soils were gains in the organic matter in

the surface layer, loss of weathered minerals and clay

from the upper part of the soil and the subsequent

transfer of these to the upper and lower parts of the

subsoil, and the transformation of iron compounds in

the subsoil. All of these processes have been active in

the soils of Florence County. The kinds of parent

material and the relief to a great extent have

determined the kinds of processes that are dominant

in the formation of all the soils. These processes, in

turn, largely determine the differences and similarities

among the soils.
229

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2000.

Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and

testing. 20th edition, 2 volumes.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2001. Standard classification of

soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D 2487-00.

Carlson, Harlan, Lloyd M. Andrews, and C.W. Threinen. 1971. Surface water resources

of Florence County. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

Clayton, Lee. 1986. Pleistocene geology of Florence County, Wisconsin. Wisconsin

Geological and Natural History Survey, Information Circular 51.

Hole, Francis D., and others. 1962. Soil survey of Florence County, Wisconsin. State of

Wisconsin, Soil Series 59, Bulletin 84.

Jenny, Hans. 1941. Factors of soil formation.

Kotar, John, Joseph A. Kovach, and Craig T. Locey. 1988. Field guide to forest habitat

types of northern Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Forestry,

and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

Oakes, E.L., and L.J. Hamilton. 1973. Water resources of Wisconsin-MenomineeOconto-Peshtigo River basin. U.S. Geological Survey, Atlas HA-470.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.

Department of Agriculture Handbook 18.

Soil Survey Staff. 1994. Keys to soil taxonomy. 6th edition. U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.

Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making

and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436.

United States Department of Agriculture. 1961. Land capability classification. Soil

Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210.

United States Department of Agriculture. 1984. Timber resource of Wisconsin’s

northeast survey unit, 1983. Research Bulletin NC-78.

References
230

Whitson, A.R., and others. 1916. Reconnaissance soil survey of northeastern

Wisconsin. State of Wisconsin, Soil Series 12, Bulletin 47.

Wisconsin Agricultural Statistics Service. 1991. Wisconsin 1991 agricultural statistics.

State of Wisconsin.
231

Alluvium. Material, such as sand, silt, or clay,

deposited on land by streams.

Alpha,alpha-dipyridyl. A dye that when dissolved in

1N ammonium acetate is used to detect the

presence of reduced iron (Fe II) in the soil. A

positive reaction indicates a type of redoximorphic

feature.

Animal unit month (AUM). The amount of forage

required by one mature cow of approximately

1,000 pounds weight, with or without a calf, for 1

month.

Aquic conditions. Current soil wetness characterized

by saturation, reduction, and redoximorphic

features.

Area reclaim (in tables). An area difficult to reclaim

after the removal of soil for construction and other

uses. Revegetation and erosion control are

extremely difficult.

Available water capacity (available moisture

capacity). The capacity of soils to hold water

available for use by most plants. It is commonly

defined as the difference between the amount of

soil water at field moisture capacity and the

amount at wilting point. It is commonly expressed

as inches of water per inch of soil. The capacity, in

inches, in a 60-inch profile or to a limiting layer is

expressed as:

Very low ............................................................ 0 to 3

Low ................................................................... 3 to 6

Moderate .......................................................... 6 to 9

High ................................................................ 9 to 12

Very high .............................................. more than 12

Backslope. The position that forms the steepest and

generally linear, middle portion of a hillslope. In

profile, backslopes are commonly bounded by a

convex shoulder above and a concave footslope

below.

Base saturation. The degree to which material having

cation-exchange properties is saturated with

exchangeable bases (sum of Ca, Mg, Na, and K),

expressed as a percentage of the total cationexchange capacity.

Bedrock. The solid rock that underlies the soil and

other unconsolidated material or that is exposed at

the surface.

Bedrock-controlled topography. A landscape where

the configuration and relief of the landforms are

determined or strongly influenced by the

underlying bedrock.

Board foot. A unit of measurement represented by a

board 1 foot wide, 1 foot long, and 1 inch thick.

Boulders. Rock fragments larger than 2 feet (60

centimeters) in diameter.

Canopy. The leafy crown of trees or shrubs. (See

Crown.)

Cation. An ion carrying a positive charge of electricity.

The common soil cations are calcium, potassium,

magnesium, sodium, and hydrogen.

Cation-exchange capacity. The total amount of

exchangeable cations that can be held by the soil,

expressed in terms of milliequivalents per 100

grams of soil at neutrality (pH 7.0) or at some

other stated pH value. The term, as applied to

soils, is synonymous with base-exchange capacity

but is more precise in meaning.

Chiseling. Tillage with an implement having one or

more soil-penetrating points that shatter or loosen

hard, compacted layers to a depth below normal

plow depth.

Clay. As a soil separate, the mineral soil particles less

than 0.002 millimeter in diameter. As a soil textural

class, soil material that is 40 percent or more clay,

less than 45 percent sand, and less than 40

percent silt.

Clay depletions. Low-chroma zones having a low

content of iron, manganese, and clay because of

the chemical reduction of iron and manganese

and the removal of iron, manganese, and clay. A

type of redoximorphic depletion.

Clay film. A thin coating of oriented clay on the

surface of a soil aggregate or lining pores or root

channels. Synonyms: clay coating, clay skin.

Clayey. General term for the soil textural classes clay,

silty clay, and sandy clay.

Clearcutting. The removal of all the timber in a stand

when trees are harvested.

Climax plant community. The stabilized plant

Glossary
232 Soil Survey of

community on a particular site. The plant cover

reproduces itself and does not change so long as

the environment remains the same.

Coarse textured soil. Sand or loamy sand.

Cobble (or cobblestone). A rounded or partly

rounded fragment of rock 3 to 10 inches (7.6 to 25

centimeters) in diameter.

Cobbly soil material. Material that has 15 to 35

percent, by volume, rounded or partially rounded

rock fragments 3 to 10 inches (7.6 to 25

centimeters) in diameter. Very cobbly soil material

has 35 to 60 percent of these rock fragments, and

extremely cobbly soil material has more than 60

percent.

Complex slope. Irregular or variable slope. Planning

or establishing terraces, diversions, and other

water-control structures on a complex slope is

difficult.

Complex, soil. A map unit of two or more kinds of soil

or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern

or so small in area that it is not practical to map

them separately at the selected scale of mapping.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or

miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all

areas.

Concretions. Cemented bodies with crude internal

symmetry organized around a point, a line, or a

plane. They typically take the form of concentric

layers visible to the naked eye. Calcium carbonate,

iron oxide, and manganese oxide are common

compounds making up concretions. If formed in

place, concretions of iron oxide or manganese

oxide are generally considered a type of

redoximorphic concentration.

Conservation cropping system. Growing crops in

combination with needed cultural and

management practices. In a good conservation

cropping system, the soil-improving crops and

practices more than offset the effects of the soildepleting crops and practices. Cropping systems

are needed on all tilled soils. Soil-improving

practices in a conservation cropping system

include the use of rotations that contain grasses

and legumes and the return of crop residue to the

soil. Other practices include the use of green

manure crops of grasses and legumes, proper

tillage, adequate fertilization, and weed and pest

control.

Conservation tillage. A tillage system that does not

invert the soil and that leaves a protective amount

of crop residue on the surface throughout the year.

Consistence, soil. Refers to the degree of cohesion

and adhesion of soil material and its resistance to

deformation when ruptured. Consistence includes

resistance of soil material to rupture and to

penetration; plasticity, toughness, and stickiness of

puddled soil material; and the manner in which the

soil material behaves when subject to

compression. Terms describing consistence are

defined in the “Soil Survey Manual.”

Contour stripcropping. Growing crops in strips that

follow the contour. Strips of grass or close-growing

crops are alternated with strips of clean-tilled

crops or summer fallow.

Control section. The part of the soil on which

classification is based. The thickness varies

among different kinds of soil, but for many it is that

part of the soil profile between depths of 10 inches

and 40 or 80 inches.

Cord. A unit of measurement of stacked wood. A

standard cord occupies 128 cubic feet with

dimensions of 4 feet by 4 feet by 8 feet.

Corrosion. Soil-induced electrochemical or chemical

action that dissolves or weakens concrete or

uncoated steel.

Cover crop. A close-growing crop grown primarily to

improve and protect the soil between periods of

regular crop production, or a crop grown between

trees and vines in orchards and vineyards.

Cradle-knoll. A small mound made up of soil material

that temporarily clung to the roots when a tree

was uprooted.

Critical-area planting. Planting stabilizing vegetation

in highly erodible or critically eroding areas. The

areas typically cannot be stabilized by ordinary

conservation treatment and management, and

leaving them untreated can result in severe

erosion or in damage from sediment.

Crop residue management. Returning crop residue

to the soil, which helps to maintain soil structure,

organic matter content, and fertility and helps to

control erosion.

Cropping system. Growing crops according to a

planned system of rotation and management

practices.

Crown. The upper part of a tree or shrub, including the

living branches and their foliage.

Culmination of the mean annual increment (CMAI).

The average annual increase per acre in the

volume of a stand. Computed by dividing the total

volume of the stand by its age. As the stand

increases in age, the mean annual increment

continues to increase until mortality begins to

reduce the rate of increase. The point where the

stand reaches its maximum annual rate of growth

is called the culmination of the mean annual

increment.

Cut area. A special symbol used on the soil maps to
Florence County, Wisconsin 233

indicate a small area where the soil has been

altered by the removal of more than about a foot of

soil material.

Cutbanks cave (in tables). The walls of excavations

tend to cave in or slough.

Decreasers. The most heavily grazed climax range

plants. Because they are the most palatable, they

are the first to be destroyed by overgrazing.

Deep to water (in tables). The soil is deep to a

permanent water table (typically more than 5 feet)

during the dry season.

Deferred grazing. Postponing grazing or resting

grazing land for a prescribed period.

Depression, closed. A special symbol used on the

soil maps to indicate a small, concave area the

middle of which is generally at least 5 feet lower in

elevation than the surrounding map unit.

Depth, soil. Generally, the thickness of the soil over

bedrock. Very deep soils are more than 60 inches

deep over bedrock; deep soils, 40 to 60 inches;

moderately deep, 20 to 40 inches; shallow, 10 to

20 inches; and very shallow, less than 10 inches.

Depth to rock (in tables). Bedrock is too near the

surface for the specified use.

Diversion (or diversion terrace). A ridge of earth,

generally a terrace, built to protect downslope

areas by diverting runoff from its natural course.

Drainage class (natural). Refers to the frequency and

duration of wet periods under conditions similar to

those under which the soil formed. Alterations of

the water regime by human activities, either

through drainage or irrigation, are not a

consideration unless they have significantly

changed the morphology of the soil. Seven

classes of natural soil drainage are recognized—

excessively drained, somewhat excessively

drained, well drained, moderately well drained,

somewhat poorly drained, poorly drained, and

very poorly drained. These classes are defined in

the “Soil Survey Manual.”

Drainage, surface. Runoff, or surface flow of water,

from an area.

Droughty (in tables). The soil holds too little water for

plants during dry periods.

Drumlin. A low, smooth, elongated oval hill, mound, or

ridge of compact glacial till. The longer axis is

parallel to the path of the glacier and commonly

has a blunt nose pointing in the direction from

which the ice approached.

Dry spot. A special symbol used on the soil maps to

indicate a small area of mineral soil within an area

of organic soils.

Eluviation. The movement of material in true solution

or colloidal suspension from one place to another

within the soil. Soil horizons that have lost material

through eluviation are eluvial; those that have

received material are illuvial.

Endosaturation. A type of saturation of the soil in

which all horizons between the upper boundary of

saturation and a depth of 2 meters are saturated.

Episaturation. A type of saturation indicating a

perched water table in a soil in which saturated

layers are underlain by one or more unsaturated

layers within 2 meters of the surface.

Erosion. The wearing away of the land surface by

water, wind, ice, or other geologic agents and by

such processes as gravitational creep.

Erosion (geologic). Erosion caused by geologic

processes acting over long geologic periods and

resulting in the wearing away of mountains and

the building up of such landscape features as

flood plains and coastal plains. Synonym: natural

erosion.

Erosion (accelerated). Erosion much more rapid

than geologic erosion, mainly as a result of human

or animal activities or of a catastrophe in nature,

such as a fire, that exposes the surface.

Esker. A narrow, winding ridge of stratified gravelly

and sandy drift deposited by a stream flowing in a

tunnel beneath a glacier.

Eutrophication. The aging process of lakes in which

aquatic plants become abundant and waters

become deficient in oxygen. The process is

usually accelerated by enrichment of waters with

surface runoff containing nitrogen and

phosphorus.

Excess fines (in tables). Excess silt and clay in the

soil. The soil does not provide a source of gravel

or sand for construction purposes.

Excess humus (in tables). The content of organic

matter is so high that it adversely affects the

specified use.

Fast intake (in tables). The rapid movement of water

into the soil.

Fertility, soil. The quality that enables a soil to provide

plant nutrients, in adequate amounts and in proper

balance, for the growth of specified plants when

light, moisture, temperature, tilth, and other growth

factors are favorable.

Fibric soil material (peat). The least decomposed of

all organic soil material. Peat contains a large

amount of well preserved fiber that is readily

identifiable according to botanical origin. Peat

has the lowest bulk density and the highest

water content at saturation of all organic soil

material.

Field border. A strip of perennial vegetation

established at the edge of a field.
234 Soil Survey of

Field windbreak. A strip of trees or shrubs

established within or adjacent to a field.

Fill area. A special symbol used on the soil maps to

indicate a small area covered with 1 foot to several

feet of graded or filled soil material.

Fine textured soil. Sandy clay, silty clay, or clay.

Flood plain. A nearly level alluvial plain that borders a

stream and is subject to flooding unless protected

artificially.

Footslope. The position that forms the inner, gently

inclined surface at the base of a hillslope. In

profile, footslopes are commonly concave. A

footslope is a transition zone between upslope

sites of erosion and transport (shoulders and

backslopes) and downslope sites of deposition

(toeslopes).

Forb. Any herbaceous plant not a grass or a sedge.

Forest cover. All trees and other woody plants

(underbrush) covering the ground in a forest.

Forest cover type. The dominant tree species in a

tract of forest land.

Forest habitat type. An association of dominant trees

and ground flora species in a climax plant

community.

Fragipan. A loamy, brittle subsurface horizon low in

porosity and content of organic matter and low or

moderate in clay but high in silt or very fine sand.

A fragipan appears cemented and restricts roots.

When dry, it is hard or very hard and has a higher

bulk density than the horizon or horizons above.

When moist, it tends to rupture suddenly under

pressure rather than to deform slowly.

Frost action (in tables). Freezing and thawing of soil

moisture. Frost action can damage roads,

buildings and other structures, and plant roots.

Glacial drift. Pulverized and other rock material

transported by glacial ice and then deposited.

Also, the sorted and unsorted material deposited

by streams flowing from glaciers.

Glacial mudflow sediment (geology). Clay, silt, sand,

gravel, cobbles, stones, and boulders that were let

down from the surface of glacial ice and have

undergone some flow or mass movement.

Glacial outwash. Gravel, sand, and silt, commonly

stratified, deposited by glacial meltwater.

Glacial till. Unsorted, nonstratified glacial drift

consisting of clay, silt, sand, and boulders

transported and deposited by glacial ice.

Gleyed soil. Soil that formed under poor drainage,

resulting in the reduction of iron and other

elements in the profile and in gray colors.

Grassed waterway. A natural or constructed

waterway, typically broad and shallow, seeded to

grass as protection against erosion. Conducts

surface water away from cropland.

Gravel. Rounded or angular fragments of rock as

much as 3 inches (2 millimeters to 7.6

centimeters) in diameter. An individual piece is a

pebble.

Gravelly soil material. Material that has 15 to 35

percent, by volume, rounded or angular rock

fragments, not prominently flattened, as much as

3 inches (7.6 centimeters) in diameter.

Green manure crop (agronomy). A soil-improving

crop grown to be plowed under in an early stage

of maturity or soon after maturity.

Ground water. Water filling all the unblocked pores of

the material below the water table.

Hard bedrock. Bedrock that cannot be excavated

except by blasting or by the use of special

equipment that is not commonly used in

construction.

Head slope. A geomorphic component of hills

consisting of a laterally concave area of a hillside,

especially at the head of a drainageway. The

overland waterflow is converging.

Hemic soil material (mucky peat). Organic soil

material intermediate in degree of decomposition

between the less decomposed fibric material and

the more decomposed sapric material.

High-chroma zones. Zones having chroma of 3 or

more. Typical color in areas of iron accumulations.

Horizon, soil. A layer of soil, approximately parallel to

the surface, having distinct characteristics

produced by soil-forming processes. In the

identification of soil horizons, an uppercase letter

represents the major horizons. Numbers or

lowercase letters that follow represent

subdivisions of the major horizons. An explanation

of the subdivisions is given in the “Soil Survey

Manual.” The major horizons of mineral soil are as

follows:

O horizon.—An organic layer of fresh and

decaying plant residue.

A horizon.—The mineral horizon at or near the

surface in which an accumulation of humified

organic matter is mixed with the mineral material.

Also, a plowed surface horizon, most of which was

originally part of a B horizon.

E horizon.—The mineral horizon in which the main

feature is loss of silicate clay, iron, aluminum, or

some combination of these.

B horizon.—The mineral horizon below an A

horizon. The B horizon is in part a layer of

transition from the overlying A to the underlying C

horizon. The B horizon also has distinctive
Florence County, Wisconsin 235

characteristics, such as (1) accumulation of clay,

sesquioxides, humus, or a combination of these;

(2) prismatic or blocky structure; (3) redder or

browner colors than those in the A horizon; or (4)

a combination of these.

C horizon.—The mineral horizon or layer,

excluding indurated bedrock, that is little affected

by soil-forming processes and does not have the

properties typical of the overlying soil material.

The material of a C horizon may be either like or

unlike that in which the solum formed. If the

material is known to differ from that in the solum,

an Arabic numeral, commonly a 2, precedes the

letter C.

Cr horizon.—Soft, consolidated bedrock beneath

the soil.

R layer.—Consolidated bedrock beneath the soil.

The bedrock commonly underlies a C horizon, but

it can be directly below an A or a B horizon.

Humus. The well decomposed, more or less stable

part of the organic matter in mineral soils.

Hydrologic soil groups. Refers to soils grouped

according to their runoff potential. The soil

properties that influence this potential are those

that affect the minimum rate of water infiltration on

a bare soil during periods after prolonged wetting

when the soil is not frozen. These properties are

depth to a seasonal high water table, the

infiltration rate and permeability after prolonged

wetting, and depth to a very slowly permeable

layer. The slope and the kind of plant cover are not

considered but are separate factors in predicting

runoff.

Igneous rock. Rock formed by solidification from a

molten or partially molten state. Major varieties

include plutonic and volcanic rock. Examples are

andesite, basalt, and granite.

Illuviation. The movement of soil material from one

horizon to another in the soil profile. Generally,

material is removed from an upper horizon and

deposited in a lower horizon.

Impervious soil. A soil through which water, air, or

roots penetrate slowly or not at all. No soil is

absolutely impervious to air and water all the time.

Increasers. Species in the climax vegetation that

increase in amount as the more desirable plants

are reduced by close grazing. Increasers

commonly are the shorter plants and the less

palatable to livestock.

Infiltration. The downward entry of water into the

immediate surface of soil or other material, as

contrasted with percolation, which is movement of

water through soil layers or material.

Infiltration capacity. The maximum rate at which

water can infiltrate into a soil under a given set of

conditions.

Infiltration rate. The rate at which water penetrates

the surface of the soil at any given instant, usually

expressed in inches per hour. The rate can be

limited by the infiltration capacity of the soil or the

rate at which water is applied at the surface.

Interfluve. An elevated area between two

drainageways that sheds water to those

drainageways.

Iron accumulations. High-chroma zones having a

high content of iron and manganese oxide but

having a clay content similar to that of the

adjacent matrix.

Iron depletions. Low-chroma zones having a low

content of iron and manganese oxide because of

chemical reduction and removal but having a clay

content similar to that of the adjacent matrix. A

type of redoximorphic depletion.

Irrigation. Application of water to soils to assist in

production of crops.

Kame. An irregular, short ridge or hill of stratified

glacial drift.

Knoll. A small, low, rounded hill rising above adjacent

landforms.

Ksat. Saturated hydraulic conductivity. (See

Permeability.)

Lacustrine deposit. Material deposited in lake water

and exposed when the water level is lowered or

the elevation of the land is raised.

Large stones (in tables). Rock fragments 3 inches

(7.6 centimeters) or more across. Large stones

adversely affect the specified use of the soil.

Leaching. The removal of soluble material from soil or

other material by percolating water.

Liquid limit. The moisture content at which the soil

passes from a plastic to a liquid state.

Loam. Soil material that is 7 to 27 percent clay

particles, 28 to 50 percent silt particles, and less

than 52 percent sand particles.

Loamy. General term for the soil textural classes very

fine sandy loam, fine sandy loam, sandy loam,

coarse sandy loam, loam, clay loam, and sandy

clay loam.

Low strength. The soil is not strong enough to

support loads.

Low-chroma zones. Zones having chroma of 2 or

less. Typical color in areas of iron depletions.

Masses. Concentrations of substances in the soil

matrix that do not have a clearly defined boundary

with the surrounding soil material and cannot be

removed as a discrete unit. Common compounds

making up masses are calcium carbonate,

gypsum or other soluble salts, iron oxide, and
236 Soil Survey of

manganese oxide. Masses consisting of iron oxide

or manganese oxide generally are considered a

type of redoximorphic concentration.

Medium textured soil. Very fine sandy loam, loam,

silt loam, or silt.

Metamorphic rock. Rock of any origin altered in

mineralogical composition, chemical composition,

or structure by heat, pressure, and movement.

Nearly all such rocks are crystalline.

Mineral soil. Soil that is mainly mineral material and

low in organic material. Its bulk density is more

than that of organic soil.

Minimum tillage. Only the tillage essential to crop

production and prevention of soil damage.

Miscellaneous area. An area that has little or no

natural soil and supports little or no vegetation.

Moderately coarse textured soil. Coarse sandy

loam, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam.

Moderately fine textured soil. Clay loam, sandy clay

loam, or silty clay loam.

Mollic epipedon. A thick, dark, humus-rich surface

horizon (or horizons) that has high base saturation

and pedogenic soil structure. It may include the

upper part of the subsoil.

Moraine. An accumulation of earth, stones, and other

debris deposited by a glacier. Some types are

terminal, lateral, medial, and ground.

Morphology, soil. The physical makeup of the soil,

including the texture, structure, porosity,

consistence, color, and other physical, mineral,

and biological properties of the various horizons,

and the thickness and arrangement of those

horizons in the soil profile.

Mottling, soil. Irregular spots of different colors that

vary in number and size. Descriptive terms are as

follows: abundance—few, common, and many;

size—fine, medium, and coarse; and contrast—

faint, distinct, and prominent. The size

measurements are of the diameter along the

greatest dimension. Fine indicates less than 5

millimeters (about 0.2 inch); medium, from 5 to 15

millimeters (about 0.2 to 0.6 inch); and coarse,

more than 15 millimeters (about 0.6 inch).

Muck. Dark, finely divided, well decomposed organic

soil material. (See Sapric soil material.)

Munsell notation. A designation of color by degrees

of three simple variables—hue, value, and

chroma. For example, a notation of 10YR 6/4 is

a color with hue of 10YR, value of 6, and chroma

of 4.

Neutral soil. A soil having a pH value of 6.6 to 7.3.

(See Reaction, soil.)

No water (in tables). The ground water is too deep for

the specified use.

Nodules. Cemented bodies lacking visible internal

structure. Calcium carbonate, iron oxide, and

manganese oxide are common compounds

making up nodules. If formed in place, nodules of

iron oxide or manganese oxide are considered

types of redoximorphic concentrations.

Nose slope. A geomorphic component of hills

consisting of the projecting end (laterally convex

area) of a hillside. The overland waterflow is

predominantly divergent.

Nutrient, plant. Any element taken in by a plant

essential to its growth. Plant nutrients are mainly

nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium,

magnesium, sulfur, iron, manganese, copper,

boron, and zinc obtained from the soil and carbon,

hydrogen, and oxygen obtained from the air and

water.

Organic matter. Plant and animal residue in the soil in

various stages of decomposition. The content of

organic matter in the surface layer is described as

follows:

Very low ................................... less than 0.5 percent

Low ................................................ 0.5 to 1.0 percent

Moderately low .............................. 1.0 to 2.0 percent

Moderate ....................................... 2.0 to 4.0 percent

High ............................................... 4.0 to 8.0 percent

Very high ............................... more than 8.0 percent

Organic soil. A soil that contains 12 percent to more

than 18 percent organic carbon, depending on the

content of mineral materials, and is 16 or more

inches thick.

Outwash plain. A landform of mainly sandy or coarse

textured material of glaciofluvial origin. An

outwash plain is commonly smooth; where pitted,

it generally is low in relief.

Paleoterrace. An erosional remnant of a terrace that

retains the surface form and alluvial deposits of its

origin but was not emplaced by, and commonly

does not grade to, a present-day stream or

drainage network.

Parent material. The unconsolidated organic and

mineral material in which soil forms.

Peat. Unconsolidated material, largely undecomposed

organic matter, that has accumulated under

excess moisture. (See Fibric soil material.)

Ped. An individual natural soil aggregate, such as a

granule, a prism, or a block.

Pedon. The smallest volume that can be called “a soil.”

A pedon is three dimensional and large enough to

permit study of all horizons. Its area ranges from

about 10 to 100 square feet (1 square meter to 10

square meters), depending on the variability of the

soil.
Florence County, Wisconsin 237

Perched water table. A water table that exists in the

soil above an unsaturated zone.

Percolation. The movement of water through the soil.

Percs slowly (in tables). The slow movement of water

through the soil adversely affects the specified

use.

Permeability. The quality of the soil that enables water

or air to move downward through the profile. The

rate at which a saturated soil transmits water is

accepted as a measure of this quality. In soil

physics, the rate is referred to as “saturated

hydraulic conductivity,” which is defined in the “Soil

Survey Manual.” In line with conventional usage in

the engineering profession and with traditional

usage in published soil surveys, this rate of flow

continues to be expressed as “permeability.” Terms

describing permeability, measured in inches per

hour, are as follows:

Impermeable ...........................less than 0.0015 inch

Very slow .................................... 0.0015 to 0.06 inch

Slow.................................................. 0.06 to 0.2 inch

Moderately slow ................................. 0.2 to 0.6 inch

Moderate ................................ 0.6 inch to 2.0 inches

Moderately rapid ............................ 2.0 to 6.0 inches

Rapid ............................................... 6.0 to 20 inches

Very rapid ................................. more than 20 inches

pH value. A numerical designation of acidity and

alkalinity in soil. (See Reaction, soil.)

Phase, soil. A subdivision of a soil series based on

features that affect its use and management, such

as slope, stoniness, and flooding.

Piping (in tables). Formation of subsurface tunnels or

pipelike cavities by water moving through the soil.

Pitted outwash. An outwash area characterized by

many irregular depressions, such as kettles,

shallow pits, and potholes.

Plastic limit. The moisture content at which a soil

changes from semisolid to plastic.

Poletimber. Hardwood trees ranging from 5 to 11

inches in diameter at breast height; coniferous

trees ranging from 5 to 9 inches in diameter at

breast height.

Ponding. Standing water on soils in closed

depressions. Unless the soils are artificially

drained, the water can be removed only by

percolation or evapotranspiration.

Poor filter (in tables). Because of rapid or very rapid

permeability, the soil may not adequately filter

effluent from a waste disposal system.

Poorly graded. Refers to a coarse grained soil or soil

material consisting mainly of particles of nearly

the same size. Because there is little difference in

size of the particles, density can be increased only

slightly by compaction.

Potential rooting depth (effective rooting depth).

Depth to which roots could penetrate if the content

of moisture in the soil were adequate. The soil has

no properties restricting the penetration of roots to

this depth.

Productivity, soil. The capability of a soil for

producing a specified plant or sequence of plants

under specific management.

Profile, soil. A vertical section of the soil extending

through all its horizons and into the parent

material.

Reaction, soil. A measure of acidity or alkalinity of a

soil, expressed in pH values. A soil that tests to pH

7.0 is described as precisely neutral in reaction

because it is neither acid nor alkaline. The

degrees of acidity or alkalinity, expressed as pH

values, are:

Ultra acid .............................................. less than 3.5

Extremely acid ........................................... 3.5 to 4.4

Very strongly acid ...................................... 4.5 to 5.0

Strongly acid .............................................. 5.1 to 5.5

Moderately acid .......................................... 5.6 to 6.0

Slightly acid ................................................ 6.1 to 6.5

Neutral ........................................................ 6.6 to 7.3

Slightly alkaline .......................................... 7.4 to 7.8

Moderately alkaline .................................... 7.9 to 8.4

Strongly alkaline ........................................ 8.5 to 9.0

Very strongly alkaline ......................... 9.1 and higher

Redoximorphic concentrations. Nodules,

concretions, soft masses, pore linings, and other

features resulting from the accumulation of iron or

manganese oxide. An indication of chemical

reduction and oxidation resulting from saturation.

Redoximorphic depletions. Low-chroma zones from

which iron and manganese oxide or a combination

of iron and manganese oxide and clay has been

removed. These zones are indications of the

chemical reduction of iron resulting from

saturation.

Redoximorphic features. Redoximorphic

concentrations, redoximorphic depletions, reduced

matrices, a positive reaction to alpha,alphadipyridyl, and other features indicating the

chemical reduction and oxidation of iron and

manganese compounds resulting from saturation.

Reduced matrix. A soil matrix that has low chroma in

situ because of chemically reduced iron (Fe II).

The chemical reduction results from nearly

continuous wetness. The matrix undergoes a

change in hue or chroma within 30 minutes after
238 Soil Survey of

exposure to air as the iron is oxidized (Fe III). A

type of redoximorphic feature.

Relief. The elevations or inequalities of a land surface,

considered collectively.

Residuum (residual soil material). Unconsolidated,

weathered or partly weathered mineral material

that accumulated as consolidated rock

disintegrated in place.

Rock fragments. Rock or mineral fragments having a

diameter of 2 millimeters or more; for example,

pebbles, cobbles, stones, and boulders.

Rock outcrop. A special symbol used on the soil

maps to indicate a small exposure of bedrock.

Root zone. The part of the soil that can be penetrated

by plant roots.

Rooting depth (in tables). Shallow root zone. The soil

is shallow over a layer that greatly restricts roots.

Runoff. The precipitation discharged into stream

channels from an area. The water that flows off the

surface of the land without sinking into the soil is

called surface runoff. Water that enters the soil

before reaching surface streams is called groundwater runoff or seepage flow from ground water.

Sand. As a soil separate, individual rock or mineral

fragments from 0.05 millimeter to 2.0 millimeters in

diameter. Most sand grains consist of quartz. As a

soil textural class, a soil that is 85 percent or more

sand and not more than 10 percent clay.

Sandy. General term for the soil textural classes

loamy very fine sand, loamy fine sand, loamy

sand, loamy coarse sand, very fine sand, fine

sand, sand, and coarse sand.

Sapling. A tree ranging from 1 inch to 5 inches in

diameter at breast height.

Sapric soil material (muck). The most highly

decomposed of all organic soil material. Muck has

the least amount of plant fiber, the highest bulk

density, and the lowest water content at saturation

of all organic soil material.

Saturation. Wetness characterized by zero or positive

pressure of the soil water. Under conditions of

saturation, the water will flow from the soil matrix

into an unlined auger hole.

Sawtimber. Hardwood trees more than 11 inches in

diameter at breast height; coniferous trees more

than 9 inches in diameter at breast height.

Sedimentary rock. Rock made up of particles

deposited from suspension in water. The chief

kinds of sedimentary rock are conglomerate,

formed from gravel; sandstone, formed from sand;

shale, formed from clay; and limestone, formed

from soft masses of calcium carbonate. There are

many intermediate types. Some wind-deposited

sand is consolidated into sandstone.

Seedling. A tree less than 1 inch in diameter at breast

height.

Seepage (in tables). The movement of water through

the soil. Seepage adversely affects the specified

use.

Sequum. A sequence consisting of an illuvial horizon

and the overlying eluvial horizon. (See Eluviation.)

Series, soil. A group of soils that have profiles that are

almost alike, except for differences in texture of

the surface layer. All the soils of a series have

horizons that are similar in composition, thickness,

and arrangement.

Shelterwood cut. A method of tree harvest in which

enough large trees are left to protect the younger

and shorter trees from windthrow and other

damage.

Short steep slope. A special symbol used on the soil

maps to indicate a narrow, elongated area in

which the slope is at least two classes greater

than that of the surrounding area.

Shoulder. The position that forms the uppermost

inclined surface near the top of a hillslope. It is a

transition from backslope to summit. The surface

is dominantly convex in profile and erosional in

origin.

Side slope. A geomorphic component of hills

consisting of a laterally planar area of a hillside.

The overland waterflow is predominantly parallel.

Silt. As a soil separate, individual mineral particles

that range in diameter from the upper limit of clay

(0.002 millimeter) to the lower limit of very fine

sand (0.05 millimeter). As a soil textural class, soil

that is 80 percent or more silt and less than 12

percent clay.

Silty. General term for the soil textural classes silt, silt

loam, and silty clay loam.

Similar soils. Soils that share limits of diagnostic

criteria, behave and perform in a similar manner,

and have similar conservation needs or

management requirements for the major land uses

in the survey area.

Site index. A designation of the quality of a forest site

based on the height of the dominant stand at an

arbitrarily chosen age. For example, if the average

height attained by dominant and codominant trees

in a fully stocked stand at the age of 50 years is

75 feet, the site index is 75.

Slope. The inclination of the land surface from the

horizontal. Percentage of slope is the vertical

distance divided by horizontal distance, then
Florence County, Wisconsin 239

multiplied by 100. Thus, a slope of 20 percent is a

drop of 20 feet in 100 feet of horizontal distance. In

this survey, the slope classes are as follows:

Nearly level ......................................... 0 to 2 percent

Gently sloping ..................................... 2 to 6 percent

Sloping .............................................. 6 to 15 percent

Moderately steep ............................ 15 to 25 percent

Steep ............................................... 25 to 35 percent

Slope (in tables). Slope is great enough that special

practices are required to ensure satisfactory

performance of the soil for a specific use.

Small stones (in tables). Rock fragments less than 3

inches (7.6 centimeters) in diameter. Small stones

adversely affect the specified use of the soil.

Sodium adsorption ratio (SAR). A measure of the

amount of sodium (Na) relative to calcium (Ca)

and magnesium (Mg) in the water extract from

saturated soil paste. It is the ratio of the Na

concentration divided by the square root of onehalf of the Ca + Mg concentration.

Soft bedrock. Bedrock that can be excavated with

trenching machines, backhoes, small rippers, and

other equipment commonly used in construction.

Soil. A natural, three-dimensional body at the earth’s

surface. It is capable of supporting plants and has

properties resulting from the integrated effect of

climate and living matter acting on earthy parent

material, as conditioned by relief and by the

passage of time.

Soil blowing (in tables). The soil is easily moved by

the wind.

Soil separates. Mineral particles less than 2

millimeters in equivalent diameter and ranging

between specified size limits. The names and

sizes, in millimeters, of separates recognized in

the United States are as follows:

Very coarse sand ....................................... 2.0 to 1.0

Coarse sand ............................................... 1.0 to 0.5

Medium sand ........................................... 0.5 to 0.25

Fine sand ............................................... 0.25 to 0.10

Very fine sand ........................................ 0.10 to 0.05

Silt ........................................................ 0.05 to 0.002

Clay .................................................. less than 0.002

Solum. The upper part of a soil profile, above the C

horizon, in which the processes of soil formation

are active. The solum in soil consists of the A, E,

and B horizons. Generally, the characteristics of

the material in these horizons are unlike those of

the material below the solum. The living roots and

plant and animal activities are largely confined to

the solum.

Stones. Rock fragments 10 to 24 inches (25 to 60

centimeters) in diameter if rounded or 15 to 24

inches (38 to 60 centimeters) in length if flat.

Stony. Refers to a soil containing stones in numbers

that interfere with or prevent tillage.

Strip cut. A method of tree harvest in which the

timber is clearcut in strips, commonly 50 to 100

feet wide.

Stripcropping. Growing crops in a systematic

arrangement of strips or bands that provide

vegetative barriers to soil blowing and water

erosion.

Structure, soil. The arrangement of primary soil

particles into compound particles or aggregates.

The principal forms of soil structure are—platy

(laminated), prismatic (vertical axis of aggregates

longer than horizontal), columnar (prisms with

rounded tops), blocky (angular or subangular),

and granular. Structureless soils are either single

grain (each grain by itself, as in dune sand) or

massive (the particles adhering without any

regular cleavage, as in many hardpans).

Subsides (in tables). The settlement of organic soils

or soils containing semifluid layers.

Subsoil. Technically, the B horizon; roughly, the part of

the solum below plow depth.

Substratum. The part of the soil below the solum.

Subsurface layer. Any surface soil horizon (A, E, AB,

or EB) below the surface layer.

Succession. The replacement of one plant community

by another. Shade-tolerant plant species

commonly replace shade-intolerant species.

Summit. The topographically highest position of a

hillslope. It has a nearly level (planar or only

slightly convex) surface.

Surface layer. The A and Ap horizons and those E,

Oi, Oe, and Oa horizons that extend all the way to

the land surface. The Oi, Oe, and Oa horizons in

soils that are excessively drained, somewhat

excessively drained, well drained, moderately well

drained, or somewhat poorly drained are

considered organic layers rather than surface

layers.

Surface soil. The A, E, AB, and EB horizons,

considered collectively. It includes all subdivisions

of these horizons.

Terrace. An embankment, or ridge, constructed

across sloping soils on the contour or at a slight

angle to the contour. The terrace intercepts

surface runoff so that water soaks into the soil or

flows slowly to a prepared outlet. A terrace in a

field generally is built so that the field can be

farmed. A terrace intended mainly for drainage
240

has a deep channel that is maintained in

permanent sod.

Terrace (geologic). An old alluvial plain, ordinarily flat

or undulating, bordering a river, a lake, or the sea.

Texture, soil. The relative proportions of sand, silt,

and clay particles in a mass of soil. The basic

textural classes, in order of increasing proportion

of fine particles, are sand, loamy sand, sandy

loam, loam, silt loam, silt, sandy clay loam, clay

loam, silty clay loam, sandy clay, silty clay, and

clay. The sand, loamy sand, and sandy loam

classes may be further divided by specifying

“coarse,” “fine,” or “very fine.”

Thin layer (in tables). Otherwise suitable soil material

that is too thin for the specified use.

Tiers. Layers used to define the control section in the

classification of organic soils. The organic material

is divided into three tiers. The surface tier is the

upper 12 inches, the subsurface tier is the next 24

inches, and the bottom tier is the lower 16 inches.

Till plain. An extensive area of nearly level to

undulating soils underlain by glacial till.

Tilth, soil. The physical condition of the soil as related

to tillage, seedbed preparation, seedling

emergence, and root penetration.

Toeslope. The position that forms the gently inclined

surface at the base of a hillslope. Toeslopes in

profile are commonly gentle and linear and are

constructional surfaces forming the lower part of a

hillslope continuum that grades to valley or closeddepression floors.

Too sandy (in tables). The soil is soft and loose,

droughty, and low in fertility.

Topsoil. The upper part of the soil, which is the most

favorable material for plant growth. It is ordinarily

rich in organic matter and is used to topdress

roadbanks, lawns, and land affected by mining.

Upland. Land at a higher elevation, in general, than

the alluvial plain or stream terrace; land above the

lowlands along streams.

Weathering. All physical and chemical changes

produced in rocks or other deposits at or near the

earth’s surface by atmospheric agents. These

changes result in disintegration and

decomposition of the material.

Well graded. Refers to soil material consisting of

coarse grained particles that are well distributed

over a wide range in size or diameter. Such soil

normally can be easily increased in density and

bearing properties by compaction. Contrasts with

poorly graded soil.

Wilting point (or permanent wilting point). The

moisture content of soil, on an ovendry basis, at

which a plant (specifically a sunflower) wilts so

much that it does not recover when placed in a

humid, dark chamber.

Windthrow. The uprooting and tipping over of trees by

the wind.
241

Tables
242 Soil Survey of

Table 1.--Temperature and Precipitation

(Recorded in the period 1951-84 at Brule Island, Wisconsin)

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | |

 | Temperature | Precipitation

 | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | 2 years in | | |2 years in 10| |

 | | | | 10 will have-- | | | will have-- | | _______________________ _____________

 Month |Average|Average|Average| | | Average |Average| | | Average |Average

 | daily | daily | | Maximum | Minimum |number of| | Less | More |number of|snowfall

 |maximum|minimum| |temperature|temperature| growing | |than--|than--|days with|

 | | | | higher | lower | degree | | | |0.10 inch|

 | | | | than-- | than-- | days* | | | | or more | _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | oF | oF | oF | oF | oF | Units | In | In | In | | In

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 January----| 20.8 | -2.4 | 9.2 | 42 | -34 | 0 | 1.14 | 0.47| 1.71| 4 | 13.4

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 February---| 26.3 | -.1 | 13.1 | 49 | -34 | 0 | .98 | .34| 1.50| 3 | 9.8

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 March------| 36.1 | 11.1 | 23.6 | 60 | -25 | 0 | 1.68 | .69| 2.50| 5 | 10.9

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 April------| 51.4 | 26.3 | 38.9 | 82 | 3 | 0 | 2.57 | 1.67| 3.38| 6 | 3.6

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 May--------| 65.8 | 37.0 | 51.4 | 89 | 19 | 149 | 3.28 | 1.98| 4.44| 7 | .4

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 June-------| 74.5 | 46.2 | 60.4 | 92 | 29 | 316 | 3.91 | 2.26| 5.37| 8 | .0

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 July-------| 79.3 | 51.2 | 65.3 | 94 | 36 | 474 | 3.72 | 2.05| 5.19| 7 | .0

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 August-----| 76.5 | 49.7 | 63.1 | 92 | 33 | 406 | 3.83 | 1.98| 5.43| 7 | .0

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 September--| 65.9 | 41.8 | 53.9 | 88 | 24 | 136 | 3.67 | 1.76| 5.32| 8 | .0

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 October----| 55.2 | 33.0 | 44.1 | 79 | 15 | 38 | 2.36 | .96| 3.53| 6 | .4

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 November---| 38.4 | 21.5 | 30.0 | 62 | -4 | 0 | 1.79 | .91| 2.54| 5 | 6.1

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 December---| 25.8 | 6.8 | 16.3 | 47 | -28 | 0 | 1.49 | .86| 2.05| 5 | 14.4

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 Yearly: | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 Average---| 51.3 | 27.1 | 39.1 | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---| ---| --- | ---

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 Extreme---| --- | --- | --- | 96 | -37 | --- | --- | ---| ---| --- | ---

 | | | | | | | | | | |

 Total-----| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 1,519 | 30.42 | 26.48| 34.22| 71 | 59.0

 | | | | | | | | | | | _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 * A growing degree day is a unit of heat available for plant growth. It can be calculated by adding the

maximum and minimum daily temperatures, dividing the sum by 2, and subtracting the temperature below which

growth is minimal for the principal crops in the area (50 degrees F).
Florence County, Wisconsin 243

Table 2.--Freeze Dates in Spring and Fall

 (Recorded in the period 1951-84 at Brule Island, Wisconsin)

_____________________________________________________________

 |

 | Temperature

 |__________________________________________

 Probability | | |

 | 24 oF | 28 oF | 32 oF

 | or lower | or lower | or lower _____________________________________________________________

 | | |

 | | |

Last freezing | | |

 temperature | | |

 in spring: | | |

 | | |

 1 year in 10 | | |

 later than-- | May 22 | June 3 | June 18

 | | |

 2 years in 10 | | |

 later than-- | May 18 | May 29 | June 14

 | | |

 5 years in 10 | | |

 later than-- | May 10 | May 20 | June 4

 | | |

First freezing | | |

 temperature | | |

 in fall: | | |

 | | |

 1 year in 10 | | |

 earlier than-- | Sept. 18 | Sept. 10 | Aug. 18

 | | |

 2 years in 10 | | |

 earlier than-- | Sept. 24 | Sept. 15 | Aug. 26

 | | |

 5 years in 10 | | |

 earlier than-- | Oct. 7 | Sept. 25 | Sept. 10

 | | | _____________________________________________________________

Table 3.--Growing Season

(Recorded in the period 1951-84 at Brule Island,

 Wisconsin)

__________________________________________________

 |

 | Daily minimum temperature

 | during growing season

 |___________________________________

 Probability | | |

 | Higher | Higher | Higher

 | than | than | than

 | 24 oF | 28 oF | 32 o __________________________________________________ F

 | Days | Days | Days

 | | |

9 years in 10 | 127 | 107 | 67

 | | |

8 years in 10 | 134 | 114 | 77

 | | |

5 years in 10 | 149 | 128 | 97

 | | |

2 years in 10 | 164 | 141 | 116

 | | |

1 year in 10 | 172 | 148 | 127

 | | | __________________________________________________
244 Soil Survey of

Table 4.--Acreage and Proportionate Extent of the Soils

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | |

 Map | Soil name | Acres |Percent

symbol| | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | |

AnB |Annalake fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes------------------------------------| 1,920 | 0.6

AnC |Annalake fine sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes-----------------------------------| 403 | 0.1

Au |Au Gres loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 658 | 0.2

Ca |Capitola muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes, very stony-----------------------------------| 996 | 0.3

CoA |Crossett silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 490 | 0.2

CrA |Croswell loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes-----------------------------------------| 1,667 | 0.5

CuA |Cublake loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 1,570 | 0.5

EdB |Ellwood silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 1,252 | 0.4

EdC |Ellwood silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 144 | *

ElB |Ellwood-Crossett silt loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes---------------------------------| 1,354 | 0.4

EmB |Ellwood-Iosco-Morganlake complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes----------------------------| 1,525 | 0.5

EnC |Ellwood-Iosco-Vilas complex, 0 to 15 percent slopes--------------------------------| 2,864 | 0.9

EoD |Ellwood-Vilas-Padus complex, 10 to 30 percent slopes-------------------------------| 1,513 | 0.5

Ep |Epiaquents and Epiaquods, nearly level---------------------------------------------| 1,219 | 0.4

FeB |Fence silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes---------------------------------------------| 1,795 | 0.6

Fm |Fordum loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes-------------------------------------------------| 3,295 | 1.0

GaA |Gastrow silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 670 | 0.2

GmC |Goodman silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony------------------------------| 3,070 | 1.0

GmD |Goodman silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes, very stony-----------------------------| 628 | 0.2

GwB |Goodwit silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony-------------------------------| 7,386 | 2.3

IsA |Iosco loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes---------------------------------------| 689 | 0.2

Kr |Kinross muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes------------------------------------------------| 449 | 0.1

Lo |Loxley, Beseman, and Dawson peats, 0 to 1 percent slopes---------------------------| 5,179 | 1.6

Lu |Lupton, Cathro, and Markey mucks, 0 to 1 percent slopes----------------------------| 37,659 | 11.8

MaA |Manitowish sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes---------------------------------------| 1,377 | 0.4

Mn |Minocqua muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes-----------------------------------------------| 2,147 | 0.7

MrB |Morganlake loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes----------------------------------| 468 | 0.1

MuB |Mudlake silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony-------------------------------| 3,470 | 1.1

M-W |Miscellaneous water----------------------------------------------------------------| 18 | *

PaB |Padus sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes--------------------------------------------| 9,209 | 2.9

PaC |Padus sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 14,902 | 4.7

PaD |Padus sandy loam, 15 to 35 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 2,678 | 0.8

PeB |Padus-Pence sandy loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes-------------------------------------| 7,421 | 2.3

PeC |Padus-Pence sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes------------------------------------| 12,878 | 4.0

PeD |Padus-Pence sandy loams, 15 to 35 percent slopes-----------------------------------| 18,716 | 5.9

PnB |Pence sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes--------------------------------------------| 7,023 | 2.2

PnC |Pence sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 6,180 | 1.9

PnD |Pence sandy loam, 15 to 35 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 4,150 | 1.3

PsB |Pence-Vilas complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes-----------------------------------------| 3,641 | 1.1

PsC |Pence-Vilas complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes----------------------------------------| 4,627 | 1.5

PsD |Pence-Vilas complex, 15 to 35 percent slopes---------------------------------------| 3,438 | 1.1

Pt |Pits, gravel-----------------------------------------------------------------------| 103 | *

Px |Pits, mine-------------------------------------------------------------------------| 74 | *

Rb |Robago fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes--------------------------------------| 1,055 | 0.3

RkC |Rock outcrop-Ishpeming-Vilas complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes-----------------------| 1,545 | 0.5

RkD |Rock outcrop-Ishpeming-Vilas complex, 15 to 35 percent slopes----------------------| 469 | 0.1

RmC |Rock outcrop-Metonga-Sarona complex, 1 to 15 percent slopes------------------------| 4,831 | 1.5

RmD |Rock outcrop-Metonga-Sarona complex, 15 to 35 percent slopes-----------------------| 3,905 | 1.2

RsB |Rousseau loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes------------------------------------| 165 | 0.1

RsC |Rousseau loamy fine sand, 6 to 15 percent slopes-----------------------------------| 173 | 0.1

SaB |Sarona fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony--------------------------| 7,297 | 2.3

SaC |Sarona fine sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony-------------------------| 3,346 | 1.1

SaD |Sarona fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes, very stony------------------------| 821 | 0.3

SdB |Sarona-Padus complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, very stony----------------------------| 4,659 | 1.5

SdC |Sarona-Padus complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony---------------------------| 6,846 | 2.2

SdD |Sarona-Padus complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes, very stony--------------------------| 3,208 | 1.0

SlB |Sarona-Vilas complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, very stony----------------------------| 4,487 | 1.4

SlC |Sarona-Vilas complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony---------------------------| 5,224 | 1.6

SlD |Sarona-Vilas complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes, very stony--------------------------| 2,203 | 0.7

SnB |Sayner loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 798 | 0.3

SnC |Sayner loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 976 | 0.3

SnD |Sayner loamy sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes-----------------------------------------| 1,706 | 0.5

 | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 245

Table 4.--Acreage and Proportionate Extent of the Soils--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | |

 Map | Soil name | Acres |Percent

symbol| | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | |

SoD |Soperton-Goodman silt loams, 15 to 35 percent slopes, very stony-------------------| 781 | 0.2

StC |Stambaugh silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes----------------------------------------| 12,757 | 4.0

StD |Stambaugh silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes---------------------------------------| 482 | 0.2

SuC |Stambaugh-Goodman silt loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony-------------------| 3,463 | 1.1

SuD |Stambaugh-Goodman silt loams, 15 to 35 percent slopes, very stony------------------| 842 | 0.3

TpA |Tipler sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 3,605 | 1.1

VaB |Vanzile silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 20,895 | 6.6

VgB |Vanzile-Goodwit silt loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes, very stony----------------------| 2,937 | 0.9

VsB |Vilas loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes--------------------------------------------| 5,932 | 1.9

VsC |Vilas loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent slopes-------------------------------------------| 5,287 | 1.7

VsD |Vilas loamy sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes------------------------------------------| 3,294 | 1.0

W |Water------------------------------------------------------------------------------| 7,599 | 2.4

WaC |Wabeno-Goodman silt loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony----------------------| 2,190 | 0.7

WbB |Wabeno-Goodwit silt loams, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony-----------------------| 5,506 | 1.7

WkB |Wakefield silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony-----------------------------| 2,901 | 0.9

WkC |Wakefield silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, very stony----------------------------| 1,286 | 0.4

WrA |Worcester sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes----------------------------------------| 3,829 | 1.2

 | |-----------|-------

 | Total-------------------------------------------------------------------------| 318,215 | 100.0

 | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 * Less than 0.05 percent.
246 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity

(Only the soils suitable for production of commercial trees are listed. See text for definitions of terms

 used in this table. Absence of an entry indicates that information was not available)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

AnB, AnC--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |White spruce,

 Annalake | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | red pine,

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

Au--------------| 6W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Quaking aspen-------| 70 | 81 |White spruce,

 Au Gres | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | red pine,

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| 65 | 40 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 51 | 69 |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| 61 | 104 |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

Ca--------------| 7W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Balsam fir----------| 52 | 100 |Balsam fir, red

 Capitola | | | | | |Red maple-----------| 56 | 36 | maple, white

 | | | | | |Black ash-----------| 48 | 32 | ash, black

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | spruce, white

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |American elm--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

CoA-------------| 3W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Red maple-----------| 65 | 40 |Eastern white

 Crossett | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American elm--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

CrA-------------| 5S |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Quaking aspen-------| 68 | 78 |Red pine,

 Croswell | | | | | |Red pine------------| 55 | 88 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 53 | 73 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 69 | 80 |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| 54 | 55 |

 | | | | | | | | |

CuA-------------| 7S |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Red pine------------| 60 | 101 |Red pine,

 Cublake | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- | pine, jack

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 247

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

EdB, EdC--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Sugar maple---------| 62 | 39 |White spruce,

 Ellwood | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

ElB: | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Sugar maple---------| 62 | 39 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Crossett-------| 3W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Red maple-----------| 65 | 40 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American elm--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Sugar maple---------| 62 | 39 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco----------| 5W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Quaking aspen-------| 65 | 73 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| 55 | 107 |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| 58 | 62 |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
248 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | | | | |

 Morganlake-----| 6S |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Quaking aspen-------| 74 | 86 |Red pine, white

 | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 63 | 56 | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 77 | 76 |

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 76 | 89 |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| 62 | 107 |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

EnC: | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Sugar maple---------| 62 | 39 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco----------| 5W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Quaking aspen-------| 65 | 73 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| 55 | 107 |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| 58 | 62 |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Sugar maple---------| 62 | 39 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 249

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Padus----------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 78 | 91 | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

Ep: | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquents-----| 2W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Red maple-----------| 56 | 36 |Red maple,

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | balsam fir,

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | white ash,

 | | | | | |Black spruce--------| --- | --- | black spruce,

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | white spruce.

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquods------| 2W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Red maple-----------| 56 | 36 |Red maple,

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | balsam fir,

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | white ash,

 | | | | | |Black spruce--------| --- | --- | black spruce,

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | white spruce.

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

FeB-------------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 65 | 40 |Red pine,

 Fence | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

Fm--------------| 2W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Silver maple--------| 80 | 34 |Silver maple,

 Fordum | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | red maple,

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | white ash.

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
250 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

GaA-------------| 3W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |White spruce,

 Gastrow | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, northern

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | whitecedar.

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

GmC-------------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 Goodman | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

GmD-------------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 Goodman | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

GwB-------------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 Goodwit | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hophornbeam-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

IsA-------------| 5W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Quaking aspen-------| 65 | 73 |Eastern white

 Iosco | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| 55 | 107 |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| 58 | 62 |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

Kr--------------| 2W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Quaking aspen-------| 45 | 32 | ---

 Kinross | | | | | |Black spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 251

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

Lu: | | | | | | | | |

 Lupton---------| 6W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Balsam fir----------| 46 | 86 | ---

 | | | | | |Black spruce--------| 20 | 29 |

 | | | | | |Black ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Cathro---------| 5W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Balsam fir----------| 40 | 71 |White spruce.

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Markey---------| 7W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Balsam fir----------| 52 | 100 | ---

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

MaA-------------| 3A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 60 | 38 |Red pine,

 Manitowish | | | | | |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine, jack

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

Mn--------------| 7W |Slight |Severe |Severe |Severe |Balsam fir----------| 54 | 105 |Red maple,

 Minocqua | | | | | |Red maple-----------| 55 | 35 | white ash,

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | white spruce,

 | | | | | |Black ash-----------| --- | --- | black spruce.

 | | | | | |Tamarack------------| 55 | 50 |

 | | | | | |Northern whitecedar-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

MrB-------------| 6S |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Quaking aspen-------| 74 | 86 |Red pine, white

 Morganlake | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 63 | 56 | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 77 | 76 |

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 76 | 89 |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| 62 | 107 |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
252 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

MuB-------------| 3W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Red maple-----------| 63 | 39 |Red maple,

 Mudlake | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | white ash,

 | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- | white spruce,

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PaB, PaC--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 Padus | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 78 | 91 | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PaD-------------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 Padus | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 78 | 91 | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PeB, PeC: | | | | | | | | |

 Padus----------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 78 | 91 | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Pence----------| 3A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Sugar maple---------| 59 | 37 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | pine, jack

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PeD: | | | | | | | | |

 Padus----------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 78 | 91 | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 253

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

PeD: | | | | | | | | |

 Pence----------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Sugar maple---------| 59 | 37 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | pine, jack

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PnB, PnC--------| 3A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Sugar maple---------| 59 | 37 |Red pine,

 Pence | | | | | |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | pine, jack

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PnD-------------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Sugar maple---------| 59 | 37 |Red pine,

 Pence | | | | | |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | pine, jack

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PsB, PsC: | | | | | | | | |

 Pence----------| 3A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Sugar maple---------| 59 | 37 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | pine, jack

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
254 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

PsB, PsC: | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

PsD: | | | | | | | | |

 Pence----------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Sugar maple---------| 59 | 37 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | pine, jack

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

Rb--------------| 3W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |White spruce,

 Robago | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | northern

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | whitecedar,

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

RkC: | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming------| 5D |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Slight |Quaking aspen-------| 63 | 70 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| 60 | 65 |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 68 | 78 |

 | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 255

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

RkC: | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

RkD: | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming------| 5R |Moderate|Slight |Moderate|Slight |Quaking aspen-------| 63 | 70 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| 60 | 65 |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 68 | 78 |

 | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

RmC: | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Metonga--------| 3D |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 60 | 38 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| 60 | 38 |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona---------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | eastern white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
256 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

RmD: | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Metonga--------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 60 | 38 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| 60 | 38 |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona---------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | eastern white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

RsB, RsC--------| 5A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Quaking aspen-------| 65 | 73 |Red pine, jack

 Rousseau | | | | | |Red maple-----------| 60 | 38 | pine.

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 62 | 89 |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| 65 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 66 | 75 |

 | | | | | | | | |

SaB, SaC--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine, white

 Sarona | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SaD-------------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine, white

 Sarona | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SdB, SdC: | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona---------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine, white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 257

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

SdB, SdC: | | | | | | | | |

 Padus----------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 78 | 91 | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SdD: | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona---------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine, white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Padus----------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| 78 | 91 | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red pine------------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SlB, SlC: | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona---------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine, white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SlD: | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona---------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 64 | 40 |Red pine, white

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 72 | 69 | spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 75 | 73 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
258 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

SlD: | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas----------| 6R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SnB, SnC--------| 7A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 |Red pine, jack

 Sayner | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| --- | --- | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SnD-------------| 7R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 59 | 99 |Red pine, jack

 Sayner | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| --- | --- | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 57 | 112 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SoD: | | | | | | | | |

 Soperton-------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 74 | 72 | red pine.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| 72 | 44 |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 78 | 78 |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| 56 | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman--------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

StC-------------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |Eastern white

 Stambaugh | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | spruce, red

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

StD-------------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |Eastern white

 Stambaugh | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | spruce, red

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 259

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

SuC: | | | | | | | | |

 Stambaugh------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | spruce, red

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

SuD: | | | | | | | | |

 Stambaugh------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | spruce, red

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman--------| 3R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

TpA-------------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |Red pine,

 Tipler | | | | | |Northern red oak----| 70 | 66 | eastern white

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

VaB-------------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |Eastern white

 Vanzile | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

VgB: | | | | | | | | |

 Vanzile--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | pine, white

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hophornbeam-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
260 Soil Survey of

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

VsB, VsC--------| 6A |Slight |Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 Vilas | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

VsD-------------| 6R |Moderate|Slight |Slight |Slight |Red pine------------| 57 | 93 |Red pine, jack

 Vilas | | | | | |Jack pine-----------| 65 | 94 | pine, eastern

 | | | | | |Eastern white pine--| 56 | 109 | white pine.

 | | | | | |Northern pin oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Northern red oak----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Red maple-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

WaC: | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno---------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 74 | 72 | red pine.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| 72 | 44 |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 78 | 78 |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

WbB: | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno---------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Moderate|Moderate|Sugar maple---------| 67 | 41 |White spruce,

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 74 | 72 | red pine.

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| 72 | 44 |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| 78 | 78 |

 | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit--------| 3L |Slight |Slight |Slight |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 69 | 42 |Eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |American basswood---| 68 | 63 | pine, white

 | | | | | |Bigtooth aspen------| --- | --- | spruce.

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |White ash-----------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Black cherry--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hophornbeam-| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | |

WkB, WkC--------| 3W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Sugar maple---------| 61 | 38 |White spruce,

 Wakefield | | | | | |American basswood---| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | pine, jack

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | pine, red

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 261

Table 5.--Woodland Management and Productivity--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Management concerns | Potential productivity | ______________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and |Ordi- | | | | | | | |

 map symbol |nation|Erosion |Seedling| Wind- | Plant | Common trees |Site |Volume*| Trees to

 |symbol|hazard |mortal- | throw |competi-| |index| | plant

 | | | ity | hazard | tion | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |

WrA-------------| 2W |Slight |Moderate|Severe |Severe |Red maple-----------| 55 | 35 |Red maple,

 Worcester | | | | | |Sugar maple---------| --- | --- | white spruce,

 | | | | | |Yellow birch--------| --- | --- | eastern white

 | | | | | |Balsam fir----------| --- | --- | pine.

 | | | | | |White spruce--------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Paper birch---------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Quaking aspen-------| --- | --- |

 | | | | | |Eastern hemlock-----| --- | --- |

 | | | | | | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 * Volume is the yield in cubic feet per acre per year calculated at the age of culmination of the mean

annual increment for fully stocked natural stands.
262 Soil Survey of

Table 6.--Woodland Equipment Use

(Only the soils suitable for the production of commercial trees are listed. Some terms that describe

 restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for definitions of "slight,"

 "moderate," and "severe." Absence of an entry indicates that the soil was not rated)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Ratings for the most limiting season | _______________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Logging areas | | | Site | Preferred

 map symbol | and skid | Log landings | Haul roads | preparation | operating

 | trails | | | and planting | season(s) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

AnB------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Annalake | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

AnC------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Annalake | low strength. | low strength, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

Au-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, winter.

 Au Gres | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. |

 | | | | |

Ca-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 Capitola | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

CoA------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer,

 Crossett | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | winter.*

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

CrA------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Croswell | | | | |

 | | | | |

CuA------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Cublake | | | | |

 | | | | |

EdB------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Ellwood | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

EdC------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Ellwood | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

ElB: | | | | |

 Ellwood-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

 Crossett------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer,

 | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | winter.*

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

EmB: | | | | |

 Ellwood-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

 Iosco---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, winter.

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. |

 | | | | |

 Morganlake----------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | | | |

EnC: | | | | |

 Ellwood-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

 Iosco---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, winter.

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. |

 | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 263

Table 6.--Woodland Equipment Use--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Ratings for the most limiting season | _______________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Logging areas | | | Site | Preferred

 map symbol | and skid | Log landings | Haul roads | preparation | operating

 | trails | | | and planting | season(s) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

EnC: | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

EoD: | | | | |

 Ellwood-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

 Padus---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

Ep: | | | | |

 Epiaquents----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 Epiaquods-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

FeB------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, fall,

 Fence | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

Fm-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 Fordum | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | flooding, | flooding, | low strength. |

 | | low strength. | low strength. | |

 | | | | |

GaA------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer,

 Gastrow | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | winter.*

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

GmC------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Goodman | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

GmD------------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Goodman | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.*

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

GwB------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Goodwit | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

IsA------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, fall.

 Iosco | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. |

 | | | | |

Kr-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 Kinross | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. |

 | | | | |

Lu: | | | | |

 Lupton--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 Cathro--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
264 Soil Survey of

Table 6.--Woodland Equipment Use--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Ratings for the most limiting season | _______________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Logging areas | | | Site | Preferred

 map symbol | and skid | Log landings | Haul roads | preparation | operating

 | trails | | | and planting | season(s) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

Lu: | | | | |

 Markey--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

MaA------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Manitowish | | | | |

 | | | | |

Mn-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Winter.

 Minocqua | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

MrB------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Morganlake | | | | |

 | | | | |

MuB------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer,

 Mudlake | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | winter.*

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

PaB------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Padus | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

PaC------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Padus | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

PaD------------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Padus | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

PeB: | | | | |

 Padus---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

 Pence---------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | | | |

PeC: | | | | |

 Padus---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

 Pence---------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

PeD: | | | | |

 Padus---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 Pence---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

PnB------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Pence | | | | |

 | | | | |

PnC------------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Pence | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

PnD------------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 Pence | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 265

Table 6.--Woodland Equipment Use--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Ratings for the most limiting season | _______________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Logging areas | | | Site | Preferred

 map symbol | and skid | Log landings | Haul roads | preparation | operating

 | trails | | | and planting | season(s) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

PsB: | | | | |

 Pence---------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | | | |

PsC: | | | | |

 Pence---------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

PsD: | | | | |

 Pence---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

Rb-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, winter.

 Robago | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

RkC: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Ishpeming-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Year round.

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. |

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Year round.

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. |

 | | | | |

RkD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Ishpeming-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Year round.

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop, | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. |

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Year round.

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop, | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. |

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

RmC: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Metonga-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Summer, fall,

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | winter.

 | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, fall,

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | winter.

 | | | | |

RmD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Metonga-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, fall,

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop, | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | winter.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, fall,

 | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop, | rock outcrop. | rock outcrop. | winter.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
266 Soil Survey of

Table 6.--Woodland Equipment Use--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Ratings for the most limiting season | _______________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Logging areas | | | Site | Preferred

 map symbol | and skid | Log landings | Haul roads | preparation | operating

 | trails | | | and planting | season(s) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

RsB------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Rousseau | | | | |

 | | | | |

RsC------------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Rousseau | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

SaB------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Sarona | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

SaC------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Sarona | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

SaD------------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Sarona | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

SdB: | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

 Padus---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

SdC: | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

 Padus---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

SdD: | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 Padus---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

SlB: | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | | | |

SlC: | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

SlD: | | | | |

 Sarona--------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 267

Table 6.--Woodland Equipment Use--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Ratings for the most limiting season | _______________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Logging areas | | | Site | Preferred

 map symbol | and skid | Log landings | Haul roads | preparation | operating

 | trails | | | and planting | season(s) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

SlD: | | | | |

 Vilas---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

SnB------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Sayner | | | | |

 | | | | |

SnC------------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Sayner | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

SnD------------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 Sayner | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

SoD: | | | | |

 Soperton------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.*

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 Goodman-------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.*

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

StC------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Stambaugh | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

StD------------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Stambaugh | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.*

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

SuC: | | | | |

 Stambaugh-----------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

 Goodman-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

SuD: | | | | |

 Stambaugh-----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.*

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

 Goodman-------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | slope, | slope. | slope, | slope, | winter.*

 | low strength. | | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | |

TpA------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Tipler | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

VaB------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 Vanzile | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.

 | | | | |

VgB: | | | | |

 Vanzile-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

 Goodwit-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

 See footnote at end of table.
268 Soil Survey of

Table 6.--Woodland Equipment Use--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Ratings for the most limiting season | _______________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Logging areas | | | Site | Preferred

 map symbol | and skid | Log landings | Haul roads | preparation | operating

 | trails | | | and planting | season(s) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

VsB------------------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Vilas | | | | |

 | | | | |

VsC------------------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Year round.

 Vilas | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

VsD------------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Year round.

 Vilas | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. |

 | | | | |

WaC: | | | | |

 Wabeno--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

 Goodman-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | slope, | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | low strength. | | |

 | | | | |

WbB: | | | | |

 Wabeno--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

 Goodwit-------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Summer, fall,

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | winter.*

 | | | | |

WkB, WkC-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer,

 Wakefield | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | winter.*

 | | | | |

WrA------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Summer, winter.

 Worcester | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, | wetness, |

 | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. |

 | | | | | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 * Equipment operations may be severely restricted after a heavy rainfall because the soil has a

high content of silt. The soil is slippery when wet and can easily become rutted.
Florence County, Wisconsin 269

Table 7.--Land Capability and Yields per Acre of Crops and Pasture

(Yields are those that can be expected under a high level of management. Absence of a yield indicates that the

 soil is not suited to the crop or the crop generally is not grown on the soil)

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Land | | | | | | |

 map symbol |capability| Corn |Corn silage| Oats |Bromegrass-|Timothy-red| Kentucky | Irish

 | | | | |alfalfa hay|clover hay | bluegrass | potatoes _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Bu | Tons | Bu | Tons | Tons | AUM* | Cwt

 | | | | | | | |

AnB-------------| IIe | 70 | 11 | 65 | 4.0 | 2.8 | 2.9 | ---

 Annalake | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

AnC-------------| IIIe | 65 | 10 | 60 | 3.8 | 2.6 | 2.7 | ---

 Annalake | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Au--------------| IVw | 50 | 8 | 45 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.2 | ---

 Au Gres | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Ca--------------| VIIw | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Capitola | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

CoA-------------| IIw | 75 | 12 | 70 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 1.3 | ---

 Crossett | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

CrA-------------| IVs | 50 | 8 | 45 | 2.5 | 2.0 | 2.0 | ---

 Croswell | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

CuA-------------| IVs | 55 | 9 | 55 | 2.8 | 2.5 | 2.1 | ---

 Cublake | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

EdB-------------| IIe | 80 | 13 | 75 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 3.6 | ---

 Ellwood | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

EdC-------------| IIIe | 75 | 12 | 70 | 4.3 | 3.3 | 3.4 | ---

 Ellwood | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

ElB-------------| IIe | 80 | 13 | 75 | 4.1 | 3.3 | 3.0 | ---

 Ellwood- | | | | | | | |

 Crossett | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

EmB-------------| IIe | 70 | 11 | 65 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | ---

 Ellwood-Iosco- | | | | | | | |

 Morganlake | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

EnC-------------| IIIe | 65 | 10 | 55 | 3.5 | 2.6 | 2.6 | ---

 Ellwood-Iosco- | | | | | | | |

 Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

EoD-------------| VIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 2.3 | ---

 Ellwood-Vilas- | | | | | | | |

 Padus | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Ep--------------| VIw | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Epiaquents and | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquods | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

FeB-------------| IIe | 75 | 12 | 70 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.6 | ---

 Fence | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Fm--------------| VIw | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Fordum | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

GaA-------------| IIw | 75 | 12 | 70 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 3.2 | ---

 Gastrow | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

 See footnotes at end of table.
270 Soil Survey of

Table 7.--Land Capability and Yields per Acre of Crops and Pasture--Continued

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Land | | | | | | |

 map symbol |capability| Corn |Corn silage| Oats |Bromegrass-|Timothy-red| Kentucky | Irish

 | | | | |alfalfa hay|clover hay | bluegrass | potatoes _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Bu | Tons | Bu | Tons | Tons | AUM* | Cwt

 | | | | | | | |

GmC-------------| IIIe** | 75 | 12 | 70 | 4.3 | 3.3 | 3.4 | ---

 Goodman | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

GmD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 3.0 | ---

 Goodman | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

GwB-------------| IIe** | 80 | 13 | 75 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 3.6 | ---

 Goodwit | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

IsA-------------| IIIw | 70 | 11 | 65 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.7 | ---

 Iosco | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Kr--------------| VIw | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Kinross | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Lo--------------| VIIw | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Loxley, | | | | | | | |

 Beseman, and | | | | | | | |

 Dawson | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Lu--------------| VIw | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Lupton, Cathro,| | | | | | | |

 and Markey | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

MaA-------------| IIIs | 65 | 10 | 60 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 2.6 | 250

 Manitowish | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Mn--------------| VIw | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Minocqua | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

MrB-------------| IIIs | 65 | 10 | 65 | 4.0 | 2.5 | 3.2 | ---

 Morganlake | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

MuB-------------| IIe** | 75 | 12 | 70 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 3.2 | ---

 Mudlake | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PaB-------------| IIe | 70 | 11 | 70 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 3.2 | 375

 Padus | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PaC-------------| IIIe | 65 | 10 | 65 | 3.8 | 2.8 | 3.0 | 350

 Padus | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PaD-------------| VIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 2.1 | ---

 Padus | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PeB-------------| IIIe | 65 | 10 | 65 | 3.7 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 275

 Padus-Pence | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PeC-------------| IVe | 60 | 10 | 60 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 2.6 | 250

 Padus-Pence | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PeD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 2.0 | ---

 Padus-Pence | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PnB-------------| IIIe | 60 | 10 | 55 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 250

 Pence | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PnC-------------| IVe | 55 | 9 | 50 | 3.3 | 2.3 | 2.3 | 225

 Pence | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

 See footnotes at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 271

Table 7.--Land Capability and Yields per Acre of Crops and Pasture--Continued

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Land | | | | | | |

 map symbol |capability| Corn |Corn silage| Oats |Bromegrass-|Timothy-red| Kentucky | Irish

 | | | | |alfalfa hay|clover hay | bluegrass | potatoes _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Bu | Tons | Bu | Tons | Tons | AUM* | Cwt

 | | | | | | | |

PnD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 1.7 | ---

 Pence | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PsB-------------| IVs | 55 | 9 | 50 | 2.9 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 225

 Pence-Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PsC-------------| VIs | 50 | 8 | 45 | 2.7 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 200

 Pence-Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

PsD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 1.3 | ---

 Pence-Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Pt. | | | | | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Px. | | | | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

Rb--------------| IIw | 70 | 11 | 65 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 2.7 | ---

 Robago | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

RkC-------------| VIs | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Rock outcrop- | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming- | | | | | | | |

 Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

RkD-------------| VIIs | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Rock outcrop- | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming- | | | | | | | |

 Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

RmC-------------| VIs | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Rock outcrop- | | | | | | | |

 Metonga-Sarona| | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

RmD-------------| VIIs | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Rock outcrop- | | | | | | | |

 Metonga-Sarona| | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

RsB-------------| IIIs | 55 | 9 | 55 | 3.0 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 225

 Rousseau | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

RsC-------------| IIIe | 50 | 8 | 50 | 2.8 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 200

 Rousseau | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SaB-------------| IIe** | 75 | 12 | 70 | 4.0 | 3.1 | 3.3 | ---

 Sarona | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SaC-------------| IIIe** | 70 | 11 | 65 | 3.8 | 2.9 | 3.1 | ---

 Sarona | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SaD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 2.5 | ---

 Sarona | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SdB-------------| IIe** | 75 | 12 | 70 | 4.0 | 3.1 | 3.3 | ---

 Sarona-Padus | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SdC-------------| IIIe** | 70 | 11 | 65 | 3.8 | 2.9 | 3.1 | ---

 Sarona-Padus | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

 See footnotes at end of table.
272 Soil Survey of

Table 7.--Land Capability and Yields per Acre of Crops and Pasture--Continued

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Land | | | | | | |

 map symbol |capability| Corn |Corn silage| Oats |Bromegrass-|Timothy-red| Kentucky | Irish

 | | | | |alfalfa hay|clover hay | bluegrass | potatoes _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Bu | Tons | Bu | Tons | Tons | AUM* | Cwt

 | | | | | | | |

SdD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 2.4 | ---

 Sarona-Padus | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SlB-------------| IIIe** | 60 | 10 | 60 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.6 | ---

 Sarona-Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SlC-------------| IVe** | 55 | 9 | 55 | 2.8 | 2.3 | 2.4 | ---

 Sarona-Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SlD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 1.9 | ---

 Sarona-Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SnB-------------| IVs | 45 | 7 | 40 | 2.5 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 200

 Sayner | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SnC-------------| VIs | 40 | 6 | 35 | 2.3 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 175

 Sayner | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SnD-------------| VIIs | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 0.3 | ---

 Sayner | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SoD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 2.8 | ---

 Soperton- | | | | | | | |

 Goodman | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

StC-------------| IIIe | 70 | 11 | 70 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.4 | 350

 Stambaugh | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

StD-------------| VIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 3.0 | ---

 Stambaugh | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SuC-------------| IIIe** | 70 | 11 | 70 | 4.1 | 3.5 | 3.4 | ---

 Stambaugh- | | | | | | | |

 Goodman | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

SuD-------------| VIIe | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 3.0 | ---

 Stambaugh- | | | | | | | |

 Goodman | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

TpA-------------| IIs | 75 | 12 | 70 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 3.2 | 375

 Tipler | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

VaB-------------| IIe | 75 | 12 | 75 | 4.2 | 3.5 | 3.6 | 375

 Vanzile | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

VgB-------------| IIe** | 75 | 12 | 75 | 4.4 | 3.5 | 3.6 | ---

 Vanzile-Goodwit| | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

VsB-------------| IVs | 50 | 8 | 45 | 2.5 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 200

 Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

VsC-------------| VIs | 45 | 7 | 40 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 175

 Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

VsD-------------| VIIs | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | 1.1 | ---

 Vilas | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

WaC-------------| IIIe** | 75 | 12 | 70 | 3.3 | 2.8 | 3.2 | ---

 Wabeno-Goodman | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

 See footnotes at end of table.
Florence County, Wisconsin 273

Table 7.--Land Capability and Yields per Acre of Crops and Pasture--Continued

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Land | | | | | | |

 map symbol |capability| Corn |Corn silage| Oats |Bromegrass-|Timothy-red| Kentucky | Irish

 | | | | |alfalfa hay|clover hay | bluegrass | potatoes _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Bu | Tons | Bu | Tons | Tons | AUM* | Cwt

 | | | | | | | |

WbB-------------| IIe** | 80 | 13 | 75 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 3.4 | ---

 Wabeno-Goodwit | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

WkB-------------| IIe** | 75 | 12 | 65 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 3.4 | ---

 Wakefield | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

WkC-------------| IIIe** | 70 | 11 | 60 | 3.3 | 2.8 | 3.2 | ---

 Wakefield | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | |

WrA-------------| IIw | 70 | 11 | 70 | 3.8 | 3.0 | 3.4 | ---

 Worcester | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 * Animal unit month: The amount of forage or feed required to feed one animal unit (one cow, one horse,

one mule, five sheep, or five goats) for 30 days.

 ** In areas where stones have been removed.
274 Soil Survey of

Table 8.--Prime Farmland

(Only the soils considered prime farmland are listed. Urban or built-up areas of the soils listed are not

 considered prime farmland. If a soil is prime farmland only under certain conditions, the conditions

 are specified in parentheses after the soil name)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 |

 Map | Soil name

 symbol | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 |

 AnB |Annalake fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes

 Ca |Capitola muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes, very stony (where drained)

 CoA |Crossett silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes (where drained)

 EdB |Ellwood silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes

 ElB |Ellwood-Crossett silt loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes (where drained)

 FeB |Fence silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes

 GaA |Gastrow silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes (where drained)

 GwB |Goodwit silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony

 Mn |Minocqua muck, 0 to 2 percent slopes (where drained)

 MuB |Mudlake silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony (where drained)

 PaB |Padus sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes

 Rb |Robago fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes (where drained)

 SaB |Sarona fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony

 SdB |Sarona-Padus complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, very stony

 TpA |Tipler sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes

 VaB |Vanzile silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes

 VgB |Vanzile-Goodwit silt loams, 0 to 6 percent slopes, very stony

 WbB |Wabeno-Goodwit silt loams, 1 to 6 percent slopes, very stony

 WrA |Worcester sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes (where drained)

 | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Florence County, Wisconsin 275

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings

(Only the soils suitable for windbreaks and environmental plantings are listed. Absence of an entry indicates

 that trees generally do not grow to the given height on that soil)

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

AnB, AnC----------| --- |Arrowwood, |White spruce, |Eastern white |Imperial Carolina

 Annalake | | nannyberry | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine. | poplar.

 | | viburnum, | Manchurian | |

 | | Siberian | crabapple. | |

 | | peashrub, lilac, | | |

 | | silky dogwood, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

Au----------------| --- |American |White spruce, |Jack pine, Norway |Imperial Carolina

 Au Gres | | cranberrybush, | Manchurian | spruce, green | poplar.

 | | Amur maple, | crabapple. | ash, eastern |

 | | common ninebark, | | white pine. |

 | | nannyberry | | |

 | | viburnum, | | |

 | | northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

CoA---------------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 Crossett | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

CrA---------------|Manyflower |Amur maple, lilac,|Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 Croswell | cotoneaster. | Siberian | | pine, red pine, |

 | | peashrub, | | jack pine. |

 | | northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

CuA---------------|Manyflower |Siberian peashrub,|Manchurian |Eastern white | ---

 Cublake | cotoneaster. | lilac, smooth | crabapple, | pine, red pine, |

 | | sumac, staghorn | Austrian pine. | jack pine. |

 | | sumac, northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

EdB, EdC----------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 Ellwood | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

ElB: | | | | |

 Ellwood----------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |
276 Soil Survey of

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

ElB: | | | | |

 Crossett---------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

EmB: | | | | |

 Ellwood----------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Iosco------------| --- |Common ninebark, |White spruce, |Green ash, eastern|Imperial Carolina

 | | northern | Manchurian | white pine, | poplar.

 | | whitecedar, | crabapple, Norway| red pine. |

 | | American | spruce. | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | nannyberry | | |

 | | viburnum, lilac, | | |

 | | silky dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Morganlake-------| --- |Lilac, nannyberry |White spruce, |Eastern white |Imperial Carolina

 | | viburnum, | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, | poplar.

 | | northern | Manchurian | jack pine. |

 | | whitecedar. | crabapple. | |

 | | | | |

EnC: | | | | |

 Ellwood----------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Iosco------------| --- |Common ninebark, |White spruce, |Green ash, eastern|Imperial Carolina

 | | northern | Manchurian | white pine, | poplar.

 | | whitecedar, | crabapple, Norway| red pine. |

 | | American | spruce. | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | nannyberry | | |

 | | viburnum, lilac, | | |

 | | silky dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 277

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

EoD: | | | | |

 Ellwood----------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Padus------------|Manyflower |Gray dogwood, |Norway spruce-----|Jack pine, red | ---

 | cotoneaster. | silky dogwood, | | pine, eastern |

 | | Siberian | | white pine. |

 | | peashrub, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, | | |

 | | lilac, eastern | | |

 | | redcedar, | | |

 | | northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

FeB---------------| --- |Northern |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 Fence | | whitecedar, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, American | | white ash, red |

 | | cranberrybush, | | maple. |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

GaA---------------| --- |Common ninebark, |White spruce------|Red pine, eastern |Imperial Carolina

 Gastrow | | nannyberry | | white pine, white| poplar.

 | | viburnum, | | ash, red maple, |

 | | northern | | silver maple. |

 | | whitecedar, Amur | | |

 | | maple, lilac, | | |

 | | silky dogwood, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

GmC, GmD----------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 Goodman | | northern | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | whitecedar, gray | Black Hills | white ash, red |

 | | dogwood, lilac, | spruce. | maple. |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

GwB---------------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 Goodwit | | northern | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | whitecedar, gray | Black Hills | white ash, red |

 | | dogwood, lilac, | spruce. | maple. |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |
278 Soil Survey of

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

IsA---------------| --- |Common ninebark, |White spruce, |Green ash, eastern|Imperial Carolina

 Iosco | | northern | Manchurian | white pine, | poplar.

 | | whitecedar, | crabapple, | red pine. |

 | | American | Norway spruce. | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | nannyberry | | |

 | | viburnum, lilac, | | |

 | | silky dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

MaA---------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 Manitowish | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

MrB---------------| --- |Lilac, nannyberry |White spruce, |Eastern white |Imperial Carolina

 Morganlake | | viburnum, | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, | poplar.

 | | northern | Manchurian | jack pine. |

 | | whitecedar. | crabapple. | |

 | | | | |

MuB---------------| --- |Silky dogwood, |White spruce------|Red maple, eastern| ---

 Mudlake | | northern | | white pine, white|

 | | whitecedar, | | ash, silver |

 | | nannyberry | | maple. |

 | | viburnum, | | |

 | | redosier dogwood,| | |

 | | lilac, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

PaB, PaC, PaD-----|Manyflower |Gray dogwood, |Norway spruce-----|Jack pine, red | ---

 Padus | cotoneaster. | silky dogwood, | | pine, eastern |

 | | Siberian | | white pine. |

 | | peashrub, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, | | |

 | | lilac, northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

PeB, PeC, PeD: | | | | |

 Padus------------|Manyflower |Gray dogwood, |Norway spruce-----|Jack pine, red | ---

 | cotoneaster. | silky dogwood, | | pine, eastern |

 | | Siberian | | white pine. |

 | | peashrub, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, | | |

 | | lilac, northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

 Pence------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 279

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

PnB, PnC, PnD-----|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 Pence | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

PsB, PsC, PsD: | | | | |

 Pence------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

Rb----------------| --- |Northern |White spruce------|Red maple, eastern|Imperial Carolina

 Robago | | whitecedar, | | white pine, green| poplar.

 | | American | | ash. |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | silky dogwood, | | |

 | | lilac, nannyberry| | |

 | | viburnum, common | | |

 | | ninebark, Amur | | |

 | | maple. | | |

 | | | | |

RkC, RkD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Ishpeming--------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, Amur | | pine, red pine, |

 | | maple, Siberian | | jack pine. |

 | | peashrub, lilac. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |
280 Soil Survey of

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

RmC, RmD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Metonga----------|Manyflower |Lilac, Amur maple,|Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | American | | pine, red pine, |

 | | cranberrybush, | | jack pine. |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | Siberian | | jack pine. |

 | | peashrub, lilac, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

RsB, RsC----------|Manyflower |Siberian |White spruce, |Red pine, eastern |Imperial Carolina

 Rousseau | cotoneaster. | crabapple, silky | Norway spruce. | white pine, jack | poplar.

 | | dogwood, Amur | | pine. |

 | | privet. | | |

 | | | | |

SaB, SaC, SaD-----|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 Sarona | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | Siberian | | jack pine. |

 | | peashrub, lilac, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

SdB, SdC, SdD: | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | Siberian | | jack pine. |

 | | peashrub, lilac, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Padus------------|Manyflower |Gray dogwood, |Norway spruce-----|Jack pine, red | ---

 | cotoneaster. | silky dogwood, | | pine, eastern |

 | | Siberian | | white pine. |

 | | peashrub, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, | | |

 | | lilac, northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 281

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

SlB, SlC, SlD: | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | Siberian | | jack pine. |

 | | peashrub, lilac, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, silky| | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

SnB, SnC, SnD-----|Manyflower |Siberian peashrub,|Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 Sayner | cotoneaster. | lilac, Amur | | pine, red pine, |

 | | maple, American | | jack pine. |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | silky dogwood, | | |

 | | gray dogwood, | | |

 | | northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

SoD: | | | | |

 Soperton---------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | Siberian | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | peashrub, lilac, | Black Hills | white ash. |

 | | gray dogwood, | spruce. | |

 | | northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

 Goodman----------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | northern | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | whitecedar, gray | Black Hills | white ash, red |

 | | dogwood, lilac, | spruce. | maple. |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

StC, StD----------| --- |Nannyberry |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 Stambaugh | | viburnum, lilac, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | Amur maple, | | jack pine. |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, common | | |

 | | ninebark, | | |

 | | northern | | |

 | | whitecedar, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | gray dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |
282 Soil Survey of

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

SuC, SuD: | | | | |

 Stambaugh--------| --- |Nannyberry |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 | | viburnum, lilac, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | Amur maple, | | jack pine. |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, common | | |

 | | ninebark, | | |

 | | northern | | |

 | | whitecedar, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | gray dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |

 Goodman----------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | northern | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | whitecedar, gray | Black Hills | white ash, red |

 | | dogwood, lilac, | spruce. | maple. |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

TpA---------------|Manyflower |Gray dogwood, |Norway spruce-----|Jack pine, red | ---

 Tipler | cotoneaster. | silky dogwood, | | pine, eastern |

 | | Siberian | | white pine. |

 | | peashrub, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Amur maple, | | |

 | | lilac, northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

VaB---------------| --- |Silky dogwood, |Norway spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 Vanzile | | American | white spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | cranberrybush, | | red maple, white |

 | | gray dogwood, | | ash. |

 | | lilac, Amur | | |

 | | maple, northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

VgB: | | | | |

 Vanzile----------| --- |Silky dogwood, |Norway spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | American | white spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | cranberrybush, | | red maple, white |

 | | gray dogwood, | | ash. |

 | | lilac, Amur | | |

 | | maple, northern | | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

 Goodwit----------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | northern | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | whitecedar, gray | Black Hills | white ash, red |

 | | dogwood, lilac, | spruce. | maple. |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

VsB, VsC, VsD-----|Manyflower |Northern |Norway spruce-----|Eastern white | ---

 Vilas | cotoneaster. | whitecedar, | | pine, red pine, |

 | | lilac, Amur | | jack pine. |

 | | maple, American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | Siberian | | |

 | | peashrub, silky | | |

 | | dogwood, gray | | |

 | | dogwood. | | |

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 283

Table 9.--Windbreaks and Environmental Plantings--Continued

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Trees having predicted 20-year average height, in feet, of-- ______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | | | | |

 map symbol | <8 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-35 | >35

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

WaC: | | | | |

 Wabeno-----------| --- |Siberian peashrub,|White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | lilac, common | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | ninebark, Amur | Black Hills | white ash. |

 | | maple, northern | spruce. | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

 Goodman----------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | northern | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | whitecedar, gray | Black Hills | white ash, red |

 | | dogwood, lilac, | spruce. | maple. |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

WbB: | | | | |

 Wabeno-----------| --- |Siberian peashrub,|White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | lilac, common | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | ninebark, Amur | Black Hills | white ash. |

 | | maple, northern | spruce. | |

 | | whitecedar. | | |

 | | | | |

 Goodwit----------| --- |Amur maple, |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 | | northern | Norway spruce, | pine, red pine, |

 | | whitecedar, gray | Black Hills | white ash, red |

 | | dogwood, lilac, | spruce. | maple. |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush. | | |

 | | | | |

WkB, WkC----------| --- |Lilac, American |White spruce, |Eastern white | ---

 Wakefield | | cranberrybush, | Norway spruce. | pine, red pine, |

 | | silky dogwood, | | red maple. |

 | | arrowwood, common| | |

 | | ninebark, | | |

 | | nannyberry | | |

 | | viburnum. | | |

 | | | | |

WrA---------------| --- |Common ninebark, |White spruce------|Eastern white | ---

 Worcester | | northern | | pine, silver |

 | | whitecedar, | | maple, red maple,|

 | | nannyberry | | white ash. |

 | | viburnum, | | |

 | | American | | |

 | | cranberrybush, | | |

 | | redosier dogwood,| | |

 | | silky dogwood, | | |

 | | lilac. | | |

 | | | | | _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
284 Soil Survey of

Table 10.--Recreational Development

(Some terms that describe restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for definitions

 of "slight," "moderate," and "severe." Absence of an entry indicates that the soil was not rated)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

AnB-------------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Annalake | | | slope, | | droughty.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

AnC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Annalake | slope. | slope. | slope. | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

Au--------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Au Gres | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

Ca--------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Capitola | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

CoA-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Crossett | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

CrA-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Croswell | wetness, | wetness, | small stones, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | too sandy, | |

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |

CuA-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Cublake | wetness, | wetness, | small stones, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | too sandy, | |

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |

EdB-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Ellwood | wetness. | wetness. | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | | | small stones, | | wetness.

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |

EdC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Ellwood | slope, | slope, | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | wetness. | wetness. | | | wetness,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

ElB: | | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness. | wetness. | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | | | small stones, | | wetness.

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |

 Crossett-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

EmB: | | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness. | wetness. | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | | | small stones, | | wetness.

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |

 Iosco----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

 Morganlake-----------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | wetness, | wetness, | slope, | wetness, | wetness,

 | percs slowly. | too sandy. | too sandy, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 285

Table 10.--Recreational Development--Continued

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

EnC: | | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness. | slope, | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | | wetness. | | | wetness,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Iosco----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | droughty,

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

EoD: | | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | wetness. | wetness. | | | wetness,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | too sandy, | slope.

 | | | | slope. |

 | | | | |

 Padus----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | slope.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

Ep: | | | | |

 Epiaquents-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

 Epiaquods------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

FeB-------------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Slight.

 Fence | | | slope. | erodes easily. |

 | | | | |

Fm--------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Fordum | flooding, | ponding. | ponding, | ponding. | ponding,

 | ponding. | | flooding. | | flooding.

 | | | | |

GaA-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Gastrow | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

GmC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Goodman | slope. | slope. | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

GmD-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Goodman | slope. | slope. | slope. | erodes easily. | slope.

 | | | | |

GwB-------------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Goodwit | | | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

IsA-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Iosco | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

Kr--------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Kinross | ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding,

 | | | | | excess humus.

 | | | | |
286 Soil Survey of

Table 10.--Recreational Development--Continued

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

Lo: | | | | |

 Loxley---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

 Beseman--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

 Dawson---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

Lu: | | | | |

 Lupton---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

 Cathro---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

 Markey---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

MaA-------------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Manitowish | | | small stones. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | |

Mn--------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Minocqua | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding,

 | excess humus. | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus. | excess humus.

 | | | | |

MrB-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Morganlake | wetness, | wetness, | slope, | wetness, | wetness,

 | percs slowly. | too sandy. | too sandy, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |

MuB-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Mudlake | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

PaB-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Padus | small stones. | small stones. | small stones. | | small stones,

 | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | |

PaC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Padus | slope, | slope, | slope, | | small stones,

 | small stones. | small stones. | small stones. | | large stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

PaD-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Padus | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | slope.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

PeB: | | | | |

 Padus----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | small stones. | small stones. | small stones. | | small stones,

 | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | |

 Pence----------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | | | slope, | | large stones,

 | | | small stones. | | droughty.

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 287

Table 10.--Recreational Development--Continued

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

PeC: | | | | |

 Padus----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope, | | small stones,

 | small stones. | small stones. | small stones. | | large stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Pence----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

PeD: | | | | |

 Padus----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | slope.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

 Pence----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

PnB-------------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Pence | | | slope, | | large stones,

 | | | small stones. | | droughty.

 | | | | |

PnC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Pence | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

PnD-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Pence | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

PsB: | | | | |

 Pence----------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | | | slope, | | large stones,

 | | | small stones. | | droughty.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | slope, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | | small stones, | |

 | | | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |

PsC: | | | | |

 Pence----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | droughty,

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

PsD: | | | | |

 Pence----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

Pt. | | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | | |

 | | | | |

Px. | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | |

 | | | | |
288 Soil Survey of

Table 10.--Recreational Development--Continued

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

Rb--------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Robago | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | |

RkC: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Ishpeming------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | large stones,

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | droughty,

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

RkD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Ishpeming------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

RmC: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Metonga--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | slope,

 | | | | | depth to rock.

 | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

RmD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Metonga--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

RsB-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Rousseau | too sandy. | too sandy. | slope, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |

RsC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Rousseau | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | droughty,

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

SaB-------------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Sarona | | | slope, | | large stones,

 | | | small stones. | | droughty.

 | | | | |

SaC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Sarona | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 289

Table 10.--Recreational Development--Continued

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

SaD-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 Sarona | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

SdB: | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | | | slope, | | large stones,

 | | | small stones. | | droughty.

 | | | | |

 Padus----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | small stones. | small stones. | small stones. | | small stones,

 | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | |

SdC: | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Padus----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope, | | small stones,

 | small stones. | small stones. | small stones. | | large stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

SdD: | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Padus----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | slope.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

SlB: | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | | | slope, | | large stones,

 | | | small stones. | | droughty.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | slope, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | | small stones, | |

 | | | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |

SlC: | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | | large stones,

 | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | droughty,

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

SlD: | | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | too sandy, | slope.

 | | | | slope. |

 | | | | |

SnB-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe:

 Sayner | too sandy. | too sandy. | slope, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | | small stones, | |

 | | | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |
290 Soil Survey of

Table 10.--Recreational Development--Continued

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

SnC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 Sayner | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | droughty.

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | |

 | | | | |

SnD-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 Sayner | slope. | slope. | slope. | too sandy, | droughty,

 | | | | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

SoD: | | | | |

 Soperton-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope.

 | | | | erodes easily. |

 | | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope.

 | | | | erodes easily. |

 | | | | |

StC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Stambaugh | slope, | slope, | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | percs slowly. | percs slowly. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

StD-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Stambaugh | slope. | slope. | slope. | erodes easily. | slope.

 | | | | |

SuC: | | | | |

 Stambaugh------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | percs slowly. | percs slowly. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

SuD: | | | | |

 Stambaugh------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | erodes easily. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope.

 | | | | erodes easily. |

 | | | | |

TpA-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Slight----------|Moderate:

 Tipler | small stones. | small stones. | small stones. | | small stones,

 | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | |

VaB-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Vanzile | percs slowly. | percs slowly. | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones.

 | | | percs slowly. | |

 | | | | |

VgB: | | | | |

 Vanzile--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | percs slowly. | percs slowly. | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones.

 | | | percs slowly. | |

 | | | | |

 Goodwit--------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | | | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

VsB-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Vilas | too sandy. | too sandy. | slope, | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | | small stones, | |

 | | | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 291

Table 10.--Recreational Development--Continued

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Camp areas | Picnic areas | Playgrounds |Paths and trails| Golf fairways

 map symbol | | | | |

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

VsC-------------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Vilas | slope, | slope, | slope. | too sandy. | droughty,

 | too sandy. | too sandy. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

VsD-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 Vilas | slope. | slope. | slope. | too sandy, | slope.

 | | | | slope. |

 | | | | |

WaC: | | | | |

 Wabeno---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | slope, | slope, | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | wetness, | wetness, | | | wetness,

 | percs slowly. | percs slowly. | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

WbB: | | | | |

 Wabeno---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness, | wetness, | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | percs slowly. | percs slowly. | small stones, | | wetness.

 | | | wetness. | |

 | | | | |

 Goodwit--------------|Slight----------|Slight----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | | | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones.

 | | | small stones. | |

 | | | | |

WkB-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Wakefield | wetness, | percs slowly. | wetness, | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | percs slowly. | | percs slowly. | | wetness.

 | | | | |

WkC-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Wakefield | wetness, | percs slowly. | slope, | erodes easily. | large stones,

 | percs slowly. | | wetness, | | wetness,

 | | | percs slowly. | | slope.

 | | | | |

WrA-------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Worcester | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
292 Soil Survey of

Table 11.--Wildlife Habitat

(See text for definitions of "good," "fair," "poor," and "very poor." Absence of an entry indicates

 that the soil was not rated)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Potential for habitat elements |Potential as habitat for-- __________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Grain | | Wild | | | | | Open- | Wood- |

 map symbol | and |Grasses|herba- | Hard- |Conif- |Wetland|Shallow| land | land |Wetland

 | seed | and | ceous | wood | erous |plants | water | wild- | wild- | wild-

 | crops |legumes|plants | trees |plants | | areas | life | life | life ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | | |

AnB----------------|Good |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor.

 Annalake | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

AnC----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 Annalake | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

Au-----------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Fair |Good |Poor.

 Au Gres | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Ca-----------------|Very |Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Poor |Fair |Good.

 Capitola | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

CoA----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Fair.

 Crossett | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

CrA----------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Poor |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 Croswell | | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

CuA----------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Poor |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 Cublake | | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

EdB----------------|Good |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor.

 Ellwood | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

EdC----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 Ellwood | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

ElB: | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood-----------|Good |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Crossett----------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Fair.

 | | | | | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood-----------|Good |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco-------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Fair |Good |Fair.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Morganlake--------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Fair |Good |Poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

EnC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood-----------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco-------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Fair |Good |Fair.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Fair |Poor |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood-----------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Poor |Poor |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Poor |Poor |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 293

Table 11.--Wildlife Habitat--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Potential for habitat elements |Potential as habitat for-- __________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Grain | | Wild | | | | | Open- | Wood- |

 map symbol | and |Grasses|herba- | Hard- |Conif- |Wetland|Shallow| land | land |Wetland

 | seed | and | ceous | wood | erous |plants | water | wild- | wild- | wild-

 | crops |legumes|plants | trees |plants | | areas | life | life | life ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | | |

Ep: | | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquents--------|Very |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Poor |Fair |Good.

 | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquods---------|Very |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Poor |Fair |Good.

 | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

FeB----------------|Good |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor.

 Fence | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Fm-----------------|Very |Very |Poor |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Very |Fair |Good.

 Fordum | poor. | poor. | | | | | | poor. | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

GaA----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Fair.

 Gastrow | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

GmC, GmD-----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 Goodman | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

GwB----------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 Goodwit | poor. | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

IsA----------------|Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Fair |Good |Fair.

 Iosco | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Kr-----------------|Very |Poor |Poor |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Poor |Fair |Good.

 Kinross | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Lo: | | | | | | | | | |

 Loxley------------|Very |Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good.

 | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Beseman-----------|Very |Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good.

 | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Dawson------------|Very |Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good.

 | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Lu: | | | | | | | | | |

 Lupton------------|Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Cathro------------|Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Markey------------|Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good.

 | | | | | | | | | |

MaA----------------|Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Fair |Good |Poor.

 Manitowish | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Mn-----------------|Very |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Poor |Fair |Good.

 Minocqua | poor. | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

MrB----------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Fair |Good |Poor.

 Morganlake | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

MuB----------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 Mudlake | poor. | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

PaB, PaC-----------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 Padus | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |
294 Soil Survey of

Table 11.--Wildlife Habitat--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Potential for habitat elements |Potential as habitat for-- __________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Grain | | Wild | | | | | Open- | Wood- |

 map symbol | and |Grasses|herba- | Hard- |Conif- |Wetland|Shallow| land | land |Wetland

 | seed | and | ceous | wood | erous |plants | water | wild- | wild- | wild-

 | crops |legumes|plants | trees |plants | | areas | life | life | life ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | | |

PaD----------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 Padus | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

PeB, PeC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence-------------|Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

PeD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence-------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

PnB, PnC-----------|Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 Pence | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

PnD----------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 Pence | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

PsB, PsC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence-------------|Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Fair |Poor |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

PsD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence-------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Very |Poor |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Poor |Poor |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

Pt. | | | | | | | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Px. | | | | | | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

Rb-----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Fair.

 Robago | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

RkC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming---------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Fair |Fair |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Fair |Poor |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

RkD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming---------|Very |Poor |Fair |Fair |Fair |Very |Very |Poor |Fair |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Very |Poor |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Poor |Poor |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 295

Table 11.--Wildlife Habitat--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Potential for habitat elements |Potential as habitat for-- __________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Grain | | Wild | | | | | Open- | Wood- |

 map symbol | and |Grasses|herba- | Hard- |Conif- |Wetland|Shallow| land | land |Wetland

 | seed | and | ceous | wood | erous |plants | water | wild- | wild- | wild-

 | crops |legumes|plants | trees |plants | | areas | life | life | life ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | | |

RmC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Metonga-----------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

RmD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Metonga-----------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

RsB----------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 Rousseau | | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

RsC----------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 Rousseau | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SaB, SaC, SaD------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 Sarona | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SdB, SdC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SdD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SlB, SlC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Fair |Poor |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SlD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-------------|Poor |Poor |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Poor |Poor |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SnB, SnC-----------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Fair |Poor |Very

 Sayner | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SnD----------------|Very |Poor |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Poor |Poor |Very

 Sayner | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |
296 Soil Survey of

Table 11.--Wildlife Habitat--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Potential for habitat elements |Potential as habitat for-- __________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Grain | | Wild | | | | | Open- | Wood- |

 map symbol | and |Grasses|herba- | Hard- |Conif- |Wetland|Shallow| land | land |Wetland

 | seed | and | ceous | wood | erous |plants | water | wild- | wild- | wild-

 | crops |legumes|plants | trees |plants | | areas | life | life | life ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | | |

SoD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Soperton----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman-----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

StC----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 Stambaugh | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

StD----------------|Poor |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 Stambaugh | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SuC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Stambaugh---------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Good |Good |Very

 | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman-----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

SuD: | | | | | | | | | |

 Stambaugh---------|Very |Fair |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Fair |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman-----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

TpA----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Good |Good |Very

 Tipler | | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

VaB----------------|Good |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor.

 Vanzile | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | |

VgB: | | | | | | | | | |

 Vanzile-----------|Good |Good |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Poor |Good |Good |Poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit-----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

VsB, VsC-----------|Poor |Fair |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Fair |Poor |Very

 Vilas | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

VsD----------------|Poor |Poor |Fair |Poor |Poor |Very |Very |Poor |Poor |Very

 Vilas | | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

WaC: | | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman-----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

WbB: | | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit-----------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 | poor. | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

WkB----------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Poor |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 Wakefield | poor. | | | | | | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 297

Table 11.--Wildlife Habitat--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Potential for habitat elements |Potential as habitat for-- __________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Grain | | Wild | | | | | Open- | Wood- |

 map symbol | and |Grasses|herba- | Hard- |Conif- |Wetland|Shallow| land | land |Wetland

 | seed | and | ceous | wood | erous |plants | water | wild- | wild- | wild-

 | crops |legumes|plants | trees |plants | | areas | life | life | life ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | | |

WkC----------------|Very |Poor |Good |Good |Good |Very |Very |Poor |Good |Very

 Wakefield | poor. | | | | | poor. | poor. | | | poor.

 | | | | | | | | | |

WrA----------------|Fair |Good |Good |Good |Good |Fair |Fair |Good |Good |Fair.

 Worcester | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
298 Soil Survey of

Table 12.--Building Site Development

(Some terms that describe restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for definitions of

 "slight," "moderate," and "severe." Absence of an entry indicates that the soil was not rated. The

 information in this table indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite

 investigation)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

AnB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 Annalake | cutbanks cave.| | wetness. | | frost action. | droughty.

 | | | | | |

AnC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Annalake | cutbanks cave.| slope. | wetness, | slope. | slope, | droughty,

 | | | slope. | | frost action. | slope.

 | | | | | |

Au----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Au Gres | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | wetness. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Ca----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Capitola | cutbanks cave,| ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding, | ponding,

 | ponding. | | | | frost action. | excess humus.

 | | | | | |

CoA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Crossett | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | low strength, | wetness.

 | | | | | wetness, |

 | | | | | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

CrA---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Croswell | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | droughty.

 | wetness. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

CuA---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe:

 Cublake | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | droughty.

 | wetness. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

EdB---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Ellwood | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | wetness, | low strength. | large stones,

 | | shrink-swell. | | shrink-swell. | | wetness.

 | | | | | |

EdC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 Ellwood | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | slope. | low strength. | large stones,

 | | shrink-swell, | | | | wetness,

 | | slope. | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

ElB: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | wetness, | low strength. | large stones,

 | | shrink-swell. | | shrink-swell. | | wetness.

 | | | | | |

 Crossett---------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | low strength, | wetness.

 | | | | | wetness, |

 | | | | | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | wetness, | low strength. | large stones,

 | | shrink-swell. | | shrink-swell. | | wetness.

 | | | | | |

 Iosco------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | wetness. | | | | |

 | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 299

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | |

 Morganlake-------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness,

 | wetness. | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

EnC: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | slope. | low strength. | large stones,

 | | shrink-swell, | | | | wetness,

 | | slope. | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Iosco------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | wetness. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate:

 | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | slope. | low strength. | large stones,

 | | shrink-swell, | | | | wetness,

 | | slope. | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Ep: | | | | | |

 Epiaquents-------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding, | ponding,

 | ponding. | | | | frost action. | excess humus.

 | | | | | |

 Epiaquods--------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding,

 | ponding. | | | | | excess humus.

 | | | | | |

FeB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Severe: |Slight.

 Fence | cutbanks cave.| | wetness. | | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

Fm----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Fordum | cutbanks cave,| flooding, | flooding, | flooding, | ponding, | ponding,

 | ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | flooding, | flooding.

 | | | | | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

GaA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Gastrow | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness.

 | wetness. | | | | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

GmC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Goodman | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | slope.

 | | | | | |

GmD---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Goodman | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |
300 Soil Survey of

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

GwB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 Goodwit | cutbanks cave.| | wetness. | | frost action. | large stones.

 | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

IsA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Iosco | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | wetness. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Kr----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Kinross | cutbanks cave,| ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding,

 | ponding. | | | | | excess humus.

 | | | | | |

Lo: | | | | | |

 Loxley-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | excess humus, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | ponding,

 | ponding. | ponding, | ponding, | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus.

 | | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

 Beseman----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | excess humus, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | ponding,

 | ponding. | ponding, | ponding. | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus.

 | | low strength. | | low strength. | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

 Dawson-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | ponding,

 | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus.

 | ponding. | low strength. | | low strength. | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

Lu: | | | | | |

 Lupton-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | excess humus, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | ponding,

 | ponding. | ponding, | ponding, | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus.

 | | low strength. | low strength. | low strength. | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

 Cathro-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | excess humus, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | ponding,

 | ponding. | ponding, | ponding. | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus.

 | | low strength. | | low strength. | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

 Markey-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | subsides, | ponding,

 | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | ponding, | ponding, | excess humus.

 | ponding. | low strength. | | low strength. | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

MaA---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 Manitowish | cutbanks cave.| | wetness. | | | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

Mn----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Minocqua | cutbanks cave,| ponding. | ponding. | ponding. | ponding, | ponding,

 | ponding. | | | | frost action. | excess humus.

 | | | | | |

MrB---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Morganlake | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness,

 | wetness. | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

MuB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Mudlake | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness.

 | wetness. | | | | frost action. |

 | | | | | |

PaB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 Padus | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | small stones,

 | | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 301

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

PaC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Padus | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | small stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | large stones,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

PaD---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Padus | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

PeB: | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | small stones,

 | | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

PeC: | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | small stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | large stones,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

PeD: | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

PnB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 Pence | cutbanks cave.| | | | | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

PnC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Pence | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

PnD---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Pence | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

PsB: | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |
302 Soil Survey of

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

PsC: | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

PsD: | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Pt. | | | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Px. | | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Rb----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Robago | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | too acid,

 | wetness. | | | | frost action. | wetness.

 | | | | | |

RkC: | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Ishpeming--------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | depth to rock,| slope, | depth to rock.| slope. | depth to rock,| large stones,

 | cutbanks cave.| depth to rock.| | | slope. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

RkD: | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Ishpeming--------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | depth to rock,| slope. | depth to rock,| slope. | slope. | slope.

 | cutbanks cave,| | slope. | | |

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

RmC: | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Metonga----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | depth to rock.| slope, | depth to rock.| slope. | depth to rock,| large stones,

 | | depth to rock.| | | slope, | slope,

 | | | | | frost action. | depth to rock.

 | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 303

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

RmC: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

RmD: | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Metonga----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | depth to rock,| slope. | depth to rock,| slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | slope. | | |

 | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

RsB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 Rousseau | cutbanks cave.| | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

RsC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Rousseau | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

SaB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 Sarona | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

SaC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Sarona | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

SaD---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Sarona | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

SdB: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | small stones,

 | | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | | |

SdC: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | small stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | large stones,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

SdD: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |
304 Soil Survey of

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

SdD: | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

SlB: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | large stones,

 | | | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

SlC: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

SlD: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

SnB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Severe:

 Sayner | cutbanks cave.| | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

SnC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Severe:

 Sayner | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty.

 | | | | | |

SnD---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Sayner | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty,

 | slope. | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

SoD: | | | | | |

 Soperton---------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Goodman----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

StC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Stambaugh | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | slope.

 | | | | | |

StD---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Stambaugh | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

SuC: | | | | | |

 Stambaugh--------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | slope.

 | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 305

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

SuC: | | | | | |

 Goodman----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | slope.

 | | | | | |

SuD: | | | | | |

 Stambaugh--------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Goodman----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

TpA---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 Tipler | cutbanks cave.| | wetness. | | frost action. | small stones,

 | | | | | | large stones.

 | | | | | |

VaB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 Vanzile | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | large stones.

 | | | | | |

VgB: | | | | | |

 Vanzile----------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | | | frost action. | large stones.

 | | | | | |

 Goodwit----------|Severe: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | wetness. | | frost action. | large stones.

 | | | | | |

VsB---------------|Severe: |Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Slight---------|Moderate:

 Vilas | cutbanks cave.| | | | | droughty.

 | | | | | |

VsC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Vilas | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | droughty,

 | | | | | | slope.

 | | | | | |

VsD---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Vilas | cutbanks cave,| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | slope. | | | | |

 | | | | | |

WaC: | | | | | |

 Wabeno-----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave,| wetness, | wetness. | slope. | wetness, | large stones,

 | wetness. | slope. | | | slope, | wetness,

 | | | | | frost action. | slope.

 | | | | | |

 Goodman----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| slope. | slope. | slope. | slope, | large stones,

 | | | | | frost action. | slope.

 | | | | | |

WbB: | | | | | |

 Wabeno-----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | large stones,

 | wetness. | | | | frost action. | wetness.

 | | | | | |

 Goodwit----------|Severe: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Slight---------|Moderate: |Moderate:

 | cutbanks cave.| | wetness. | | frost action. | large stones.

 | | | | | |

WkB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Wakefield | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | low strength, | large stones,

 | | | | | wetness. | wetness.

 | | | | | |
306 Soil Survey of

Table 12.--Building Site Development--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

 Soil name and | Shallow | Dwellings | Dwellings | Small | Local roads | Lawns and

 map symbol | excavations | without | with | commercial | and streets | landscaping

 | | basements | basements | buildings | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

WkC---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate:

 Wakefield | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | low strength, | large stones,

 | | | | slope. | wetness, | wetness,

 | | | | | slope. | slope.

 | | | | | |

WrA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe:

 Worcester | cutbanks cave,| wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness.

 | wetness. | | | | frost action. |

 | | | | | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Florence County, Wisconsin 307

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities

(Some terms that describe restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for definitions of

 "moderate," "poor," and other terms. Absence of an entry indicates that the soil was not rated. The

 information in this table indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for

 onsite investigation)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

AnB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Poor:

 Annalake | wetness. | wetness. | too sandy. | wetness. | too sandy.

 | | | | |

AnC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Poor:

 Annalake | wetness. | slope, | too sandy. | wetness, | too sandy.

 | | wetness. | | slope. |

 | | | | |

Au------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Au Gres | wetness, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | wetness.

 | | | | |

Ca------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Capitola | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding. | ponding. | seepage,

 | percs slowly. | ponding. | | | small stones,

 | | | | | ponding.

 | | | | |

CoA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Crossett | wetness, | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | percs slowly. | | | |

 | | | | |

CrA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Croswell | wetness, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy.

 | | | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |

CuA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Cublake | wetness, | seepage, | too sandy. | seepage. | seepage,

 | percs slowly, | wetness. | | | too sandy.

 | poor filter. | | | |

 | | | | |

EdB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Fair:

 Ellwood | wetness, | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | too clayey,

 | percs slowly. | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

EdC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Fair:

 Ellwood | wetness, | slope, | wetness. | wetness, | too clayey,

 | percs slowly. | wetness. | | slope. | small stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

ElB: | | | | |

 Ellwood------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Fair:

 | wetness, | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | too clayey,

 | percs slowly. | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Crossett-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | wetness, | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | percs slowly. | | | |

 | | | | |

EmB: | | | | |

 Ellwood------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Fair:

 | wetness, | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | too clayey,

 | percs slowly. | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Iosco--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | wetness, | seepage, | wetness, | seepage, | seepage,

 | percs slowly, | wetness. | too sandy. | wetness. | too sandy,

 | poor filter. | | | | wetness.

 | | | | |
308 Soil Survey of

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

EmB: | | | | |

 Morganlake---------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Fair:

 | wetness, | seepage, | wetness. | seepage. | too clayey,

 | percs slowly, | wetness. | | | wetness.

 | poor filter. | | | |

 | | | | |

EnC: | | | | |

 Ellwood------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Fair:

 | wetness, | slope, | wetness. | wetness, | too clayey,

 | percs slowly. | wetness. | | slope. | small stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Iosco--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | wetness, | seepage, | wetness, | seepage, | seepage,

 | percs slowly, | wetness. | too sandy. | wetness. | too sandy,

 | poor filter. | | | | wetness.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

EoD: | | | | |

 Ellwood------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Fair:

 | wetness, | slope, | wetness. | wetness, | too clayey,

 | percs slowly. | wetness. | | slope. | small stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Padus--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

Ep: | | | | |

 Epiaquents---------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | ponding, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | too sandy,

 | percs slowly, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | ponding.

 | poor filter. | ponding. | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |

 Epiaquods----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | ponding, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | too sandy,

 | poor filter. | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | ponding.

 | | ponding. | too sandy. | |

 | | | | |

FeB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Fair:

 Fence | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy. | wetness. | too sandy,

 | percs slowly. | | | | wetness.

 | | | | |

Fm------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Fordum | flooding, | seepage, | flooding, | flooding, | seepage,

 | ponding, | flooding. | seepage, | seepage, | too sandy,

 | poor filter. | | ponding. | ponding. | small stones.

 | | | | |

GaA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Gastrow | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | wetness.

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 309

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

GmC-----------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Poor:

 Goodman | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | slope. | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

GmD-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Goodman | slope. | seepage, | seepage, | slope. | seepage,

 | | slope. | slope. | | small stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

GwB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Poor:

 Goodwit | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | small stones.

 | | | | |

IsA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Iosco | wetness, | seepage, | wetness, | seepage, | seepage,

 | percs slowly, | wetness. | too sandy. | wetness. | too sandy,

 | poor filter. | | | | wetness.

 | | | | |

Kr------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Kinross | ponding, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter. | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | too sandy,

 | | ponding. | too sandy. | | ponding.

 | | | | |

Lo: | | | | |

 Loxley-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | subsides, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | ponding,

 | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | excess humus.

 | percs slowly. | ponding. | excess humus. | |

 | | | | |

 Beseman------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | subsides, | seepage, | ponding, | seepage, | ponding,

 | ponding, | excess humus, | excess humus. | ponding. | excess humus.

 | percs slowly. | ponding. | | |

 | | | | |

 Dawson-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | subsides, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | ponding,

 | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | excess humus.

 | percs slowly. | ponding. | excess humus. | |

 | | | | |

Lu: | | | | |

 Lupton-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | subsides, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | ponding,

 | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | excess humus.

 | percs slowly. | ponding. | excess humus. | |

 | | | | |

 Cathro-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | ponding, | seepage, | ponding. | seepage, | ponding.

 | percs slowly. | excess humus, | | ponding. |

 | | ponding. | | |

 | | | | |

 Markey-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | subsides, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | ponding, | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | too sandy,

 | percs slowly. | ponding. | too sandy. | | ponding.

 | | | | |

MaA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Manitowish | wetness, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

Mn------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Minocqua | ponding, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter. | excess humus, | ponding, | ponding. | too sandy,

 | | ponding. | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |
310 Soil Survey of

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

MrB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Fair:

 Morganlake | wetness, | seepage, | wetness. | seepage. | too clayey,

 | percs slowly, | wetness. | | | wetness.

 | poor filter. | | | |

 | | | | |

MuB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Mudlake | wetness. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | small stones,

 | | | | | wetness.

 | | | | |

PaB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Padus | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PaC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Padus | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PaD-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Padus | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PeB: | | | | |

 Padus--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Pence--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PeC: | | | | |

 Padus--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Pence--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PeD: | | | | |

 Padus--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Pence--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PnB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Pence | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 311

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

PnC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Pence | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PnD-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Pence | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

PsB: | | | | |

 Pence--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

PsC: | | | | |

 Pence--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

PsD: | | | | |

 Pence--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | slope.

 | | | | |

Pt. | | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | | |

 | | | | |

Px. | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | |

 | | | | |

Rb------------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Robago | wetness. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | wetness.

 | | | | |

RkC: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Ishpeming----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | depth to rock, | seepage, | depth to rock, | depth to rock, | depth to rock,

 | poor filter. | depth to rock, | seepage. | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |
312 Soil Survey of

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

RkD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Ishpeming----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | depth to rock, | seepage, | depth to rock, | depth to rock, | depth to rock,

 | poor filter, | depth to rock, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | too sandy.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | slope.

 | | | | |

RmC: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Metonga------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | depth to rock. | depth to rock, | depth to rock. | depth to rock. | depth to rock.

 | | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage. | small stones.

 | slope. | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

RmD: | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | |

 | | | | |

 Metonga------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | depth to rock, | depth to rock, | depth to rock, | depth to rock, | depth to rock,

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | slope. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | small stones,

 | | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

RsB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Rousseau | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

RsC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Rousseau | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

SaB-----------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Sarona | percs slowly. | seepage. | seepage. | seepage. | small stones.

 | | | | |

SaC-----------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Sarona | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage. | small stones.

 | slope. | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

SaD-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Sarona | slope. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | small stones,

 | | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

SdB: | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly. | seepage. | seepage. | seepage. | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Padus--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 313

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

SdC: | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage. | small stones.

 | slope. | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

 Padus--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

SdD: | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | slope. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | small stones,

 | | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Padus--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

SlB: | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly. | seepage. | seepage. | seepage. | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

SlC: | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage. | small stones.

 | slope. | slope. | | |

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

SlD: | | | | |

 Sarona-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | slope. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | small stones,

 | | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope.

 | | | | |

 Vilas--------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | slope.

 | | | | |

SnB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Sayner | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

SnC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Sayner | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

SnD-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Sayner | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |
314 Soil Survey of

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

SoD: | | | | |

 Soperton-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope. | slope. | small stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

 Goodman------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | slope. | seepage, | seepage, | slope. | seepage,

 | | slope. | slope. | | small stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

StC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Stambaugh | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage. | too sandy,

 | poor filter. | slope. | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

StD-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Stambaugh | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter, | slope. | slope. | slope. | too sandy,

 | slope. | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

SuC: | | | | |

 Stambaugh----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage. | seepage,

 | poor filter. | slope. | | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Goodman------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | slope. | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

SuD: | | | | |

 Stambaugh----------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter, | slope. | slope. | slope. | too sandy,

 | slope. | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Goodman------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | slope. | seepage, | seepage, | slope. | seepage,

 | | slope. | slope. | | small stones,

 | | | | | slope.

 | | | | |

TpA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Tipler | wetness, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | |

VaB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Vanzile | percs slowly, | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | poor filter. | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

VgB: | | | | |

 Vanzile------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | poor filter. | | too sandy. | | too sandy,

 | | | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Goodwit------------|Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Poor:

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | small stones.

 | | | | |

VsB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Vilas | poor filter. | seepage. | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 315

Table 13.--Sanitary Facilities--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

 Soil name and | Septic tank | Sewage lagoon | Trench | Area | Daily cover

 map symbol | absorption | areas | sanitary | sanitary | for landfill

 | fields | | landfill | landfill | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | |

VsC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Vilas | poor filter. | seepage, | seepage, | seepage. | seepage,

 | | slope. | too sandy. | | too sandy.

 | | | | |

VsD-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Vilas | poor filter, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | slope, | slope. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | slope.

 | | | | |

WaC: | | | | |

 Wabeno-------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Poor:

 | wetness, | slope. | wetness. | wetness, | seepage,

 | percs slowly. | | | slope. | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Goodman------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Poor:

 | percs slowly, | seepage, | seepage. | slope. | seepage,

 | slope. | slope. | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

WbB: | | | | |

 Wabeno-------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Severe: |Moderate: |Poor:

 | wetness, | seepage, | wetness. | wetness. | seepage,

 | percs slowly. | slope. | | | small stones.

 | | | | |

 Goodwit------------|Severe: |Severe: |Moderate: |Moderate: |Poor:

 | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | small stones.

 | | | | |

WkB-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Wakefield | wetness, | wetness. | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | percs slowly. | | | |

 | | | | |

WkC-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Wakefield | wetness, | slope, | wetness. | wetness. | wetness.

 | percs slowly. | wetness. | | |

 | | | | |

WrA-----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Severe: |Poor:

 Worcester | wetness, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage, | seepage,

 | poor filter. | wetness. | wetness, | wetness. | too sandy,

 | | | too sandy. | | small stones.

 | | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
316 Soil Survey of

Table 14.--Construction Materials

(Some terms that describe restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for definitions of

 "fair," "poor," and other terms. Absence of an entry indicates that the soil was not rated. The

 information in this table indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for

 onsite investigation)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

AnB-------------------|Fair: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Fair:

 Annalake | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones,

 | | | | thin layer.

 | | | |

AnC-------------------|Fair: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Fair:

 Annalake | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones,

 | | | | thin layer,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

Au--------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 Au Gres | wetness. | | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

Ca--------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Capitola | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

CoA-------------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Crossett | low strength, | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones,

 | wetness. | | | wetness.

 | | | |

CrA-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 Croswell | wetness. | | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |

CuA-------------------|Fair: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Cublake | wetness. | thin layer. | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |

EdB, EdC--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Ellwood | low strength. | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones.

 | | | |

ElB: | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | low strength. | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones.

 | | | |

 Crossett-------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | low strength, | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones,

 | wetness. | | | wetness.

 | | | |

EmB: | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | low strength. | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones.

 | | | |

 Iosco----------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | thin layer. | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

 Morganlake-----------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | low strength. | excess fines. | excess fines. | too sandy.

 | | | |

EnC: | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | low strength. | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones.

 | | | |

 Iosco----------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | thin layer. | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 317

Table 14.--Construction Materials--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

EnC: | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | | | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |

EoD: | | | |

 Ellwood--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | low strength. | excess fines. | excess fines. | small stones.

 | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | slope. | | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

 Padus----------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

Ep: | | | |

 Epiaquents-----------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

 Epiaquods------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | too sandy,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

FeB-------------------|Fair: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Fair:

 Fence | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | too sandy.

 | | | |

Fm--------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Fordum | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

GaA-------------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Gastrow | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | wetness.

 | | | |

GmC-------------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Goodman | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

GmD-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Goodman | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

GwB-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Goodwit | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

IsA-------------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Iosco | wetness. | thin layer. | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

Kr--------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 Kinross | wetness. | | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |
318 Soil Survey of

Table 14.--Construction Materials--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

Lo: | | | |

 Loxley---------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | excess humus. | excess humus. | excess humus,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

 Beseman--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | excess humus. | excess humus. | excess humus,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

 Dawson---------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | | too sandy. | excess humus,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

Lu: | | | |

 Lupton---------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | excess humus. | excess humus. | excess humus,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

 Cathro---------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | thin layer,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

 Markey---------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | wetness. | | too sandy. | excess humus,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

MaA-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Manitowish | wetness. | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

Mn--------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Minocqua | wetness. | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

MrB-------------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Morganlake | low strength. | excess fines. | excess fines. | too sandy.

 | | | |

MuB-------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Mudlake | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

PaB, PaC--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Padus | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

PaD-------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Padus | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

PeB, PeC: | | | |

 Padus----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Pence----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 319

Table 14.--Construction Materials--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

PeD: | | | |

 Padus----------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

 Pence----------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

PnB, PnC--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Pence | | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

PnD-------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Pence | slope. | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

PsB, PsC: | | | |

 Pence----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | | | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |

PsD: | | | |

 Pence----------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | slope. | | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

Pt. | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | |

 | | | |

Px. | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | |

 | | | |

Rb--------------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Robago | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | thin layer,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | |

RkC: | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | |

 | | | |

 Ishpeming------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | depth to rock. | thin layer. | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | large stones.

 | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | | | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |
320 Soil Survey of

Table 14.--Construction Materials--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

RkD: | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | |

 | | | |

 Ishpeming------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | depth to rock, | thin layer. | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | slope. | | | large stones,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | slope. | | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

RmC: | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | |

 | | | |

 Metonga--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Fair:

 | depth to rock. | excess fines. | excess fines. | depth to rock,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

RmD: | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | |

 | | | |

 Metonga--------------|Poor: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 | depth to rock, | excess fines. | excess fines. | slope.

 | slope. | | |

 | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

RsB, RsC--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 Rousseau | | | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |

SaB, SaC--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Sarona | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

SaD-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Sarona | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

SdB, SdC: | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Padus----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

SdD: | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 321

Table 14.--Construction Materials--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

SdD: | | | |

 Padus----------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

SlB, SlC: | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | | | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |

SlD: | | | |

 Sarona---------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

 Vilas----------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 | slope. | | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

SnB, SnC--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Sayner | | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

SnD-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Sayner | slope. | | | too sandy,

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

SoD: | | | |

 Soperton-------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

StC-------------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Stambaugh | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

StD-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Stambaugh | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

SuC: | | | |

 Stambaugh------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |
322 Soil Survey of

Table 14.--Construction Materials--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

SuD: | | | |

 Stambaugh------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | slope. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

TpA-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Tipler | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

VaB-------------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Vanzile | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

VgB: | | | |

 Vanzile--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Goodwit--------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

VsB, VsC--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 Vilas | | | too sandy. | too sandy.

 | | | |

VsD-------------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Improbable: |Poor:

 Vilas | slope. | | too sandy. | too sandy,

 | | | | slope.

 | | | |

WaC: | | | |

 Wabeno---------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Goodman--------------|Good-----------------|Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

WbB: | | | |

 Wabeno---------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

 Goodwit--------------|Fair: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim.

 | | | |

WkB, WkC--------------|Fair: |Improbable: |Improbable: |Poor:

 Wakefield | wetness. | excess fines. | excess fines. | area reclaim,

 | | | | small stones.

 | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 323

Table 14.--Construction Materials--Continued

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

 Soil name and | Roadfill | Sand | Gravel | Topsoil

 map symbol | | | |

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | |

WrA-------------------|Poor: |Probable-------------|Probable-------------|Poor:

 Worcester | wetness. | | | small stones,

 | | | | area reclaim,

 | | | | wetness.

 | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
324 Soil Survey of

Table 15.--Water Management

(Some terms that describe restrictive soil features are defined in the Glossary. See text for definitions of

 "slight," "moderate," and "severe." Absence of an entry indicates that the soil was not evaluated. The

 information in this table indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite

 investigation)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Limitations for-- | Features affecting-- _______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Pond | Embankments, | | | Terraces |

 map symbol | reservoir | dikes, and | Drainage | Irrigation | and | Grassed

 | areas | levees | | | diversions | waterways __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

AnB---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Slope, |Slope, |Wetness, |Droughty.

 Annalake | seepage, | piping. | cutbanks cave.| wetness, | too sandy, |

 | slope. | | | droughty. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

AnC---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Slope, |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Annalake | slope. | piping. | cutbanks cave.| wetness, | wetness, | droughty.

 | | | | droughty. | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |

Au----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Wetness, |Wetness,

 Au Gres | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty.

 | | piping, | | | soil blowing. |

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | |

Ca----------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Large stones, |Large stones,

 Capitola | seepage. | seepage, | frost action, | soil blowing, | erodes easily,| wetness,

 | | piping, | cutbanks cave.| rooting depth.| ponding. | erodes easily.

 | | ponding. | | | |

 | | | | | |

CoA---------------|Slight---------|Severe: |Frost action---|Wetness, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 Crossett | | wetness. | | erodes easily.| wetness. | erodes easily.

 | | | | | |

CrA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Wetness, |Droughty.

 Croswell | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | too sandy, |

 | | piping. | | | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

CuA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Wetness, |Droughty.

 Cublake | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | too sandy, |

 | | piping. | | | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

EdB---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily.

 Ellwood | slope. | wetness. | | wetness, | wetness. |

 | | | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

EdC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Ellwood | slope. | wetness. | | wetness, | erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | | | | erodes easily.| wetness. |

 | | | | | |

ElB: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily.

 | slope. | wetness. | | wetness, | wetness. |

 | | | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

 Crossett---------|Slight---------|Severe: |Frost action---|Wetness, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 | | wetness. | | erodes easily.| wetness. | erodes easily.

 | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily.

 | slope. | wetness. | | wetness, | wetness. |

 | | | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

 Iosco------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | wetness, | erodes easily,

 | | piping, | | | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Morganlake-------|Severe: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily,

 | seepage. | piping, | | wetness, | wetness, | droughty.

 | | wetness. | | droughty. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 325

Table 15.--Water Management--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Limitations for-- | Features affecting-- _______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Pond | Embankments, | | | Terraces |

 map symbol | reservoir | dikes, and | Drainage | Irrigation | and | Grassed

 | areas | levees | | | diversions | waterways __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

EnC: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | slope. | wetness. | | wetness, | erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | | | | erodes easily.| wetness. |

 | | | | | |

 Iosco------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | wetness, | erodes easily,

 | | piping, | | | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | |

 Ellwood----------|Severe: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | slope. | wetness. | | wetness, | erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | | | | erodes easily.| wetness. |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | piping. | | soil blowing. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

Ep: | | | | | |

 Epiaquents-------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Ponding, |Wetness,

 | seepage. | seepage, | frost action, | soil blowing, | too sandy, | rooting depth.

 | | piping, | cutbanks cave.| rooting depth.| soil blowing. |

 | | ponding. | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Epiaquods--------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Ponding, |Wetness,

 | seepage. | seepage, | frost action, | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty,

 | | piping, | cutbanks cave.| soil blowing. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | ponding. | | | |

 | | | | | |

FeB---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Frost action, |Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily.

 Fence | seepage, | piping. | slope, | wetness, | wetness. |

 | slope. | | cutbanks cave.| erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

Fm----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 Fordum | seepage. | seepage, | flooding, | droughty, | ponding, | erodes easily,

 | | piping, | frost action. | flooding. | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | ponding. | | | |

 | | | | | |

GaA---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Frost action, |Wetness, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 Gastrow | seepage. | piping, | cutbanks cave.| erodes easily.| wetness, | erodes easily.

 | | wetness. | | | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |

GmC, GmD----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Goodman | seepage, | seepage, | | erodes easily.| erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | slope. | piping. | | | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |

GwB---------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily.

 Goodwit | seepage, | seepage, | | wetness, | wetness. |

 | slope. | piping. | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

IsA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 Iosco | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | wetness, | erodes easily,

 | | piping, | | | too sandy. | droughty.

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | |
326 Soil Survey of

Table 15.--Water Management--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Limitations for-- | Features affecting-- _______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Pond | Embankments, | | | Terraces |

 map symbol | reservoir | dikes, and | Drainage | Irrigation | and | Grassed

 | areas | levees | | | diversions | waterways __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

Kr----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding--------|Ponding, |Wetness.

 Kinross | seepage. | seepage, | cutbanks cave.| | too sandy, |

 | | piping, | | | soil blowing. |

 | | ponding. | | | |

 | | | | | |

Lo: | | | | | |

 Loxley-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding--------|Ponding--------|Wetness.

 | seepage. | excess humus, | subsides, | | |

 | | ponding. | frost action. | | |

 | | | | | |

 Beseman----------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Ponding--------|Wetness,

 | seepage. | excess humus, | subsides, | rooting depth.| | rooting depth.

 | | ponding. | frost action. | | |

 | | | | | |

 Dawson-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Ponding--------|Wetness,

 | seepage. | excess humus, | subsides, | rooting depth.| | rooting depth.

 | | ponding. | frost action. | | |

 | | | | | |

Lu: | | | | | |

 Lupton-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Ponding, |Wetness.

 | seepage. | excess humus, | subsides, | soil blowing. | soil blowing. |

 | | ponding. | frost action. | | |

 | | | | | |

 Cathro-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Ponding, |Wetness.

 | seepage. | piping, | subsides, | soil blowing. | soil blowing. |

 | | ponding. | frost action. | | |

 | | | | | |

 Markey-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Ponding, |Wetness.

 | seepage. | seepage, | subsides, | soil blowing. | too sandy, |

 | | piping, | frost action. | | soil blowing. |

 | | ponding. | | | |

 | | | | | |

MaA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Wetness, |Droughty.

 Manitowish | seepage. | seepage. | | droughty, | too sandy, |

 | | | | soil blowing. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

Mn----------------|Severe: |Severe: |Ponding, |Ponding, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 Minocqua | seepage. | seepage, | frost action, | rooting depth.| ponding, | erodes easily.

 | | piping, | cutbanks cave.| | too sandy. |

 | | ponding. | | | |

 | | | | | |

MrB---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily,

 Morganlake | seepage. | piping, | | wetness, | wetness, | droughty.

 | | wetness. | | droughty. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

MuB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Frost action, |Slope, |Large stones, |Large stones,

 Mudlake | seepage. | seepage, | slope, | wetness, | erodes easily,| wetness,

 | | piping, | cutbanks cave.| erodes easily.| wetness. | erodes easily.

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | |

PaB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty,

 Padus | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | piping. | | soil blowing. | |

 | | | | | |

PaC, PaD----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Padus | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | piping. | | soil blowing. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

PeB: | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty,

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | piping. | | soil blowing. | |

 | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 327

Table 15.--Water Management--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Limitations for-- | Features affecting-- _______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Pond | Embankments, | | | Terraces |

 map symbol | reservoir | dikes, and | Drainage | Irrigation | and | Grassed

 | areas | levees | | | diversions | waterways __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

PeB: | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty,

 | seepage. | seepage. | | droughty. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

PeC, PeD: | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | piping. | | soil blowing. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage. | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | | | | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

PnB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty,

 Pence | seepage. | seepage. | | droughty. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

PnC, PnD----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Pence | seepage, | seepage. | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | | | | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

PsB: | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty,

 | seepage. | seepage. | | droughty. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty.

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | soil blowing. |

 | | piping. | | fast intake. | |

 | | | | | |

PsC, PsD: | | | | | |

 Pence------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage. | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | | | | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

Pt. | | | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Px. | | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

Rb----------------|Moderate: |Severe: |Frost action, |Wetness, |Wetness, |Wetness.

 Robago | seepage. | piping, | cutbanks cave.| soil blowing. | too sandy, |

 | | wetness. | | | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

RkC, RkD: | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Ishpeming--------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | depth to rock,| droughty,

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | too sandy. | depth to rock.

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |
328 Soil Survey of

Table 15.--Water Management--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Limitations for-- | Features affecting-- _______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Pond | Embankments, | | | Terraces |

 map symbol | reservoir | dikes, and | Drainage | Irrigation | and | Grassed

 | areas | levees | | | diversions | waterways __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

RmC, RmD: | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Metonga----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | slope. | piping. | | soil blowing, | depth to rock,| erodes easily,

 | | | | depth to rock.| erodes easily.| depth to rock.

 | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

RsB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty.

 Rousseau | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | soil blowing. |

 | | piping. | | fast intake. | |

 | | | | | |

RsC---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Rousseau | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

SaB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty.

 Sarona | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | soil blowing. |

 | | piping. | | | |

 | | | | | |

SaC, SaD----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Sarona | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

SdB: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty.

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | soil blowing. |

 | | piping. | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty,

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | piping. | | soil blowing. | |

 | | | | | |

SdC, SdD: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

 Padus------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | piping. | | soil blowing. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

SlB: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty.

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty. | soil blowing. |

 | | piping. | | | |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty.

 | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | soil blowing. |

 | | piping. | | fast intake. | |

 | | | | | |

SlC, SlD: | | | | | |

 Sarona-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty. | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

 Vilas------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 329

Table 15.--Water Management--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Limitations for-- | Features affecting-- _______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Pond | Embankments, | | | Terraces |

 map symbol | reservoir | dikes, and | Drainage | Irrigation | and | Grassed

 | areas | levees | | | diversions | waterways __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

SnB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty,

 Sayner | seepage. | seepage. | | droughty, | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | fast intake. | |

 | | | | | |

SnC, SnD----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Sayner | seepage, | seepage. | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty,

 | slope. | | | fast intake. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | | | | |

SoD: | | | | | |

 Soperton---------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Large stones,

 | seepage, | seepage. | | droughty, | large stones, | slope,

 | slope. | | | percs slowly. | erodes easily.| erodes easily.

 | | | | | |

 Goodman----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | erodes easily.| erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | slope. | piping. | | | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |

StC, StD----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Stambaugh | seepage, | seepage, | | erodes easily.| erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | slope. | piping. | | | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |

SuC, SuD: | | | | | |

 Stambaugh--------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | erodes easily.| erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | slope. | piping. | | | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |

 Goodman----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | erodes easily.| erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | slope. | piping. | | | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |

TpA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Cutbanks cave |Wetness, |Wetness, |Droughty,

 Tipler | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | rooting depth.

 | | piping. | | soil blowing. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

VaB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily,

 Vanzile | seepage. | seepage, | | rooting depth,| too sandy. | rooting depth.

 | | piping. | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

VgB: | | | | | |

 Vanzile----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily,

 | seepage. | seepage, | | rooting depth,| too sandy. | rooting depth.

 | | piping. | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

 Goodwit----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily.

 | seepage, | seepage, | | wetness, | wetness. |

 | slope. | piping. | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

VsB---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Too sandy, |Droughty.

 Vilas | seepage. | seepage, | | droughty, | soil blowing. |

 | | piping. | | fast intake. | |

 | | | | | |

VsC, VsD----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 Vilas | seepage, | seepage, | | droughty, | too sandy, | droughty.

 | slope. | piping. | | fast intake. | soil blowing. |

 | | | | | |

WaC: | | | | | |

 Wabeno-----------|Severe: |Severe: |Percs slowly, |Slope, |Slope, |Large stones,

 | slope. | seepage. | large stones, | wetness, | large stones, | slope,

 | | | slope. | droughty. | erodes easily.| erodes easily.

 | | | | | |

 Goodman----------|Severe: |Severe: |Deep to water |Slope, |Slope, |Slope,

 | seepage, | seepage, | | erodes easily.| erodes easily,| erodes easily.

 | slope. | piping. | | | too sandy. |

 | | | | | |
330 Soil Survey of

Table 15.--Water Management--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | Limitations for-- | Features affecting-- _______________________________________________________________________________________________

 Soil name and | Pond | Embankments, | | | Terraces |

 map symbol | reservoir | dikes, and | Drainage | Irrigation | and | Grassed

 | areas | levees | | | diversions | waterways __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | |

WbB: | | | | | |

 Wabeno-----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Percs slowly, |Slope, |Large stones, |Large stones,

 | seepage, | seepage. | large stones, | wetness, | erodes easily.| erodes easily.

 | slope. | | slope. | droughty. | |

 | | | | | |

 Goodwit----------|Moderate: |Severe: |Slope----------|Slope, |Erodes easily, |Erodes easily.

 | seepage, | seepage, | | wetness, | wetness. |

 | slope. | piping. | | erodes easily.| |

 | | | | | |

WkB---------------|Moderate: |Moderate: |Percs slowly, |Slope, |Erodes easily, |Wetness,

 Wakefield | seepage, | thin layer, | slope. | wetness, | wetness. | erodes easily.

 | slope. | piping, | | droughty. | |

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | |

WkC---------------|Severe: |Moderate: |Percs slowly, |Slope, |Slope, |Wetness,

 Wakefield | slope. | thin layer, | slope. | wetness, | erodes easily,| slope,

 | | piping, | | droughty. | wetness. | erodes easily.

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | |

WrA---------------|Severe: |Severe: |Frost action, |Wetness, |Wetness, |Wetness,

 Worcester | seepage. | seepage, | cutbanks cave.| droughty, | too sandy, | droughty,

 | | piping, | | soil blowing. | soil blowing. | rooting depth.

 | | wetness. | | | |

 | | | | | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Florence County, Wisconsin 331

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties

(See text for explanations of terms used in this table. Absence of an entry indicates that data were not

 estimated)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

AnB, AnC------| 0-3 |Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |90-100|85-100|50-95 |25-60 | <26 | NP-8

 Annalake | | loam. | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | 3-6 |Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |90-100|85-100|50-95 |25-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 6-17|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |90-100|85-100|50-95 |25-65 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, very | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-31|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |90-100|85-100|50-95 |25-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-39|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |90-100|85-100|50-95 |25-80 | 18-28 | 3-9

 | | very fine | CL, ML | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |39-60|Stratified |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |90-100|85-100|50-95 |25-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | fine sand to | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | silt loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Au------------| 0-7 |Loamy sand----|SM, SP-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|75-100|35-90 |10-30 | 0-25 | NP-7

 Au Gres | | | SC-SM | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 7-17|Sand, loamy |SP-SM, SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|75-100|35-90 | 0-30 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | sand. | SC-SM, SP| A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |17-62|Sand----------|SP-SM, SM,|A-3, | 0 | 0 |95-100|75-100|35-90 | 0-15 | 0-14 | NP

 | | | SP | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Ca------------| 0-5 |Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 2-3 | 0-15 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | NP

 Capitola | 5-20|Silt loam, |CL, ML, |A-4, | 1-5 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|45-100|20-90 | <28 | NP-9

 | | loam, sandy | SM, SC | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |20-34|Fine sandy |SM, SC |A-4, | 0-10 | 0-25 |65-100|55-95 |35-85 |15-50 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, sandy | | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |34-60|Fine sandy |SM, SP-SM |A-4, | 0-10 | 0-25 |65-100|55-95 |20-85 | 8-50 | <21 | NP-4

 | | loam, sandy | | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

CoA-----------| 0-9 |Silt loam-----|CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|50-90 | 20-35 | 4-15

 Crossett | 9-19|Silt loam, |CL |A-6 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|45-95 | 30-40 | 10-20

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |19-38|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |38-80|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
332 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

CrA-----------| 0-5 |Loamy sand----|SM, SP-SM,|A-2, | 0 | 0 |90-100|75-100|40-90 |10-30 | 0-25 | NP-7

 Croswell | | | SC-SM | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 5-21|Sand, loamy |SP-SM, SM,|A-3, | 0 | 0 |90-100|75-100|40-90 | 3-30 | 0-14 | NP

 | | sand. | SP | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |21-27|Sand, loamy |SP-SM, SM,|A-3, | 0 | 0 |90-100|75-100|40-90 | 3-30 | 0-14 | NP

 | | sand. | SP | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |27-62|Sand----------|SP-SM, SM,|A-3, | 0 | 0 |90-100|75-100|40-90 | 3-15 | 0-14 | NP

 | | | SP | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

CuA-----------| 0-3 |Loamy sand----|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-75 |10-35 | <20 | NP-4

 Cublake | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 3-4 |Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-95 | 5-50 | <20 | NP-4

 | | sand, loamy | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-23|Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-95 | 5-50 | <20 | NP-4

 | | sand, loamy | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |23-48|Sand, fine |SM, SP-SM |A-3, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-85 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand, loamy | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |48-60|Stratified |SC, SC-SM,|A-4, A-6,| 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|50-85 |25-60 | 20-35 | 4-15

 | | sandy loam to| CL, CL-ML| A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | silt loam. | | A-2-6 | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EdB, EdC------| 0-8 |Silt loam-----|CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|55-90 | 20-35 | 4-15

 Ellwood | 8-15|Clay loam, |CL |A-6 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 30-40 | 10-20

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |15-35|Clay loam, |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-80|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

ElB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood------| 0-8 |Silt loam-----|CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|55-90 | 20-35 | 4-15

 | 8-15|Clay loam, |CL |A-6 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 30-40 | 10-20

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |15-35|Clay loam, |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-80|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 333

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

ElB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Crossett-----| 0-9 |Silt loam-----|CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|50-90 | 20-35 | 4-15

 | 9-19|Silt loam, |CL |A-6 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|45-95 | 30-40 | 10-20

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |19-38|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |38-80|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood------| 0-8 |Silt loam-----|CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|55-90 | 20-35 | 4-15

 | 8-15|Clay loam, |CL |A-6 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 30-40 | 10-20

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |15-35|Clay loam, |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-80|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco--------| 0-11|Loamy fine |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0-8 |90-100|75-100|35-85 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |11-33|Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0-8 |90-100|75-100|35-85 | 5-35 | <25 | NP-7

 | | sand, loamy | SC-SM | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |33-44|Silty clay |CL, CL-ML,|A-4, A-6,| 0 | 0-8 |90-100|85-100|65-95 |30-90 | 25-45 | 5-25

 | | loam, loam, | SC, SC-SM| A-7, A-2| | | | | | | |

 | | sandy clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |44-60|Silty clay |CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6,| 0 | 0-8 |90-100|85-100|70-95 |50-90 | 25-45 | 5-25

 | | loam, clay | | A-7 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Morganlake---| 0-7 |Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM |A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|65-95 |20-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | sand. | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | 7-8 |Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|25-95 | 5-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | sand, sand. | SP-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-26|Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|25-95 | 5-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | sand, sand. | SP-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |26-31|Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|25-95 | 5-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | sand, sand. | SP-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |31-40|Silty clay |CL | --- | 0 | 0 |80-95 |75-95 |60-95 |50-90 | 25-45 | 10-20

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |40-60|Silty clay |CL | --- | 0 | 0 |80-95 |75-95 |60-95 |50-90 | 25-45 | 10-20

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
334 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EnC: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood------| 0-8 |Silt loam-----|CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|55-90 | 20-35 | 4-15

 | 8-15|Clay loam, |CL |A-6 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 30-40 | 10-20

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |15-35|Clay loam, |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-80|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco--------| 0-11|Loamy sand----|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0-8 |90-100|75-100|35-85 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |11-33|Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0-8 |90-100|75-100|35-85 | 5-35 | <25 | NP-7

 | | sand, loamy | SC-SM | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |33-44|Silty clay |CL, CL-ML,|A-4, A-6,| 0 | 0-8 |90-100|85-100|65-95 |30-90 | 25-45 | 5-25

 | | loam, loam, | SC, SC-SM| A-7, A-2| | | | | | | |

 | | sandy clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |44-60|Silty clay |CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6,| 0 | 0-8 |90-100|85-100|70-95 |50-90 | 25-45 | 5-25

 | | loam, clay | | A-7 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas--------| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-5 |Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 5-8 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-37|Sand, loamy |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |37-62|Sand----------|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-25 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood------| 0-8 |Silt loam-----|CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|60-100|55-90 | 20-35 | 4-15

 | 8-15|Clay loam, |CL |A-6 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 30-40 | 10-20

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |15-35|Clay loam, |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | silty clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-80|Silty clay |CL |A-6, A-7 | 0-1 | 0-8 |80-100|75-100|55-100|50-95 | 35-45 | 15-25

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 335

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas--------| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-5 |Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 5-8 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-37|Sand, loamy |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |37-62|Sand----------|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-25 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus--------| 0-2 |Sandy loam----|SM |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-90 |15-50 | <21 | NP-4

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 2-3 |Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SM, SC-SM| A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 3-19|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, fine | ML, CL | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |19-38|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <28 | NP-9

 | | gravelly | ML, CL | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |38-60|Stratified |SP, SP-SM,|A-1, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |30-100|25-95 | 7-65 | 1-25 | --- | NP

 | | sand to very | GP, GP-GM| A-3 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Ep: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquents---| 0-8 |Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | 8-11|Fine sandy |SM, SC, |A-4, A-6,| 0-1 | 0-3 |90-100|85-100|50-95 |15-90 | <35 | NP-15

 | | loam, mucky | ML, CL | A-2 | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | silt loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |11-60|Gravelly very |SM, SC, |A-4, A-6,| 0-2 | 0-7 |75-100|70-100|20-100| 3-95 | <40 | NP-18

 | | fine sandy | ML, CL | A-2, A-1| | | | | | | |

 | | loam, silty | | | | | | | | | |

 | | clay loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquods----| 0-8 |Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | 8-12|Fine sandy |SC, SM, |A-4, | 0-1 | 0-3 |90-100|85-100|25-95 | 5-80 | <30 | NP-11

 | | loam, sand, | ML, CL | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | A-3, A-1| | | | | | | |

 |12-23|Fine sandy |SC, SM, |A-4, | 0-2 | 0-5 |90-100|85-100|25-95 | 5-80 | <30 | NP-11

 | | loam, sand, | ML, CL | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | A-3, A-1| | | | | | | |

 |23-60|Sandy loam, |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0-2 | 0-7 |75-100|70-100|20-95 | 3-80 | <25 | NP-7

 | | gravelly | ML, CL-ML| A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | sand, loam. | | A-3, A-1| | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
336 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

FeB-----------| 0-2 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML,|A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |96-100|90-100|80-100| 20-30 | 3-9

 Fence | | | CL | | | | | | | | |

 | 2-6 |Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |96-100|90-100|80-100| <25 | NP-7

 | | very fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 6-14|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |96-100|90-100|80-100| 15-25 | NP-7

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loamy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | very fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |14-25|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |96-100|90-100|80-100| 15-25 | NP-7

 | | very fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |25-42|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |96-100|85-100|70-100| 20-30 | 3-9

 | | very fine | CL | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy very | | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |42-60|Stratified |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 |96-100|75-100|50-90 | 15-25 | NP-7

 | | silt to very | | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Fm------------| 0-9 |Loam----------|ML, CL, |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|55-100|45-85 | 20-35 | 3-15

 Fordum | | | SM, SC | | | | | | | | |

 | 9-29|Silt loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-15 |30-100|25-100|20-100|10-90 | <30 | 3-10

 | | very fine | ML, CL | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |29-60|Sand, very |SP, SM, |A-3, A-2,| 0 | 0-15 |30-100|25-100| 7-95 | 1-50 | --- | NP

 | | gravelly | GP, SM | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

GaA-----------| 0-3 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |80-100|60-90 | 0-25 | NP-7

 Gastrow | 3-6 |Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |80-100|50-65 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | very fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 6-10|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |80-100|50-70 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | very fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |10-31|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |80-100|50-80 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | very fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-37|Fine sandy |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |75-100|50-80 | 18-25 | 3-7

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, very | | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |37-60|Stratified |SM, SC-SM,|A-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |65-95 |35-80 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | silt loam to | ML, CL-ML| | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 337

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

GmC, GmD------| 0-4 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|85-100|75-100| <23 | NP-6

 Goodman | 4-20|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |20-31|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-35|Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-90 | 8-75 | <23 | NP-6

 | | gravelly | SM, SP-SM| A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-62|Loamy sand, |SC-SM, SM,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-85 | 8-50 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SP-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

GwB-----------| 0-5 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <23 | NP-6

 Goodwit | 5-6 |Silt loam, |ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-100| <21 | NP-4

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 6-17|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |17-40|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |40-47|Loam, sandy |ML, CL, |A-4, | 2-10 | 0-15 |60-100|55-95 |35-90 |15-75 | <28 | NP-9

 | | loam, | SM, SC | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly fine| | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |47-62|Gravelly loamy|SC-SM, SM,|A-3, A-1,| 2-10 | 0-15 |60-100|55-95 |20-75 | 8-45 | <23 | NP-6

 | | sand, sandy | SP-SM | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

IsA-----------| 0-11|Loamy fine |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0-8 |90-100|75-100|35-85 |10-35 | --- | NP

 Iosco | | sand. | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |11-33|Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0-8 |90-100|75-100|35-85 | 5-35 | <25 | NP-7

 | | sand, loamy | SC-SM | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |33-44|Silty clay |CL, CL-ML,|A-4, A-6,| 0 | 0-8 |90-100|85-100|65-95 |30-90 | 25-45 | 5-25

 | | loam, loam, | SC, SC-SM| A-7, A-2| | | | | | | |

 | | sandy clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |44-60|Silty clay |CL, CL-ML |A-4, A-6,| 0 | 0-8 |90-100|85-100|70-95 |50-90 | 25-45 | 5-25

 | | loam, clay | | A-7 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Kr------------| 0-2 |Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | NP

 Kinross | 2-17|Sand, fine |SP-SM, SM |A-3, | 0 | 0 | 100 |90-100|50-80 | 5-30 | --- | NP

 | | sand, loamy | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-60|Sand, fine |SP-SM, SM |A-3, | 0 | 0 | 100 |90-100|50-80 | 5-30 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Lo: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Loxley-------| 0-9 |Peat----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | 9-60|Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Beseman------| 0-12|Peat----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 |12-36|Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 |36-60|Loam, sandy |CL, ML, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-2 |75-100|65-100|40-95 |25-75 | 15-30 | NP-12

 | | loam, silt | SM, SC | A-6 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
338 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Lo: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Dawson-------| 0-10|Peat----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 |10-44|Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 |44-60|Sand, gravelly|SP, SM, |A-2, A-3,| 0 | 0 |45-100|35-100|15-90 | 0-45 | <20 | NP-10

 | | sand, very | SC, GP | A-1, A-4| | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly very| | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Lu: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Lupton-------| 0-6 |Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | 6-60|Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Cathro-------| 0-8 |Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | 8-30|Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 |30-60|Loam, silt |SC-SM, |A-4, A-6 | 0 | 0-5 |80-100|65-100|60-100|35-90 | 20-40 | 4-20

 | | loam, sandy | CL-ML, | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | SC, CL | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Markey-------| 0-36|Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 |36-60|Sand, fine |SP, SM, |A-2, A-3,| 0 | 0 |95-100|60-100|30-75 | 0-30 | --- | NP

 | | sand, | SP-SM | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

MaA-----------| 0-4 |Sandy loam----|SM, ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|50-85 |35-55 | <21 | NP-4

 Manitowish | 4-13|Sandy loam, |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|35-95 |20-75 | <25 | NP-7

 | | loam, | ML, CL-ML| A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly fine| | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |13-29|Loamy sand, |SM, SC-SM,|A-2, A-1,| 0 | 0-15 |55-100|50-90 |20-90 | 5-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | gravelly | GM, GM-GC| A-3, A-4| | | | | | | |

 | | sand, sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |29-62|Stratified |SP, SP-SM |A-1, A-3,| 0 | 0-15 |55-100|50-75 |20-70 | 0-12 | --- | NP

 | | sand to | | A-2 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Mn------------| 0-5 |Muck----------|PT |A-8 | 0 | 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Minocqua | 5-21|Silt loam, |SC, SM, |A-2, A-4,| 0-1 | 0-9 |80-100|75-100|45-100|25-90 | <35 | NP-13

 | | fine sandy | CL, ML | A-6 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |21-25|Gravelly loamy|SM, GM, |A-2, A-1,| 0-1 | 0-9 |40-100|35-100| 5-70 | 2-40 | <20 | NP-4

 | | coarse sand, | GP, SP | A-3, A-4| | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | very gravelly| | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |25-60|Coarse sand, |SP, SM, |A-1, A-3,| 0-1 | 0-9 |30-100|25-100| 5-70 | 0-30 | --- | NP

 | | sand, very | GP, GM | A-2 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 339

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

MrB-----------| 0-7 |Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM |A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|65-95 |20-50 | <25 | NP-6

 Morganlake | | sand. | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | 7-8 |Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|25-95 | 5-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | sand, sand. | SP-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-26|Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|25-95 | 5-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | sand, sand. | SP-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |26-31|Loamy fine |SM, SC-SM,|A-4, | 0 | 0 |95-100|90-100|25-95 | 5-50 | <25 | NP-6

 | | sand, sand. | SP-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |31-40|Silty clay |CL | --- | 0 | 0 |80-95 |75-95 |60-95 |50-90 | 25-45 | 10-20

 | | loam, silt | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |40-60|Silty clay |CL | --- | 0 | 0 |80-95 |75-95 |60-95 |50-90 | 25-45 | 10-20

 | | loam, clay | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

MuB-----------| 0-4 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|55-95 |50-90 | 15-25 | NP-6

 Mudlake | 4-5 |Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 1-5 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|55-95 |50-90 | <25 | NP-6

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 5-12|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0-8 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|55-95 |50-90 | 15-25 | NP-6

 |12-34|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0-8 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|55-95 |50-90 | 15-25 | NP-7

 |34-43|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2-4, | 0-10 | 0-25 |60-95 |55-95 |35-90 |15-75 | 15-25 | NP-9

 | | gravelly | CL, ML | A-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |43-70|Sandy loam, |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0-10 | 0-25 |60-95 |55-95 |20-75 | 8-45 | 15-25 | NP-6

 | | gravelly | SP-SM | A-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand. | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PaB, PaC, PaD-| 0-2 |Sandy loam----|SM |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-90 |15-50 | <21 | NP-4

 Padus | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 2-3 |Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SM, SC-SM| A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 3-19|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, fine | ML, CL | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |19-38|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <28 | NP-9

 | | gravelly | ML, CL | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |38-60|Stratified |SP, SP-SM,|A-1, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |30-100|25-95 | 7-65 | 1-25 | --- | NP

 | | sand to very | GP, GP-GM| A-3 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
340 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PeB, PeC, PeD:| | | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus--------| 0-2 |Sandy loam----|SM |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-90 |15-50 | <21 | NP-4

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 2-3 |Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SM, SC-SM| A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 3-19|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, fine | ML, CL | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |19-38|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <28 | NP-9

 | | gravelly | ML, CL | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |38-60|Stratified |SP, SP-SM,|A-1, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |30-100|25-95 | 7-65 | 1-25 | --- | NP

 | | sand to very | GP, GP-GM| A-3 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence--------| 0-4 |Sandy loam----|SM, ML |A-4, | 0 | 0-15 |85-100|75-100|45-85 |20-55 | <21 | NP-4

 | | | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-15|Gravelly sandy|SM, ML, |A-4, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-75 | <25 | NP-7

 | | loam, sandy | CL-ML, | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | SC-SM | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |15-31|Gravelly |SM, SP-SM,|A-3, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|25-75 | 2-30 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand, | GM, GP-GM| A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-60|Gravelly |SP, SM |A-3, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-90 |35-90 |15-55 | 2-15 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sand, very | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PnB, PnC, PnD-| 0-4 |Sandy loam----|SM, ML |A-4, | 0 | 0-15 |85-100|75-100|45-85 |20-55 | <21 | NP-4

 Pence | | | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-15|Gravelly sandy|SM, ML, |A-4, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-75 | <25 | NP-7

 | | loam, sandy | CL-ML, | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | SC-SM | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |15-31|Gravelly |SM, SP-SM,|A-3, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|25-75 | 2-30 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand, | GM, GP-GM| A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-60|Gravelly |SP, SM |A-3, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-90 |35-90 |15-55 | 2-15 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sand, very | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 341

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PsB, PsC, PsD:| | | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence--------| 0-4 |Sandy loam----|SM, ML |A-4, | 0 | 0-15 |85-100|75-100|45-85 |20-55 | <21 | NP-4

 | | | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-15|Gravelly sandy|SM, ML, |A-4, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-75 | <25 | NP-7

 | | loam, sandy | CL-ML, | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | SC-SM | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |15-31|Gravelly |SM, SP-SM,|A-3, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|25-75 | 2-30 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand, | GM, GP-GM| A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-60|Gravelly |SP, SM |A-3, | 0-4 | 0-15 |55-90 |35-90 |15-55 | 2-15 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sand, very | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas--------| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-5 |Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 5-8 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-37|Sand, loamy |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |37-62|Sand----------|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-25 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Pt------------| 0-60|Sand and |GP, SP, | --- | --- | 0-10 | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 Pits, gravel | | gravel. | GP-GM, | | | | | | | | |

 | | | SP-SM | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Px. | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Rb------------| 0-7 |Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|50-90 |25-50 | <26 | NP-8

 Robago | | loam. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | 7-17|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|50-95 |25-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-27|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|50-95 |25-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |27-38|Fine sandy |SM, SC, |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|50-95 |25-80 | 18-28 | 3-9

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |38-62|Stratified |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|50-95 |25-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | fine sand to | ML, CL-ML| A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | silt loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
342 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

RkC, RkD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop.| | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming----| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM, SP-SM,|A-2-4, | 0 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|40-100|10-50 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | | SC-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | 4-32|Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM,|A-1-b, | 0 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|40-100| 5-50 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | loamy fine | SC-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | sand, sand. | | A-3, A-4| | | | | | | |

 | 32 |Unweathered | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | | bedrock. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas--------| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-75 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-5 |Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-75 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 5-8 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-75 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-37|Sand, loamy |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-75 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |37-62|Sand----------|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-70 | 5-25 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

RmC, RmD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop.| | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Metonga------| 0-2 |Fine sandy |SM |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|65-90 |35-50 | <20 | NP-4

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 2-4 |Very fine |SM, ML, |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|65-95 |35-85 | <25 | NP-7

 | | sandy loam, | SC-SM, | | | | | | | | |

 | | silt loam, | CL-ML | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 4-17|Very fine |SM, ML, |A-4 | 0-1 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|65-95 |35-85 | <25 | NP-7

 | | sandy loam, | SC-SM, | | | | | | | | |

 | | silt loam, | CL-ML | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-39|Sandy loam, |SM |A-2-4, | 0-2 | 0-15 |55-95 |50-90 |30-80 |15-50 | <20 | NP-4

 | | gravelly | | A-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 39 |Unweathered | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | ---

 | | bedrock. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 343

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

RmC, RmD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona-------| 0-1 |Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM |A-2, A-4 | 0 | 0-15 |80-100|75-98 |55-90 |30-55 | <25 | NP-7

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 1-3 |Fine sandy |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, A-2,| 0 | 0-15 |80-100|75-98 |30-90 |10-55 | <23 | NP-6

 | | loam, sandy | SM, SP-SM| A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loamy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 3-16|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2, A-4,| 0-1 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |13-55 | <23 | NP-6

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |16-41|Sandy loam, |SC, SM, |A-2, A-1,| 0-2 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |12-45 | <28 | NP-9

 | | gravelly fine| SC-SM | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |41-60|Loamy sand, |SM, SC-SM,|A-2, A-1,| 0-2 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |20-75 | 7-45 | <25 | NP-7

 | | sandy loam, | SP-SM | A-4, A-3| | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

RsB, RsC------| 0-6 |Loamy fine |SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |75-95 |25-45 | --- | NP

 Rousseau | | sand. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | 6-36|Fine sand, |SM |A-2-4 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |65-100|20-35 | --- | NP

 | | loamy fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |36-60|Fine sand, |SP-SM, SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 | 100 | 100 |50-100| 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3 | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SaB, SaC, SaD-| 0-3 |Fine sandy |SC-SM, SM |A-4, | 2-3 | 0-15 |80-100|75-98 |45-90 |20-50 | 0-23 | NP-6

 Sarona | | loam. | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 3-17|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 2-3 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |13-55 | 0-23 | NP-6

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-48|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM |A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |70-100|50-98 |30-90 |12-45 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | loam, | | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |48-66|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |12-45 | 0-28 | NP-9

 | | loam, fine | SC | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 |66-73|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |20-90 | 7-45 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | loam, loamy | SP-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
344 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SdB, SdC, SdD:| | | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona-------| 0-3 |Fine sandy |SC-SM, SM |A-4, | 2-3 | 0-15 |80-100|75-98 |45-90 |20-50 | 0-23 | NP-6

 | | loam. | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 3-17|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 2-3 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |13-55 | 0-23 | NP-6

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-48|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM |A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |70-100|50-98 |30-90 |12-45 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | loam, | | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |48-66|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |12-45 | 0-28 | NP-9

 | | loam, fine | SC | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 |66-73|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |20-90 | 7-45 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | loam, loamy | SP-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus--------| 0-2 |Sandy loam----|SM |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-90 |15-50 | <21 | NP-4

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 2-3 |Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SM, SC-SM| A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 3-19|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, fine | ML, CL | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |19-38|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <28 | NP-9

 | | gravelly | ML, CL | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, fine | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |38-60|Stratified |SP, SP-SM,|A-1, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |30-100|25-95 | 7-65 | 1-25 | --- | NP

 | | sand to very | GP, GP-GM| A-3 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SlB, SlC, SlD:| | | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona-------| 0-3 |Fine sandy |SC-SM, SM |A-4, | 2-3 | 0-15 |80-100|75-98 |45-90 |20-50 | 0-23 | NP-6

 | | loam. | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 3-17|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 2-3 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |13-55 | 0-23 | NP-6

 | | loam, sandy | ML, CL-ML| A-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-48|Fine sandy |SM, SC-SM |A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |70-100|50-98 |30-90 |12-45 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | loam, | | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |48-66|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |30-90 |12-45 | 0-28 | NP-9

 | | loam, fine | SC | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 |66-73|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-2-4, | 0-15 | 0-15 |55-100|50-98 |20-90 | 7-45 | 0-25 | NP-7

 | | loam, loamy | SP-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 345

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SlB, SlC, SlD:| | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas--------| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-5 |Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 5-8 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-37|Sand, loamy |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |37-62|Sand----------|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-25 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SnB, SnC, SnD-| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM, SP-SM |A-1 | 0 | 0-15 |80-100|75-100|30-75 |10-35 | --- | NP

 Sayner | 4-17|Loamy sand, |SP, SM |A-1, A-3 | 0 | 0-15 |50-100|50-100|15-75 | 2-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-27|Gravelly sand,|SM, SP |A-3, A-1 | 0-3 | 0-15 |55-100|50-100|15-75 | 2-35 | --- | NP

 | | loamy sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |27-63|Stratified |SP, SM |A-1 | 0-3 | 0-15 |55-90 |50-75 |15-45 | 2-20 | --- | NP

 | | sand to | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravel. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SoD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Soperton-----| 0-5 |Silt loam-----|ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 5-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-85 | <20 | NP-4

 | 5-22|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 1-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-85 | <25 | NP-6

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |22-42|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC, |A-4, A-2,| 1-5 | 0-30 |70-100|65-90 |40-70 |20-45 | <25 | NP-8

 | | loam, sandy | SC-SM | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |42-61|Gravelly loamy|SM, SP-SM |A-1, A-2,| 1-5 | 0-30 |70-100|65-90 |25-70 |10-45 | <20 | NP-4

 | | sand, sandy | | A-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman------| 0-4 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|85-100|75-100| <23 | NP-6

 | 4-20|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |20-31|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-35|Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-90 | 8-75 | <23 | NP-6

 | | gravelly | SM, SP-SM| A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-62|Loamy sand, |SC-SM, SM,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-85 | 8-50 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SP-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

StC, StD------| 0-17|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-8 |95-100|90-100|80-100|55-90 | <26 | 2-7

 Stambaugh |17-33|Silt, silt |ML, CL-ML,|A-4 | 0 | 0-8 |95-100|90-100|80-100|80-95 | <30 | 2-9

 | | loam, very | CL | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |33-61|Sand, gravelly|SP, SP-SM |A-1 | 0 | 0-15 |70-90 |25-60 |15-40 | 0-10 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
346 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SuC, SuD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Stambaugh----| 0-17|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-8 |95-100|90-100|80-100|55-90 | <26 | 2-7

 |17-33|Silt, silt |ML, CL-ML,|A-4 | 0 | 0-8 |95-100|90-100|80-100|80-95 | <30 | 2-9

 | | loam, very | CL | | | | | | | | |

 | | fine sandy | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |33-61|Sand, gravelly|SP, SP-SM |A-1 | 0 | 0-15 |70-90 |25-60 |15-40 | 0-10 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman------| 0-4 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|85-100|75-100| <23 | NP-6

 | 4-20|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |20-31|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-35|Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-90 | 8-75 | <23 | NP-6

 | | gravelly | SM, SP-SM| A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-62|Loamy sand, |SC-SM, SM,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-85 | 8-50 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SP-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

TpA-----------| 0-2 |Sandy loam----|SM |A-2, A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-80 |15-50 | <20 | NP-4

 Tipler | 2-4 |Sandy loam, |SM |A-2, A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | 15-20 | NP-4

 | | gravelly fine| | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 4-22|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, fine | ML, CL | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |22-31|Fine sandy |SM, SC, |A-2, A-4,| 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|30-95 |15-80 | <30 | NP-9

 | | loam, | ML, CL | A-1 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-60|Gravelly |SP, SM, |A-1, A-2,| 0 | 0-9 |30-100|25-95 | 7-70 | 1-25 | --- | NP

 | | coarse sand, | GP, GM | A-3 | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

VaB-----------| 0-1 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <25 | NP-7

 Vanzile | 1-4 |Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <25 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 4-13|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <30 | NP-7

 |13-17|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <30 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-33|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML,|A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <30 | NP-9

 | | | CL | | | | | | | | |

 |33-60|Stratified |SP, SP-SM,|A-1, A-3 | 0 | 0-9 |45-95 |40-95 |10-75 | 2-25 | --- | NP

 | | sand to very | GP, GP-GM| | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 347

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

VgB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vanzile------| 0-1 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <25 | NP-7

 | 1-4 |Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <25 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 4-13|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <30 | NP-7

 |13-17|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <30 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |17-33|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML,|A-4 | 0 | 0-9 |95-100|90-100|85-100|80-95 | <30 | NP-9

 | | | CL | | | | | | | | |

 |33-60|Stratified |SP, SP-SM,|A-1, A-3 | 0 | 0-9 |45-95 |40-95 |10-75 | 2-25 | --- | NP

 | | sand to very | GP, GP-GM| | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit------| 0-5 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <23 | NP-6

 | 5-6 |Silt loam, |ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-100| <21 | NP-4

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 6-17|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |17-40|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |40-47|Loam, sandy |ML, CL, |A-4, | 2-10 | 0-15 |60-100|55-95 |35-90 |15-75 | <28 | NP-9

 | | loam, | SM, SC | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly fine| | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |47-62|Gravelly loamy|SC-SM, SM,|A-3, A-1,| 2-10 | 0-15 |60-100|55-95 |20-75 | 8-45 | <23 | NP-6

 | | sand, sandy | SP-SM | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

VsB, VsC, VsD-| 0-4 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 Vilas | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 4-5 |Loamy sand, |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 5-8 |Loamy sand----|SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|30-90 |10-35 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | 8-37|Sand, loamy |SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-35 | --- | NP

 | | sand. | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 |37-62|Sand----------|SM, SP-SM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0 |80-100|75-100|20-90 | 5-25 | --- | NP

 | | | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WaC: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno-------| 0-5 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | 0-25 | NP-6

 | 5-11|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-95 | 0-25 | NP-7

 |11-15|Silt, silt |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 1-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | 15-25 | NP-6

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |15-24|Silt loam-----|ML, CL, |A-4 | 1-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | 0-30 | NP-10

 | | | CL-ML | | | | | | | | |

 |24-55|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC, |A-1, | 0-5 | 0-30 |70-100|65-90 |30-65 |10-35 | 0-30 | NP-10

 | | loam, loamy | SP-SM, | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sand, cobbly | SC-SM | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |55-63|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-1, | 0-5 | 0-30 |70-90 |65-90 |25-70 |10-25 | 0-23 | NP-6

 | | loam, cobbly | SP-SM | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
348 Soil Survey of

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WaC: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman------| 0-4 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|85-100|75-100| <23 | NP-6

 | 4-20|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |20-31|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-10 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 |31-35|Sandy loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-90 | 8-75 | <23 | NP-6

 | | gravelly | SM, SP-SM| A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |35-62|Loamy sand, |SC-SM, SM,|A-4, | 2-10 | 0-10 |65-100|55-95 |20-85 | 8-50 | <23 | NP-6

 | | fine sandy | SP-SM | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WbB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno-------| 0-5 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | 0-25 | NP-6

 | 5-11|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-95 | 0-25 | NP-7

 |11-15|Silt, silt |ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 1-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | 15-25 | NP-6

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |15-24|Silt loam-----|ML, CL, |A-4 | 1-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | 0-30 | NP-10

 | | | CL-ML | | | | | | | | |

 |24-55|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC, |A-1, | 0-5 | 0-30 |70-100|65-90 |30-65 |10-35 | 0-30 | NP-10

 | | loam, loamy | SP-SM, | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sand, cobbly | SC-SM | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |55-63|Gravelly sandy|SM, SC-SM,|A-1, | 0-5 | 0-30 |70-90 |65-90 |25-70 |10-25 | 0-23 | NP-6

 | | loam, cobbly | SP-SM | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loamy sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit------| 0-5 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <23 | NP-6

 | 5-6 |Silt loam, |ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-100| <21 | NP-4

 | | silt. | | | | | | | | | |

 | 6-17|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |17-40|Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-15 |90-100|85-100|70-100|60-90 | <25 | NP-7

 |40-47|Loam, sandy |ML, CL, |A-4, | 2-10 | 0-15 |60-100|55-95 |35-90 |15-75 | <28 | NP-9

 | | loam, | SM, SC | A-1-b, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly fine| | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |47-62|Gravelly loamy|SC-SM, SM,|A-3, A-1,| 2-10 | 0-15 |60-100|55-95 |20-75 | 8-45 | <23 | NP-6

 | | sand, sandy | SP-SM | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WkB, WkC------| 0-5 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-3 | 0-9 |80-100|75-95 |60-95 |50-85 | 18-25 | 3-7

 Wakefield | 5-6 |Silt loam-----|ML, CL-ML |A-4 | 2-5 | 0-9 |80-100|75-95 |60-95 |50-85 | 18-25 | 3-7

 | 6-16|Silt loam, |ML, CL-ML,|A-4, | 1-5 | 0-9 |80-100|75-95 |55-95 |30-85 | 18-25 | 3-7

 | | loam, fine | SM, SC-SM| A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |16-27|Fine sandy |SC, SC-SM |A-4, A-6,| 0-5 | 0-9 |80-100|75-95 |45-85 |20-50 | 21-34 | 4-14

 | | loam, loam. | | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | | | A-2-6 | | | | | | | |

 |27-50|Loam, clay |CL |A-6 | 0-5 | 0-9 |80-100|75-95 |60-95 |50-75 | 28-40 | 10-18

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |50-60|Loam, fine |CL-ML, CL,|A-4, | 0-5 | 0-9 |80-100|75-95 |55-90 |30-60 | 21-30 | 4-11

 | | sandy loam, | SC, SC-SM| A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | very fine | | A-6 | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 349

Table 16.--Engineering Index Properties--Continued

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | Classification |Frag- |Frag- | Percentage passing | | ____________________

Soil name and |Depth| USDA texture | | |ments |ments | sieve number-- |Liquid | Plas- ___________________________

 map symbol | | | Unified | AASHTO | >10 | 3-10 | | | | | limit | ticity

 | | | | |inches|inches| 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | | index __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | | | | Pct | Pct | | | | | Pct |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WrA-----------| 0-5 |Sandy loam----|SM, SC, |A-4, | 0 | 0-9 |80-100|75-100|45-90 |25-50 | <26 | NP-8

 Worcester | | | SC-SM | A-2-4 | | | | | | | |

 | 5-21|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-4, | 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|35-95 |12-45 | <26 | NP-8

 | | loam, | SC-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly fine| | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | sandy loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |21-30|Sandy loam, |SM, SC, |A-4, | 0 | 0-9 |55-100|50-100|35-95 |12-45 | 18-28 | 3-9

 | | fine sandy | SC-SM | A-2-4, | | | | | | | |

 | | loam, | | A-1-b | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | | | | | | | | |

 | | loam. | | | | | | | | | |

 |30-34|Gravelly loamy|SM, GM |A-2-4, | 0 | 0-9 |30-100|25-100|10-75 | 5-35 | <18 | NP-3

 | | sand, very | | A-3, | | | | | | | |

 | | gravelly | | A-1-a | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 |34-62|Gravelly sand,|SP, SM, |A-3, | 0 | 0-9 |30-100|25-100| 7-70 | 1-25 | --- | NP

 | | gravelly | GP, GM | A-1-a | | | | | | | |

 | | coarse sand, | | | | | | | | | |

 | | sand. | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | | __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
350 Soil Survey of

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils

(See text for definitions of terms used in this table. Entries under "Erosion factors--T" apply to the entire

 profile. Entries under "Wind erodibility group" and "Organic matter" apply only to the surface layer. Absence

 of an entry indicates that data were not available or were not estimated)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

AnB, AnC---------| 0-3 | 5-15|1.25-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.08-0.18|4.5-7.8 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | 5 | 3 | 1-3

 Annalake | 3-6 | 2-15|1.30-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.11-0.22|4.5-7.8 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 6-17| 5-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.14|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |17-31| 5-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.14|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |31-39| 8-18|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.19|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |39-60| 5-15|1.45-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.15|5.1-8.4 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Au---------------| 0-7 |10-15|1.30-1.55| 6.0-20 |0.07-0.09|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 2-4

 Au Gres | 7-17| 1-15|1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.09|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 |17-62| 0-8 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.07|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Ca---------------| 0-5 | --- |0.15-0.35| 2.0-6.0 |0.35-0.45|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | 5 | 2 | 50-80

 Capitola | 5-20| 8-17|1.35-1.60| 0.2-2.0 |0.09-0.22|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |20-34| 8-16|1.40-1.90| 0.2-2.0 |0.07-0.16|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 |34-60| 5-10|1.70-1.90| 0.2-0.6 |0.05-0.16|5.1-7.8 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

CoA--------------| 0-9 |10-25|1.35-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 1-3

 Crossett | 9-19|20-30|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |19-38|27-35|1.50-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.20|5.1-7.8 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |38-80|27-35|1.50-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.20|6.1-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

CrA--------------| 0-5 | 5-15|1.30-1.50| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | .5-2

 Croswell | 5-21| 0-10|1.40-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.10|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 |21-27| 0-10|1.40-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.09|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 |27-62| 0-10|1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.07|3.6-8.4 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

CuA--------------| 0-3 | 1-10|1.35-1.60| 2.0-6.0 |0.08-0.12|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-2

 Cublake | 3-4 | 0-10|1.35-1.65| 2.0-20 |0.05-0.12|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 4-23| 0-10|1.40-1.70| 2.0-20 |0.04-0.11|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |23-48| 0-5 |1.45-1.70| 2.0-20 |0.04-0.11|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |48-60|10-25|1.40-1.80| 0.2-2.0 |0.12-0.18|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EdB, EdC---------| 0-8 |10-25|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 1-3

 Ellwood | 8-15|20-32|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |15-35|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |35-80|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|6.1-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

ElB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood---------| 0-8 |10-25|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 1-3

 | 8-15|20-32|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |15-35|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |35-80|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|6.1-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Crossett--------| 0-9 |10-25|1.35-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 1-3

 | 9-19|20-30|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |19-38|27-35|1.50-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.20|5.1-7.8 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |38-80|27-35|1.50-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.20|6.1-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood---------| 0-8 |10-25|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 1-3

 | 8-15|20-32|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |15-35|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |35-80|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|6.1-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco-----------| 0-11|10-15|1.25-1.40| 6.0-20 |0.10-0.12|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-4

 |11-33| 0-15|1.35-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.11|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |33-44|18-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.16-0.20|6.1-7.8 |Moderate-----|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |44-60|15-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.17-0.20|6.6-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 351

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EmB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Morganlake------| 0-7 | 1-12|1.35-1.60| 2.0-20 |0.09-0.14|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 | 7-8 | 1-12|1.40-1.65| 2.0-20 |0.06-0.12|5.1-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-26| 1-12|1.45-1.70| 2.0-20 |0.06-0.12|5.1-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |26-31| 1-12|1.45-1.70| 2.0-20 |0.06-0.12|5.1-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |31-40|18-35|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.13-0.20|5.6-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |40-60|18-35|1.50-1.75| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|5.6-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EnC: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood---------| 0-8 |10-25|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 1-3

 | 8-15|20-32|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |15-35|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |35-80|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|6.1-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Iosco-----------| 0-11|10-15|1.25-1.40| 6.0-20 |0.10-0.12|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-4

 |11-33| 0-15|1.35-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.11|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |33-44|18-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.16-0.20|6.1-7.8 |Moderate-----|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |44-60|15-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.17-0.20|6.6-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-----------| 0-4 | 2-6 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 | 4-5 | 1-5 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 5-8 | 2-6 |1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.07-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-37| 1-5 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |37-62| 0-3 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.07|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

EoD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ellwood---------| 0-8 |10-25|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 1-3

 | 8-15|20-32|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |15-35|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |35-80|27-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|6.1-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-----------| 0-4 | 2-6 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 | 4-5 | 1-5 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 5-8 | 2-6 |1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.07-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-37| 1-5 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |37-62| 0-3 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.07|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-----------| 0-2 | 3-10|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | 4 | 3 | 1-3

 | 2-3 | 3-12|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 3-19| 6-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |19-38| 6-18|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.06-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |38-60| 0-3 |1.55-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.06|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Ep: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquents------| 0-8 | --- |0.30-0.50| 2.0-6.0 |0.35-0.45|5.6-7.8 |-------------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 20-80

 | 8-11| 5-25|1.30-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.07-0.30|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 |11-60| 3-30|1.35-1.80| 0.2-20 |0.05-0.15|6.1-8.4 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Epiaquods-------| 0-8 | --- |0.30-0.50| 2.0-6.0 |0.35-0.45|3.6-6.5 |-------------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 20-80

 | 8-12| 3-20|1.40-1.70| 0.6-20 |0.05-0.18|3.6-6.5 |Low----------| --- | --- | | |

 |12-23| 3-20|1.40-1.70| 0.6-20 |0.05-0.18|4.5-6.5 |Low----------| --- | --- | | |

 |23-60| 2-15|1.40-1.80| 0.6-20 |0.02-0.15|5.6-7.3 |Low----------| --- | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

FeB--------------| 0-2 | 8-20|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.20-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | 5 | 5 | 1-2

 Fence | 2-6 | 5-15|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.20-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 6-14| 5-15|1.50-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.22|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |14-25| 5-15|1.50-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |25-42| 8-18|1.50-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.22|4.5-7.8 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |42-60| 5-15|1.50-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.14-0.20| --- |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
352 Soil Survey of

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Fm---------------| 0-9 |10-23|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.24|4.5-8.4 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | 4 | 8 | 4-12

 Fordum | 9-29| 8-17|1.40-1.50| 0.6-6.0 |0.10-0.22|4.5-8.4 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |29-60| 2-5 |1.55-1.70| >6.0 |0.04-0.10|5.6-8.4 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

GaA--------------| 0-3 | 5-15|1.30-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.22-0.24|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 Gastrow | 3-6 | 2-15|1.30-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | 6-10| 5-15|1.40-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |10-31| 5-15|1.40-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |31-37| 8-17|1.40-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.20|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |37-60| 5-15|1.45-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.12-0.16|5.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

GmC, GmD---------| 0-4 | 5-12|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 Goodman | 4-20| 8-14|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |20-31| 8-14|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |31-35| 2-12|1.50-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.18|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |35-62| 2-12|1.50-1.75| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.16|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

GwB--------------| 0-5 | 5-12|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 Goodwit | 5-6 | 4-10|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 6-17| 6-14|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |17-40| 8-14|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |40-47| 8-17|1.50-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.07-0.18|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |47-62| 2-12|1.50-1.75| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.12|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

IsA--------------| 0-11|10-15|1.25-1.40| 6.0-20 |0.10-0.12|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-4

 Iosco |11-33| 0-15|1.35-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.11|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |33-44|18-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.16-0.20|6.1-7.8 |Moderate-----|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |44-60|15-35|1.50-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.17-0.20|6.6-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Kr---------------| 0-2 | --- |0.10-0.35| 2.0-20 |0.35-0.45|3.6-5.0 |-------------|0.05 |0.05 | 5 | 2 | 20-70

 Kinross | 2-17| 0-10|1.40-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.09|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |17-60| 0-10|1.40-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.06|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Lo: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Loxley----------| 0-9 | --- |0.30-0.40| >6.0 |0.55-0.65|3.6-4.4 |-------------| --- | --- | 3 | 7 | 70-90

 | 9-60| --- |0.10-0.35| 0.2-6.0 |0.35-0.45|3.6-4.4 |-------------| --- | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Beseman---------| 0-12| --- |0.10-0.20| >6.0 |0.55-0.65|3.6-4.4 |-------------| --- | --- | 2 | 7 | 25-75

 |12-36| --- |0.10-0.25| 0.6-6.0 |0.35-0.45|3.6-4.4 |-------------| --- | --- | | |

 |36-60|10-27|1.55-1.95| 0.2-0.6 |0.11-0.18|3.6-7.3 |Moderate-----|0.28 |0.37 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Dawson----------| 0-10| --- |0.15-0.30| >6.0 |0.55-0.65|3.6-4.4 |-------------| --- | --- | 2 | 7 | 65-85

 |10-44| --- |0.15-0.40| 0.2-6.0 |0.35-0.45|3.6-4.4 |-------------| --- | --- | | |

 |44-60| 0-10|1.55-1.75| 6.0-20 |0.03-0.10|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Lu: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Lupton----------| 0-6 | --- |0.10-0.35| 0.2-6.0 |0.35-0.45|5.6-7.8 |-------------| --- | --- | 3 | 2 | 70-90

 | 6-60| --- |0.10-0.35| 0.2-6.0 |0.35-0.45|5.6-7.8 |-------------| --- | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Cathro----------| 0-8 | --- |0.28-0.45| 0.2-6.0 |0.35-0.45|4.5-7.8 |-------------| --- | --- | 2 | 2 | 60-85

 | 8-30| --- |0.15-0.30| 0.2-6.0 |0.35-0.45|4.5-7.8 |-------------| --- | --- | | |

 |30-60|10-27|1.50-1.70| 0.2-2.0 |0.11-0.22|5.6-8.4 |Low----------|0.32 | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Markey----------| 0-36| --- |0.15-0.45| 0.2-6.0 |0.35-0.45|5.6-7.8 |-------------| --- | --- | 2 | 2 | 55-85

 |36-60| 0-10|1.40-1.65| >20 |0.03-0.08|5.6-8.4 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

MaA--------------| 0-4 | 4-10|1.30-1.70| 2.0-6.0 |0.11-0.15|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.20 |0.20 | 3 | 3 | 1-3

 Manitowish | 4-13| 5-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.11-0.18|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |13-29| 3-12|1.45-1.65| 2.0-60 |0.04-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |29-62| 0-3 |1.55-1.70| 6.0-60 |0.02-0.07|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 353

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Mn---------------| 0-5 | --- |0.15-0.45| 2.0-6.0 |0.35-0.45|4.5-7.8 |Low----------|0.32 |0.32 | 4 | 2 | 30-60

 Minocqua | 5-21|10-17|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.11-0.19|4.5-7.8 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |21-25| 3-10|1.65-1.75| 2.0-20 |0.06-0.13|4.5-7.8 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 |25-60| 0-3 |1.75-1.85| >6.0 |0.02-0.04|4.5-7.8 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

MrB--------------| 0-7 | 1-12|1.35-1.60| 2.0-20 |0.09-0.14|5.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 Morganlake | 7-8 | 1-12|1.40-1.65| 2.0-20 |0.06-0.12|5.1-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-26| 1-12|1.45-1.70| 2.0-20 |0.06-0.12|5.1-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |26-31| 1-12|1.45-1.70| 2.0-20 |0.06-0.12|5.1-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |31-40|18-35|1.45-1.65| 0.2-0.6 |0.13-0.20|5.6-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |40-60|18-35|1.50-1.75| 0.2-0.6 |0.12-0.18|5.6-8.4 |Moderate-----|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

MuB--------------| 0-4 | 4-15|1.35-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.24|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 Mudlake | 4-5 | 4-12|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 5-12| 4-15|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |12-34| 4-17|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |34-43| 5-17|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.07-0.21|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 |43-70| 4-12|1.40-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.14|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.20 |0.20 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PaB, PaC, PaD----| 0-2 | 3-10|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | 4 | 3 | 1-3

 Padus | 2-3 | 3-12|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 3-19| 6-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |19-38| 6-18|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.06-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |38-60| 0-3 |1.55-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.06|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PeB, PeC, PeD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-----------| 0-2 | 3-10|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | 4 | 3 | 1-3

 | 2-3 | 3-12|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 3-19| 6-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |19-38| 6-18|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.06-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |38-60| 0-3 |1.55-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.06|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence-----------| 0-4 | 3-15|1.20-1.65| 2.0-6.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.20 |0.20 | 3 | 3 | 1-3

 | 4-15| 2-15|1.35-1.45| 0.6-6.0 |0.10-0.15|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |15-31| 2-10|1.65-1.75| 2.0-60 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.05 |0.10 | | |

 |31-60| 0-4 |1.35-1.80| 6.0-60 |0.02-0.05|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.05 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PnB, PnC, PnD----| 0-4 | 3-15|1.20-1.65| 2.0-6.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.20 |0.20 | 3 | 3 | 1-3

 Pence | 4-15| 2-15|1.35-1.45| 0.6-6.0 |0.10-0.15|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |15-31| 2-10|1.65-1.75| 2.0-60 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.05 |0.10 | | |

 |31-60| 0-4 |1.35-1.80| 6.0-60 |0.02-0.05|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.05 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

PsB, PsC, PsD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Pence-----------| 0-4 | 3-15|1.20-1.65| 2.0-6.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.20 |0.20 | 3 | 3 | 1-3

 | 4-15| 2-15|1.35-1.45| 0.6-6.0 |0.10-0.15|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |15-31| 2-10|1.65-1.75| 2.0-60 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.05 |0.10 | | |

 |31-60| 0-4 |1.35-1.80| 6.0-60 |0.02-0.05|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.05 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-----------| 0-4 | 2-6 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 | 4-5 | 1-5 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 5-8 | 2-6 |1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.07-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-37| 1-5 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |37-62| 0-3 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.07|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Pt. | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Pits, gravel | | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Px. | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Pits, mine | | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
354 Soil Survey of

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

Rb---------------| 0-7 | 5-15|1.25-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.08-0.18|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | 5 | 3 | 2-4

 Robago | 7-17| 5-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.14|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |17-27| 5-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.14|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |27-38| 8-18|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.14|5.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |38-62| 5-15|1.45-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.15|6.1-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

RkC, RkD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Ishpeming-------| 0-4 | 2-15|1.30-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 2 | 2 | 1-2

 | 4-32| 2-15|1.30-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.11|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 32 | --- | --- | 0.01-20 | --- | --- |-------------| --- | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-----------| 0-4 | 2-6 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 | 4-5 | 1-5 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 5-8 | 2-6 |1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.07-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-37| 1-5 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |37-62| 0-3 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.07|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

RmC, RmD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Metonga---------| 0-2 | 3-10|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.14-0.18|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | 2 | 3 | 1-4

 | 2-4 | 3-15|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.22|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 4-17| 3-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.13-0.24|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |17-39| 3-10|1.40-1.75| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.16|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 39 | --- | --- | 0.01-20 | --- | --- |-------------| --- | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona----------| 0-1 | 4-15|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | 5 | 3 | 1-3

 | 1-3 | 4-12|1.45-1.65| 0.6-6.0 |0.08-0.18|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 3-16| 4-12|1.55-1.65| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.17|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |16-41| 5-17|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.07-0.17|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |41-60| 4-15|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.04-0.13|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

RsB, RsC---------| 0-6 | 2-12|1.30-1.55| 2.0-6.0 |0.10-0.12|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | 5 | 2 | 1-2

 Rousseau | 6-36| 0-10|1.30-1.60| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |36-60| 0-10|1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.07|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SaB, SaC, SaD----| 0-3 | 4-12|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | 5 | 3 | 1-3

 Sarona | 3-17| 4-12|1.55-1.65| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.17|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |17-48| 4-15|1.55-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.17|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |48-66| 5-17|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.07-0.17|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |66-73| 4-15|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.15|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SdB, SdC, SdD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona----------| 0-3 | 4-12|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | 5 | 3 | 1-3

 | 3-17| 4-12|1.55-1.65| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.17|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |17-48| 4-15|1.55-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.17|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |48-66| 5-17|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.07-0.17|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |66-73| 4-15|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.15|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Padus-----------| 0-2 | 3-10|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | 4 | 3 | 1-3

 | 2-3 | 3-12|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 3-19| 6-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |19-38| 6-18|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.06-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |38-60| 0-3 |1.55-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.06|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 355

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SlB, SlC, SlD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Sarona----------| 0-3 | 4-12|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | 5 | 3 | 1-3

 | 3-17| 4-12|1.55-1.65| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.17|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |17-48| 4-15|1.55-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.17|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |48-66| 5-17|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.07-0.17|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |66-73| 4-15|1.60-1.70| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.15|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vilas-----------| 0-4 | 2-6 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 | 4-5 | 1-5 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 5-8 | 2-6 |1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.07-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-37| 1-5 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |37-62| 0-3 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.07|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SnB, SnC, SnD----| 0-4 | 1-5 |1.25-1.45| 2.0-6.0 |0.08-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 Sayner | 4-17| 0-5 |1.35-1.65| 2.0-20 |0.03-0.11|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 |17-27| 0-4 |1.45-1.70| 2.0-20 |0.03-0.11|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 |27-63| 0-3 |1.55-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.03|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SoD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Soperton--------| 0-5 | 3-10|1.20-1.50| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.23|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 4 | 5 | 2-3

 | 5-22| 4-12|1.30-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.21|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |22-42| 6-16|1.80-1.95| 0.06-0.2 |0.06-0.12|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.20 |0.28 | | |

 |42-61| 3-10|1.65-1.80| 0.6-6.0 |0.04-0.10|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.17 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman---------| 0-4 | 5-12|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 | 4-20| 8-14|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |20-31| 8-14|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |31-35| 2-12|1.50-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.18|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |35-62| 2-12|1.50-1.75| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.16|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

StC, StD---------| 0-17| 5-15|1.10-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.21-0.24|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 4 | 5 | 1-3

 Stambaugh |17-33| 8-18|1.25-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.20-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.32 | | |

 |33-61| 0-8 |1.50-1.70| >20 |0.02-0.04|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

SuC, SuD: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Stambaugh-------| 0-17| 5-15|1.10-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.21-0.24|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 4 | 5 | 1-3

 |17-33| 8-18|1.25-1.70| 0.2-0.6 |0.20-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.32 | | |

 |33-61| 0-8 |1.50-1.70| >20 |0.02-0.04|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 | --- | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman---------| 0-4 | 5-12|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 | 4-20| 8-14|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |20-31| 8-14|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |31-35| 2-12|1.50-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.18|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |35-62| 2-12|1.50-1.75| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.16|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

TpA--------------| 0-2 | 3-10|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.15|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | 4 | 3 | 2-3

 Tipler | 2-4 | 3-10|1.40-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.08-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 | 4-22| 5-15|1.40-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.09-0.19|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |22-31| 6-17|1.40-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.06-0.19|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |31-60| 0-3 |1.55-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.06|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.10 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

VaB--------------| 0-1 | 5-15|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.20-0.24|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 4 | 5 | 1-3

 Vanzile | 1-4 | 3-15|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.20-0.24|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 4-13| 5-15|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |13-17| 3-15|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |17-33| 8-18|1.40-1.65| 0.2-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |33-60| 0-8 |1.50-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.06|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
356 Soil Survey of

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

VgB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Vanzile---------| 0-1 | 5-15|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.20-0.24|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 4 | 5 | 1-3

 | 1-4 | 3-15|1.35-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.20-0.24|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 4-13| 5-15|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |13-17| 3-15|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |17-33| 8-18|1.40-1.65| 0.2-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |33-60| 0-8 |1.50-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.06|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit---------| 0-5 | 5-12|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 | 5-6 | 4-10|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 6-17| 6-14|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |17-40| 8-14|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |40-47| 8-17|1.50-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.07-0.18|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |47-62| 2-12|1.50-1.75| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.12|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.17 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

VsB, VsC, VsD----| 0-4 | 2-6 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.09-0.12|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.10 |0.10 | 5 | 2 | 1-3

 Vilas | 4-5 | 1-5 |1.35-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.06-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 5-8 | 2-6 |1.50-1.65| 6.0-20 |0.07-0.12|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.17 | | |

 | 8-37| 1-5 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.05-0.08|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 |37-62| 0-3 |1.50-1.70| 6.0-20 |0.04-0.07|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.15 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WaC: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno----------| 0-5 | 3-10|1.20-1.50| 0.6-2.0 |0.14-0.23|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 4 | 5 | 1-3

 | 5-11| 3-10|1.30-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.24|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |11-15| 3-10|1.30-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |15-24| 6-16|1.65-1.80| 0.6-2.0 |0.12-0.22|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |24-55| 6-16|1.80-1.95| 0.06-0.2 |0.01-0.03|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |55-63| 3-10|1.65-1.80| 0.6-2.0 |0.01-0.03|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.20 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodman---------| 0-4 | 5-12|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 | 4-20| 8-14|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |20-31| 8-14|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |31-35| 2-12|1.50-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.18|3.6-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |35-62| 2-12|1.50-1.75| 0.6-6.0 |0.05-0.16|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WbB: | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Wabeno----------| 0-5 | 3-10|1.20-1.50| 0.6-2.0 |0.14-0.23|3.6-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 4 | 5 | 1-3

 | 5-11| 3-10|1.30-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.24|3.6-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |11-15| 3-10|1.30-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |15-24| 6-16|1.65-1.80| 0.6-2.0 |0.12-0.22|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |24-55| 6-16|1.80-1.95| 0.06-0.2 |0.01-0.03|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.17 |0.24 | | |

 |55-63| 3-10|1.65-1.80| 0.6-2.0 |0.01-0.03|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.20 |0.28 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

 Goodwit---------| 0-5 | 5-12|1.35-1.45| 0.6-2.0 |0.19-0.24|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | 5 | 5 | 2-4

 | 5-6 | 4-10|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.22|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | 6-17| 6-14|1.45-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 |17-40| 8-14|1.50-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.17-0.22|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |40-47| 8-17|1.50-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.07-0.18|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |47-62| 2-12|1.50-1.75| 0.6-2.0 |0.05-0.12|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.17 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WkB, WkC---------| 0-5 | 8-15|1.30-1.55| 0.6-2.0 |0.18-0.24|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.49 |0.49 | 3 | 5 | 1-3

 Wakefield | 5-6 | 8-15|1.30-1.60| 0.6-2.0 |0.16-0.20|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 | 6-16| 8-15|1.35-1.65| 0.6-2.0 |0.12-0.20|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.43 |0.43 | | |

 |16-27|10-24|1.80-2.05| <0.06 |0.04-0.05|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.28 |0.28 | | |

 |27-50|18-30|1.45-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.03-0.05|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.32 |0.32 | | |

 |50-60|10-20|1.45-1.80| 0.6-2.0 |0.03-0.05|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.37 |0.37 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Florence County, Wisconsin 357

Table 17.--Physical and Chemical Properties of the Soils--Continued

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | | | | | |Wind |

 Soil name and |Depth|Clay | Moist |Permeability|Available| Soil |Shrink-swell |Erosion factors|erodi-|Organic _______________

 map symbol | | | bulk | (Ksat) | water |reaction| potential | | | |bility| matter

 | | | density | |capacity | | | K | Kf | T |group | _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | In | Pct | g/cc | In/hr | In/in | pH | | | | | | Pct

 | | | | | | | | | | | |

WrA--------------| 0-5 | 5-15|1.35-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.10-0.18|4.5-7.3 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | 4 | 3 | 1-3

 Worcester | 5-21| 5-15|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.06-0.19|4.5-6.0 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |21-30| 8-17|1.40-1.70| 0.6-2.0 |0.06-0.19|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.24 |0.24 | | |

 |30-34| 3-8 |1.45-1.70| >6.0 |0.02-0.11|4.5-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.17 | | |

 |34-62| 0-3 |1.50-1.80| >6.0 |0.01-0.07|5.1-6.5 |Low----------|0.10 |0.15 | | |

 | | | | | | | | | | | | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Table 18.--Soil and Water Features ("Flooding" and "water table" and terms such as "frequent," "brief," "apparent," and "perched" are explained 

 of an entry indicates that the feature is not a concern or that data were not estimated) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | Flooding | High water table | Bedrock | |  _____________________________________________________________________  Soil name and |Hydro-| | | | | | | | |Total |Potenti map symbol | logic| Frequency | Duration |Months | Depth | Kind |Months |Depth|Hard- |subsi-| frost  |group | | | | | | | | ness | dence| action ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | Ft | | | In | | In |  | | | | | | | | | | | AnB, AnC--------| B |None--------| --- | --- |2.5-3.5|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Annalake | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Au--------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-1.5|Apparent|Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Au Gres | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Ca--------------| B/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Capitola | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | CoA-------------| C |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-2.5|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Crossett | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | CrA-------------| A |None--------| --- | --- |2.0-3.5|Apparent|Nov-May| >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Croswell | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | CuA-------------| A |None--------| --- | --- |2.0-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Cublake | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | EdB, EdC--------| C |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Ellwood | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | ElB: | | | | | | | | | | |  Ellwood--------| C |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Crossett-------| C |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-2.5|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- | | | | | | | | | | | EmB: | | | | | | | | | | |  Ellwood--------| C |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Iosco----------| B |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-1.5|Apparent|Nov-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Morganlake-----| B |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | | EnC: | | | | | | | | | | |  Ellwood--------| C |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Iosco----------| B |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-1.5|Apparent|Nov-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Vilas----------| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | | 
Table 18.--Soil and Water Features--Continued ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Flooding | High water table | Bedrock | |  _____________________________________________________________________  Soil name and |Hydro-| | | | | | | | |Total |Potenti map symbol | logic| Frequency | Duration |Months | Depth | Kind |Months |Depth|Hard- |subsi-| frost  |group | | | | | | | | ness | dence| action ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | Ft | | | In | | In |  | | | | | | | | | | | EoD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Ellwood--------| C |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Vilas----------| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | |  Padus----------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | Ep: | | | | | | | | | | |  Epiaquents-----| D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Perched |Oct-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- | | | | | | | | | | |  Epiaquods------| D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Perched |Oct-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- | | | | | | | | | | | FeB-------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |2.5-3.5|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Fence | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Fm--------------| D |Frequent----|Brief or |Mar-Jun| +1-1.0|Apparent|Jan-Dec| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Fordum | | | long. | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | GaA-------------| C |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-2.0|Apparent|Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Gastrow | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | GmC, GmD--------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Goodman | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | GwB-------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |2.5-3.5|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Goodwit | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | IsA-------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-1.5|Apparent|Nov-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Iosco | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Kr--------------| A/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Kinross | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Lo: | | | | | | | | | | |  Loxley---------| A/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Sep-Jun| >60 | --- |50-55 |High--- | | | | | | | | | | |  Beseman--------| A/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Sep-Jun| >60 | --- |12-36 |High--- | | | | | | | | | | |  Dawson---------| A/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Sep-Jun| >60 | --- |30-36 |High--- | | | | | | | | | | | Lu: | | | | | | | | | | |  Lupton---------| A/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Oct-May| >60 | --- |50-55 |High--- | | | | | | | | | | |  Cathro---------| A/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Oct-May| >60 | --- |19-22 |High--- | | | | | | | | | | |  Markey---------| A/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Oct-May| >60 | --- |25-30 |High--- | | | | | | | | | | | 
Table 18.--Soil and Water Features--Continued ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Flooding | High water table | Bedrock | |  _____________________________________________________________________  Soil name and |Hydro-| | | | | | | | |Total |Potenti map symbol | logic| Frequency | Duration |Months | Depth | Kind |Months |Depth|Hard- |subsi-| frost  |group | | | | | | | | ness | dence| action ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | Ft | | | In | | In |  | | | | | | | | | | | MaA-------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |2.5-3.5|Apparent|Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Manitowish | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Mn--------------| B/D |None--------| --- | --- | +1-1.0|Apparent|Oct-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Minocqua | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | MrB-------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Morganlake | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | MuB-------------| C |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-2.0|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Mudlake | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | PaB, PaC, PaD---| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Padus | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | PeB, PeC, PeD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Padus----------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Pence----------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | | PnB, PnC, PnD---| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Pence | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | PsB, PsC, PsD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Pence----------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | |  Vilas----------| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | | Pt. | | | | | | | | | | |  Pits, gravel | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Px. | | | | | | | | | | |  Pits, mine | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | Rb--------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-2.0|Apparent|Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Robago | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | RkC, RkD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | |  Ishpeming------| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- |20-40|Hard | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | |  Vilas----------| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | | 
Table 18.--Soil and Water Features--Continued ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Flooding | High water table | Bedrock | |  _____________________________________________________________________  Soil name and |Hydro-| | | | | | | | |Total |Potenti map symbol | logic| Frequency | Duration |Months | Depth | Kind |Months |Depth|Hard- |subsi-| frost  |group | | | | | | | | ness | dence| action ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | Ft | | | In | | In |  | | | | | | | | | | | RmC, RmD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Rock outcrop. | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | |  Metonga--------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- |20-40|Hard | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Sarona---------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | RsB, RsC--------| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Rousseau | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | SaB, SaC, SaD---| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Sarona | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | SdB, SdC, SdD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Sarona---------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Padus----------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | SlB, SlC, SlD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Sarona---------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Vilas----------| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- | | | | | | | | | | | SnB, SnC, SnD---| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Sayner | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | SoD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Soperton-------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Goodman--------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | StC, StD--------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Stambaugh | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | SuC, SuD: | | | | | | | | | | |  Stambaugh------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Goodman--------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | TpA-------------| B |None--------| --- | --- |2.5-3.5|Apparent|Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Tipler | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | VaB-------------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Vanzile | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | 
Table 18.--Soil and Water Features--Continued ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | Flooding | High water table | Bedrock | |  _____________________________________________________________________  Soil name and |Hydro-| | | | | | | | |Total |Potenti map symbol | logic| Frequency | Duration |Months | Depth | Kind |Months |Depth|Hard- |subsi-| frost  |group | | | | | | | | ness | dence| action ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | Ft | | | In | | In |  | | | | | | | | | | | VgB: | | | | | | | | | | |  Vanzile--------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Goodwit--------| B |None--------| --- | --- |2.5-3.5|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | VsB, VsC, VsD---| A |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Low---- Vilas | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | WaC: | | | | | | | | | | |  Wabeno---------| B |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.0|Perched |Oct-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Goodman--------| B |None--------| --- | --- | >6.0 | --- | --- | >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | WbB: | | | | | | | | | | |  Wabeno---------| B |None--------| --- | --- |1.5-3.0|Perched |Oct-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | |  Goodwit--------| B |None--------| --- | --- |2.5-3.5|Perched |Sep-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat | | | | | | | | | | | WkB, WkC--------| B |None--------| --- | --- |1.0-1.5|Perched |Oct-May| >60 | --- | --- |Moderat Wakefield | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | WrA-------------| C |None--------| --- | --- |0.5-2.0|Apparent|Oct-Jun| >60 | --- | --- |High--- Worcester | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Table 19.--Engineering Index Test Data (Dashes indicate that data were not available. MAX means maximum dry density; OPT, optimum moisture; LL, liquid lim

 index; NP, nonplastic; and UN, Unified) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | Moisture | Percentage | Percentage smaller |  | | | | density | passing sieve--* | than--* |  _____________________________________________________________  Soil name and | Parent | Report |Depth| | | | | | | | | | | LL  location | material | number | | MAX | OPT | No. | No. | No. | No. |0.05 |0.02 |0.005|0.002|  | | | | | | 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | mm | mm | mm | mm | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | In | Lb/ft3| Pct | | | | | | | | | Pct  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Au Gres loamy | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  sand: |Primarily sandy|S91WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  NW1/4SW1/4 | glacial | 4-1 | 6-15| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 88 | 20 | 15 | 8 | 4 | 2 | ---  sec. 14, T. | outwash. | 4-2 |24-60| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 93 | 15 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 2 | ---  38 N., R. 17 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  E. | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Croswell loamy | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  sand: |Primarily sandy|S91WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SW1/4SE1/4 | glacial | 1-1 | 3-10| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 88 | 12 | 11 | 8 | 4 | 3 | ---  sec. 13, T. | outwash. | 1-2 |25-60| --- | --- | 99 | 99 | 89 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ---  38 N., R. 18 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  E. | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Ellwood silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Silty deposits |S85WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SE1/4SE1/4 | underlain by | 2-1 |21-30| --- | --- | 97 | 97 | 92 | 77 | 76 | 73 | 44 | 28 | 38. sec. 3, T. | silty, loamy, | 2-2 |42-60| --- | --- | 96 | 96 | 91 | 78 | 76 | 73 | 46 | 23 | 35. 38 N., R. 18 | or clayey | | | | | | | | | | | | |  E. | glacial till. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Ellwood silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Silty deposits |S90WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  NE1/4SE1/4 | underlain by | 1-4 |25-35| --- | --- | 98 | 97 | 95 | 84 | 84 | 81 | 47 | 29 | 38. sec. 3, T. | silty, loamy, | 1-8 |63-72| --- | --- | 97 | 96 | 92 | 80 | 79 | 75 | 47 | 29 | 40. 38 N., R. 18 | or clayey | | | | | | | | | | | | |  E. | glacial till. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Goodwit silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Primarily silty|S85WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SE1/4NE1/4 | deposits | 4-1 |19-38| --- | --- | 98 | 98 | 96 | 86 | 76 | 26 | 9 | 4 | 20. sec. 34, T. | underlain by | 4-2 |45-60| --- | --- | 86 | 80 | 61 | 19 | 17 | 14 | 9 | 6 | 13. 38 N., R. 16 | sandy or loamy| | | | | | | | | | | | |  E. | glacial till | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | or glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | mudflow | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | sediment. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  See footnote at end of table.
Table 19.--Engineering Index Test Data--Continued ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | Moisture | Percentage | Percentage smaller |  | | | | density | passing sieve--* | than--* |  _____________________________________________________________  Soil name and | Parent | Report |Depth| | | | | | | | | | | LL  location | material | number | | MAX | OPT | No. | No. | No. | No. |0.05 |0.02 |0.005|0.002|  | | | | | | 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | mm | mm | mm | mm | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | In | Lb/ft3| Pct | | | | | | | | | Pct  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Padus sandy | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Loamy deposits |S90WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SW1/4SE1/4 | underlain by | 3-1 | 3-8 | --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 94 | 58 | 42 | 23 | 12 | 8 | 21. sec. 30, T. | sandy or sandy| 3-2 |26-38| --- | --- | 96 | 92 | 70 | 34 | 29 | 17 | 8 | 5 | 14. 38 N., R. 16 | and gravelly | 3-3 |38-60| --- | --- | 89 | 86 | 49 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | -- E. | glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | outwash. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Pence sandy | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Loamy deposits |S89WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SE1/4NW1/4 | underlain by | 2-3 | 4-7 | --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 80 | 51 | 42 | 20 | 7 | 4 | 19. sec. 8, T. | sandy and | 2-6 |31-60| --- | --- | 93 | 88 | 53 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -- 39 N., R. 19 | gravelly | | | | | | | | | | | | |  E. | glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | outwash. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Rousseau loamy | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  fine sand: |Sandy glacial |S91WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  NW1/4NW1/4 | outwash or | 2-1 | 6-12| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 96 | 32 | 21 | 7 | 3 | 2 | ---  sec. 3, T. | lacustrine | 2-2 |36-60| --- | --- | 99 | 99 | 93 | 22 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ---  38 N., R. 19 | deposits. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  E. | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Vanzile silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Silty deposits |S85WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  NE1/4NW1/4 | underlain by | 1-1 | 7-22| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 99 | 95 | 87 | 45 | 18 | 10 | 18. sec. 34, T. | sandy or sandy| 1-2 |22-34| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 98 | 92 | 83 | 41 | 20 | 14 | 25. 39 N., R. 15 | and gravelly | 1-3 |37-60| --- | --- | 88 | 86 | 58 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | -- E. | glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | outwash. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Vanzile silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Silty deposits |S88WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SE1/4SW1/4 | underlain by | 2-3 | 4-9 | --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 97 | 87 | 76 | 36 | 9 | 5 | 30. sec. 2, T. | sandy or sandy| 2-6 |17-33| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 98 | 88 | 72 | 34 | 17 | 12 | 23. 38 N., R. 15 | and gravelly | 2-7 |33-60| --- | --- | 95 | 93 | 75 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -- E. | glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | outwash. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  See footnote at end of table.
Table 19.--Engineering Index Test Data--Continued ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | Moisture | Percentage | Percentage smaller |  | | | | density | passing sieve--* | than--* |  _____________________________________________________________  Soil name and | Parent | Report |Depth| | | | | | | | | | | LL  location | material | number | | MAX | OPT | No. | No. | No. | No. |0.05 |0.02 |0.005|0.002|  | | | | | | 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | mm | mm | mm | mm | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | In | Lb/ft3| Pct | | | | | | | | | Pct  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wabeno silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Primarily silty|S88WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SE1/4SE1/4 | deposits | 1-3 | 2-8 | --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 98 | 91 | 76 | 39 | 16 | 12 | 25. sec. 26, T. | underlain by | 1-5 |12-21| --- | --- | 96 | 96 | 95 | 91 | 81 | 32 | 11 | 5 | 25. 40 N., R. 15 | sandy or loamy| 1-9 |52-60| --- | --- | 87 | 83 | 63 | 21 | 19 | 14 | 7 | 5 | -- E. | glacial till | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | or glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | mudflow | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | sediment. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wabeno silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Primarily silty|S90WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  NW1/4NW1/4 | deposits | 4-1 | 4-12| --- | --- | 99 | 98 | 96 | 90 | 81 | 45 | 15 | 9 | 25. sec. 24, T. | underlain by | 4-2 |19-27| --- | --- | 98 | 97 | 93 | 79 | 69 | 39 | 16 | 12 | 20. 40 N., R. 15 | sandy or loamy| 4-3 |38-60| --- | --- | 85 | 81 | 59 | 17 | 15 | 11 | 7 | 6 | 14. E. | glacial till | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | or glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | mudflow | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | sediment. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wabeno silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Primarily silty|S87WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SE1/4NW1/4 | deposits | 5-1 | 5-14| --- | --- | 100 | 100 | 97 | 88 | 79 | 44 | 15 | 95 | -- sec. 5, T. | underlain by | 5-3 |20-47| --- | --- | 81 | 76 | 58 | 22 | 19 | 15 | 8 | 5 | -- 40 N., R. 15 | sandy or loamy| 5-4 |47-66| --- | --- | 81 | 77 | 54 | 18 | 16 | 14 | 8 | 5 | -- E. | glacial till | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | or glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | mudflow | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | sediment. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  See footnote at end of table.
Table 19.--Engineering Index Test Data--Continued ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 | | | | Moisture | Percentage | Percentage smaller |  | | | | density | passing sieve--* | than--* |  _____________________________________________________________  Soil name and | Parent | Report |Depth| | | | | | | | | | | LL  location | material | number | | MAX | OPT | No. | No. | No. | No. |0.05 |0.02 |0.005|0.002|  | | | | | | 4 | 10 | 40 | 200 | mm | mm | mm | mm | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | In | Lb/ft3| Pct | | | | | | | | | Pct  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wabeno silt | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  loam: |Primarily silty|S87WI-037-| | | | | | | | | | | |  SW1/4NE1/4 | deposits | 6-2 | 8-18| --- | --- | 95 | 94 | 88 | 78 | 70 | 40 | 14 | 8 | -- sec. 5, T. | underlain by | 6-3 |23-41| --- | --- | 84 | 78 | 58 | 18 | 16 | 13 | 7 | 4 | -- 40 N., R. 15 | sandy or loamy| 6-4 |67-72| --- | --- | 80 | 74 | 53 | 16 | 14 | 12 | 7 | 4 | -- E. | glacial till | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | or glacial | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | mudflow | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | sediment. | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ * Mechanical analysis according to the AASHTO Designation T88-57. Results from this procedure can differ somewhobtained by the soil survey procedure of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). In the AASHTO procedureanalyzed by hydrometer method and the various grain-size fractions are calculated on the basis of all material up t3 inches in diameter. In the NRCS soil survey procedure, the fine material is analyzed by the pipette method and ththan 2 millimeters in diameter is excluded from the calculation of grain-size fraction. The mechanical analysis datare not suitable for use in naming textural classes of soils.
Florence County, Wisconsin 367

Table 20.--Classification of the Soils

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 |

 Soil name | Family or higher taxonomic class

 | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 |

 Annalake------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Au Gres-------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Typic Endoaquods

 Beseman-------------------| Loamy, mixed, dysic Terric Borosaprists

 Capitola------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Mollic Epiaqualfs

 Cathro--------------------| Loamy, mixed, euic Terric Borosaprists

 Crossett------------------| Fine-loamy, mixed Glossaquic Eutroboralfs

 Croswell------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Cublake-------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Dawson--------------------| Sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, dysic Terric Borosaprists

 Ellwood-------------------| Fine-loamy, mixed Oxyaquic Eutroboralfs

 Epiaquents----------------| Epiaquents

 Epiaquods-----------------| Epiaquods

 Fence---------------------| Coarse-silty, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Fordum--------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, nonacid, frigid Mollic Fluvaquents

 Gastrow-------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Argic Endoaquods

 Goodman-------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Alfic Haplorthods

 Goodwit-------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Iosco---------------------| Sandy over loamy, mixed, frigid Argic Endoaquods

 Ishpeming-----------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic Haplorthods

 Kinross-------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Typic Endoaquods

 Loxley--------------------| Dysic Typic Borosaprists

 Lupton--------------------| Euic Typic Borosaprists

 Manitowish----------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Markey--------------------| Sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, euic Terric Borosaprists

 Metonga-------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Entic Haplorthods

 Minocqua------------------| Coarse-loamy over sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, nonacid, frigid Typic

 | Endoaquepts

 Morganlake----------------| Sandy over loamy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Mudlake-------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Alfic Epiaquods

 Padus---------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Alfic Haplorthods

 Pence---------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic Haplorthods

 Robago--------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Argic Endoaquods

 Rousseau------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic Haplorthods

 Sarona--------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Alfic Haplorthods

 Sayner--------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic Haplorthods

 Soperton------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Alfic Fragiorthods

 Stambaugh-----------------| Coarse-silty over sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, frigid Alfic Haplorthods

 Tipler--------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Haplorthods

 Vanzile-------------------| Coarse-silty over sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, frigid Alfic Haplorthods

 Vilas---------------------| Sandy, mixed, frigid Entic Haplorthods

 Wabeno--------------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Fragiorthods

 Wakefield-----------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Oxyaquic Fragiorthods

 Worcester-----------------| Coarse-loamy, mixed, frigid Argic Endoaquods

 | ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________