Exploring the Web Soil Survey

 Exploring the Web Soil Survey.



Despite working in the environmental field for some time, my experience with soil science is limited. As such, the information available within the survey can be a bit overwhelming. A scan of the soil types confirms the dominance of sandy loams and loamy sands - not surprising for this portion of the Virginia coastal plain. The available descriptions within each map unit name is helpful, though the significance of the information is a bit lost on the novice user. 


As I reviewed the soil data explorer, I found it necessary to remind myself that these metrics are based on the soil type rather than actual measurements of that particular area of interest. For example, the forest productivity is based on unmanaged timber within that soil type, not a direct measurement of the forest in that area. Still, in terms of long term management of an area, these metrics provide an interesting understanding of the potential of the area in terms of the capacity of the soil (see screenshots below). Thus, we can avoid long term management goals that are inconsistent with the ability of the soil to support particular vegetation.


In my area of interest, soil capacity varies sharply as the land merges with the water - the characteristics of the saline soils differ greatly from their neighboring soils at a higher elevation. The flood frequency by class was particularly interesting to explore (see screenshot  below). Again, this is not a flood map by elevation, but rather a reflection of soil characteristics that develop under frequent flooding. One might expect the chemistry,  biology, and species of these soils to differ greatly from neighboring soils and may deserve special management considerations. 


The UC Davis interface is a nice partner website for soil data. The interface is cleaner, though less robust than the Web Soil Survey. The UC Davis interface allows the user to toggle between data easily and has appealing visual components. While a number of descriptors are available within the interface, it is still heavy with technical terms that the novice user may find intimidating.


Area of Interest: Machicomoco State Park


Soil Map


Forest Productivity: Loblolly Pine


Forest Productivity: Red Oak


Flooding frequency by class

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plant Identification Apps: Which is right for you iNaturalist of LeafSnap?

Image
  Which is right for you iNaturalist of LeafSnap ? I used iNaturalist for plant identification. Its design has both positive and negative aspects. If you are seeking immediate answers, iNaturalist is probably not going to be your first choice. In order to get an identification of a plant species, I had to load the picture to the iNaturalist community and wait for a reply. About 48 hours ago, I uploaded two species and have gotten an identification for one of them. On the positive side, iNaturalist is much more than a species identifier. It has features that allow you to explore the natural area around you, review a variety of naturalist guides, and allows you to search for citizen science projects in which you could potentially participate. iNaturalist has an ecology-meets-social-media vibe and could be a valuable asset for those seeking such connections. Given the robustness of its features, iNaturalist is worth exploring. LeafSnap was able to identify this image as Chinese privet (I
Read more

Bird Identification: Audubon's Bird ID - worth flocking toward.

Image
  Audubon's  Bird ID - worth flocking toward. Audubon’s Bird ID is simply great fun. You can learn a lot about birds around the world just by exploring the app’s features. It is essentially an interactive Audubon guide. However, it has functions that go well beyond what a traditional field guide could offer - such as bird songs. When you open the app, it gives you two choices - either identify a bird or search the guide. With the identifying, the user answers a number of questions about their observation to narrow down the species. These questions are straightforward and provide an interesting insight to bird behavior such as how the species flies (soaring, hovering, undulating, etc.). The user can answer as few or as many questions as they like to narrow the choices. This option is a good choice for those in the field able to make observations with or without binoculars.  Great Blue Herons ( Ardeidae Ardea herodias ) are a common site at Machicomoco State Park.  (Image Source: Aud
Read more

Proposed Study Site

  I would like to choose Virginia’s Machicomoco State Park (MPS) as my study area. A Google Map link can be found here. MPS is a relatively new state park, and I hope that any fieldwork here could provide the park with novel data. At this point, I do not know if the park has baseline wildlife data, but I would like the opportunity to contribute truly useful, non-redundant information. The park has a deep, pre-European cultural history and is located on the waters of the tidal York river. It might be interesting to inventory the native and non-native fauna that make use of the park and the river. York River State Park is across the river and upstream from MPS. But that park is well-established and probably already has a good bit of data that could be used as a comparison. I’d like to research MPS because I admire the Virginia State Parks and because I enjoy field work. My family and I are in the middle of moving to West Point, Virginia, not far from MPS. I will continue my work as a pu
Read more