Advertisement

Demands on Soil Classification and Soil Survey Strategies: Special-Purpose Soil Classification Systems for Local Practical Use

  • R. W. Fitzpatrick
Chapter

Abstract

Classifying soils for a particular purpose involves the ordering of soils into groups with similar properties and for potential end uses. The classification of soil is a terrific conceptual and practical challenge, especially in arid environments. The challenge may spur on, or it may deter scientists or end users with an interest in soils. If a classification system proves to be relevant and user-friendly, it stimulates and encourages further work because it is recognised for its inherent capacity to create order and enhance the useful understanding and mapping of soils. General-purpose, internationally recognised soil classification systems such as Soil Taxonomy and the World Reference Base and other nationally recognised classification systems (e.g. Australian or South African) have proved to be tremendously useful for soil classification and advancing understanding of soils across the world. However, because the use of these general-purpose classifications requires considerable expertise and experience, there is a need for complementary special-purpose classification systems that are specifically tailored, for example, to particular environmental problems, land uses or local regions and that use plain language descriptions for soil types. General-purpose classification systems often lag in the incorporation of new terminologies, for example, classification of acid sulfate soils in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia, has led to descriptions of soil types with subaqueous properties (submerged underwater), monosulfidic materials and hypersulfidic materials, to enable assessment of environmental risk and management options. In addition, new challenges face general-purpose soil classification systems, especially in response to the following questions most frequently asked by soil users: (1) what soil properties are changing vertically and laterally in landscapes and with time, especially in acid sulfate soils? and (2) what are the most suitable approaches for characterising, monitoring, predicting and managing soil changes for environmental impact assessments, pollution incidents, waste management, product development and technology support? The purpose of this chapter is to address these challenges by presenting new ideas and concepts on how best to predict and solve practical problems by focussing on the development of special-purpose or more technical soil classification systems, which use plain language names for soil types. To demonstrate the critical importance of developing special-purpose technical soil classifications, the following five case studies are presented, which tackle difficult problems involving highly complex issues: (1 and 2) soil and water degradation in large aquatic environments from the River Murray and Lower Lakes region in South Australia (changing climatic and anthropogenic modified environments) and from the Mesopotamian marshlands in Iraq (anthropogenic modified arid environment); (3) acid sulfate soil as a new geochemical sampling medium for mineral exploration; (4) soil damage to the Australian telecommunication optic fibre cable network from shrink-swell soils and soil corrosion; and (5) soil landscape features to assist police in locating buried objects in complex terrain.

Keywords

General-purpose National State Regional Special-purpose technical soil classification systems Optical fibre cables Acid sulfate soils Mineral exploration Forensic soil science 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would especially like to thank the acid sulfate soil, forensic soil and Telstra optical fibre cable soil teams in CSIRO Land and Water (Richard Merry, Paul Shand, Mark Raven, Steve Marvanek, Warren Hicks, Stuart McClure, Brett Thomas, Mark Thomas, Nathan Creeper, Andrew Baker, Stuart Simpson, Peter Self, Gerard Grealish, Nilmini Jayalath, Sonia Grocke, Sean Forrester, Malcolm Wright, Phil Slade and Paul Peter) for assistance over several decades and Greg Rinder, CSIRO, for artwork.

References

  1. Beckett PHT, Webster R (1971) Soil variability: a review. Soils Fertil 34:1–15Google Scholar
  2. Burrough PA (1993) Soil variability: a late 20th century view. Soils Fertil 56:529–562Google Scholar
  3. Butler BE (1980) Soil classification for soil survey. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Drohan PJ, Havlin JL, Megonigal JP, Cheng HH (2010) The “Dig It!” Smithsonian soils exhibition: lessons learned and goals for the future. Soil Sci Soc Am J 74:697–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dudal R (1987) The role of pedology in meeting the increasing demands on soils. Soil Surv Land Eval 7:101–110Google Scholar
  6. Fitzpatrick RW (2004a) Classification systems: Australian. In: Daniel Hillel (Editor-In-Chief) Encyclopedia of soils in the environment. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 211–216. © 2005. ISBN (Set): 0-12-348530-4Google Scholar
  7. Fitzpatrick RW (2004b) Changes in soil and water characteristics of natural, drained and re-flooded soils in the Mesopotamian marshlands: implications for land management planning. CSIRO Land and Water Client report, p 181. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/consultancy/2004/Mesopotamian-marshlands-soil.pdf
  8. Fitzpatrick RW (2008) Soils and natural resource management (Chapter 12). In: Scott KM, Pain CF (eds) Regolith science. CSIRO Publishing/Springer, Collingwood, pp 307–339 (colour plates: pp 172–174)Google Scholar
  9. Fitzpatrick RW (2009) Soil: forensic analysis. In: Jamieson A, Moenssens A (Editors-In-Chief) Wiley encyclopaedia of forensic science. Wiley, Chichester, pp 2377–2388. http://mrw.interscience.wiley.com/emrw/9780470061589/home/
  10. Fitzpatrick RW, Wright MJ, Slade PG, Hollingsworth ID, Peter P (1995) Soil assessment manual: a practical guide for recognition of soils and climatic features with potential to cause faults in optical fibre cables. Confidential report to Telstra, p 52Google Scholar
  11. Fitzpatrick RW, Fritsch E, Self PG (1996) Interpretation of soil features produced by ancient and modern processes in degraded landscapes: V Development of saline sulfidic features in non-tidal seepage areas. Geoderma 69:1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fitzpatrick RW, McKenzie NJ, Maschmedt D (1999) Soil morphological indicators and their importance to soil fertility. In: Peverell K, Sparrow LA, Reuter DJ (eds) In soil analysis: an interpretation manual. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, pp 55–69Google Scholar
  13. Fitzpatrick RW, Slade PM, Hazelton P (2001) Soil-related engineering problems: identification and remedial measures (Chapter 3). In: Gostin VA (ed) Gondwana to greenhouse: Australian environmental geoscience, Geological Society of Australia special publication 21., pp 27–36Google Scholar
  14. Fitzpatrick RW, Powell B, McKenzie NJ, Maschmedt JD, Schoknecht N, Jacquier DW (2003) Demands on soil classification in Australia. In: Eswaran H, Rice T, Ahrens R, Stewart BA (eds) Soil classification: a global desk reference. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, pp 77–100Google Scholar
  15. Fitzpatrick RW, Raven MD (2012) How Pedology and mineralogy helped solve a double murder case: Using forensics to inspire future generations of soil scientists. Soil Horizons. 53 (5) doi:  10.2136/sh12-05-0016
  16. Fitzpatrick RW, Powell B, Marvanek S (2008a) Atlas of Australian acid sulfate soils. In: Fitzpatrick RW, Shand P (eds) Inland acid sulfate soil systems across Australia, CRC LEME open file report no 249. (Thematic volume). CRC LEME, Perth, pp 75–89Google Scholar
  17. Fitzpatrick RW, Shand P, Marvanek S, Merry RH, Thomas M, Simpson SL, Raven MD, McClure S (2008b) Acid sulfate soils in subaqueous, waterlogged and drained soil environments in Lake Albert, Lake Alexandrina and River Murray below Blanchetown (Lock 1): properties, distribution, genesis, risks and management. Prepared for Department of Environment and Heritage, SA. CSIRO land and water science report 46/08. CSIRO, Adelaide, p 167. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/science/2008/sr46-08.pdf
  18. Fitzpatrick RW, Grealish G, Shand P, Simpson SL, Merry RH, Raven MD (2009a) Acid sulfate soil assessment in Finniss River, Currency Creek, Black Swamp and Goolwa Channel, South Australia. Prepared for the Murray Darling Basin Authority. CSIRO land and water science report 26/09. CSIRO, Adelaide, p 213. http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/science/2009/sr26-09.pdf
  19. Fitzpatrick RW, Raven MD, Forrester ST (2009b) A systematic approach to soil forensics: criminal case studies involving transference from crime scene to forensic evidence. In: Ritz K, Dawson L, Miller D (eds) Criminal and environmental soil forensics. Springer Science+Business Media BV, Dordrecht, Netherlands pp 105–127Google Scholar
  20. Fitzpatrick RW, Shand P, Merry RH (2009c) Acid sulfate soils. In: Jennings JT (ed) ‘Natural history of the Riverland and Murraylands’. Royal Society of South Australia (Inc), Adelaide, pp 65–111Google Scholar
  21. Fitzpatrick RW, Marvanek S, Powell B, Grealish G (2010a) Atlas of Australian Acid Sulfate soils: recent developments and future priorities. In: Gilkes RJ, Prakongkep N (eds) Proceedings of the 19th world congress of soil science; soil solutions for a changing world; ISBN 987-0-646-53783-2; Published on DVD; http://www.iuss.org; Symposium WG 3.1 processes in acid sulfate soil materials; 1–6 Aug 2010, Brisbane; IUSS; 2010, pp 24–27
  22. Fitzpatrick RW, Shand P, Hicks W (2010b) Technical guidelines for assessment and management of inland freshwater areas impacted by acid sulfate soils. CSIRO client report: Water for a Healthy Country National Research Flagship. CSIRO, Adelaide, p 155 http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/science/2010.pdf
  23. Grealish G, Fitzpatrick RW, Ringrose-Voase AJ (2007) Soil fertility evaluation/advisory service in Negara Brunei Darussalam report P1-2 – soil properties and soil identification key for major soil types. Science report 76/07, CSIRO land and water, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  24. Grealish G, Fitzpatrick RW, King P, Shahid SA (2013) Conceptual soil-regolith toposequence models to support soil survey and land evaluation (Chapter 7). In: Shahid SA, Taha FK, Abdelfattah MA (eds) Developments in soil classification, land use planning and policy implications-innovative thinking of resource inventory for sustainable use and management of land resources., pp 165–174Google Scholar
  25. Hall JAS, Maschmedt DJ, Billing NB (2009) The soils of Southern South Australia. The South Australian land and soil book series, vol 1. Geological survey of South Australia; Bulletin 56, Vol 1. Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, Government of South Australia, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  26. Isbell RF (1996) The Australian soil classification. CSIRO Publishing, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  27. Junger EP (1996) Assessing the unique characteristics of close-proximity soil samples: just how useful is soil evidence. J Forensic Sci 41:27–34Google Scholar
  28. McBratney AB (1994) Allocation of new individuals to continuous soil classes. Aust J Soil Res 32:623–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McDonald RC, Isbell RF (2009) Soil profile. National Committee on soil and terrain (2009) Australian soil and land survey field handbook, 3rd edn. CSIRO Publishing, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  30. Murray RC, Tedrow JCF (1992) Forensic geology. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  31. NLWRA (2001) Australian agricultural assessment. National Land and Water Resources Audit, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  32. Northcote KH, Beckmann GG, Bettenay E, Churchward HM, Van Dijk DC, Dimmock GM, Hubble GD, Isbell RF, McArthur WM, Murtha GG, Nicholls KD, Paton TR, Thompson CH, Webb AA, Wright MJ (1960–68) Atlas of Australian soils. Sheets 1–10 with explanatory booklets. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne. Soil maps may be purchased at AUSLIG Sales, BelconnenGoogle Scholar
  33. Ruffell A, McKinley J (2005) Forensic geoscience: applications of geology, geomorphology and geophysics to criminal investigations. Earth Sci Rev 69:235–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ruffell A, McKinley J (2008) Geoforensics. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Salama RB, Otto CJ, Fitzpatrick RW (1999) Contributions of groundwater conditions to soil and water salinisation. Hydrogeol J 7:46–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sanchez PA, Ahamed S, Carré F, Hartemink AE, Hempel J, Huising J, Lagacherie P, McBratney AB, McKenzie NJ, de Lourdes Mendonça-Santos M, Minasny B, Montanarella L, Okoth P, Palm PCA, Sachs JD, Shepherd KD, Vågen TG, Vanlauwe B, Walsh MG, Winowiecki LA, Zhang GL (2009) Digital soil map of the world. Science 325(5941):680–681. doi: 10.1126/science.1175084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schoeneberger PJ, Wysocki DA, Benham EC, Broderson WD (eds) (2002) Field book for describing and sampling soils, version 2.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, LincolnGoogle Scholar
  38. Schoknecht NR (ed) (2001) Soil groups of Western Australia. Resource management technical report 193. Agriculture Western Australia, PerthGoogle Scholar
  39. Skwarnecki MS, Fitzpatrick RW (2003) Regional geochemical dispersion in materials associated with acid sulfate soils in relation to base-metal mineralisation of the Kanmantoo Group, Mt Torrens-Strathalbyn region, eastern Mt Lofty Ranges, South Australia. Cooperative Research Centre for Landscape Environments and Mineral Exploration. CRC LEME restricted report no 185R, 193 pp; Reissued in 2008 as: CRC LEME open file report no 205, p 193Google Scholar
  40. Skwarnecki MS, Fitzpatrick RW (2008) Geochemical dispersion in acid sulfate soils: implications for mineral exploration in the Mount Torrens-Strathalbyn area, South Australia. In: Fitzpatrick RW, Shand P (eds) Inland acid sulfate soil systems across Australia, CRC LEME open file report no 249. (Thematic volume). CRC LEME, Perth, pp 98–128Google Scholar
  41. Soil Survey Staff (1999) Soil taxonomy: a basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys, 2nd edn. USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, Agriculture handbook number 436Google Scholar
  42. Soil Survey Staff (2010) Keys to soil taxonomy, 11th edn. USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  43. Sullivan LA, Fitzpatrick RW, Bush RT, Burton ED, Shand P, Ward NJ (2010) The classification of acid sulfate soil materials: further modifications, Southern cross GeoScience technical report no 310. Southern Cross University, Lismore, p 12Google Scholar
  44. Webster R (1977) Quantitative and numerical methods in soil classification and survey. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  45. Webster R, Butler BE (1976) Soil survey and classification studies at Ginninderra. Aust J Soil Res 14:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. White RE (1993) The role of soil science in shaping policies for sustainable land management. Soil News 93:1–4Google Scholar
  47. White RE (1996) Soil science – raising the profile. In: Uren N (ed) Proceedings of the Australian and New Zealand soils conference 1996, vol 2, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  48. Wilding LP, Drees LR (1983) Spatial variability and pedology. In: Wilding LP, Smeck NE, Hall GF (eds) Pedogenesis and soil taxonomy. I. Concepts and interactions, Developments in soil science 11A. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  49. World Reference Base (2006) World reference base for soil resources: a framework for international classification, correlation and communication. IUSS working group WRB. World soil resources reports no 103. ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/docs/wsrr103e.pdf
  50. Yaalon DH (1996) Soil science in transition: soil awareness and soil care research strategies. Soil Sci 161:3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zala K (2007) Dirty science: soil forensics digs into new techniques. Science 318:386–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CSIRO Land and WaterGlen OsmondAustralia
  2. 2.School of Chemistry, Physics and Earth SciencesFlinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations