Update, Electricity, and Biochar

Its True.  I'll be putting my soil science blogging energy elsewhere for the forseeable future: http://nscss.org/blog/207.  Admittedly, not a pretty name, not like Transect Points: views from the underground.  Might have to make an url alias.

My latest post is on Soil Electricity, I am such a sucker for soil redox insights. 

A previous post, BioChar: Standards, Methods, and Opportunities, is a followup on NSCSS' Biochar panel discussion earlier this month.  Plus it is a lead-in to a  guidebook I am establishing for consulting soil scientists on biochar.

 

Soil pH and Plant Nutrients

Doug Edmeades gives out sound advice on pH.

It used to be believed (going back to the early days of soil science) that the ‘ideal’ soil was neutral: neither acid nor alkaline it had a pH of 7.0. This early belief still prevails especially in Charlatanville. However, with the benefit of much subsequent research our view of the ideal soil pH has changed.

First, it is now known that different plants have different tolerance to acidity. Restricting the discussion to pasture species, browntop is very tolerant to acidity which is one reason why it thrives in undeveloped soils. Ryegrasses are more sensitive and like a higher pH. Clovers are more sensitive again and, of the legumes, lucerne is very fussy. Our pastoral agriculture is focussed on growing clover-ryegrass and the optimal pH is 5.8-6.0 – this is the pH at which pasture production and especially clover production is optimised. In contrast, a straight lucerne stand requires a pH of about 6.5.

Liming pastoral soils above pH 6.0 is not recommended for several reasons. First, there is no benefit in terms of production and it can have detrimental effects on both pasture production and animal health. As the soil pH increases the availability of soil molybdenum (Mo) increases and thus the pasture Mo content increases. This can, in some cases, induce copper deficiency in animals. Also, increasing the soil pH above 6.0 reduces the concentration of soil zinc (Zn) and manganese (Mn) concentrations. This can result in induced Zn and Mn deficiency. Liming soils, contrary to popular belief, is not always beneficial!

He also works up a sensible New Zealander's criticism of liming to "fix" the Ca:Mg:K ratio.

Lime is typically calcium carbonate. For us in New Zealand the active ingredient in lime is the carbonate not the calcium (Ca). Our soils fortunately are rich in Ca – indeed often awash with Ca – a result of their origin (from the sea) and youthfulness (not very weathered).

Given that the benefits of liming are related to the change in soil pH then it should be obvious that the only useful guide and hence measurement for the requirement of lime is the soil pH. This is the adopted science-based approach used in New Zealand.

So what about all this base saturation ratio argument? In the 1930s there were two competing theories about plant nutrition. One said that the ratio of the nutrients Ca, Mg, K and Na was important. These were measured as the proportion of the soil cation exchange capacity (CEC) – the ability of a soil to store these nutrients called cations. Thus your hear some say that the Ca saturation of a soil is 50% meaning that 50% of the CEC was occupied by Ca. The other theory was that plants did not care what the ratio of nutrients were – the plant was fine providing the minimum amount of each nutrient was present. This is called the Sufficiency Theory distinguishing it from the Ratio Theory.

After almost 80 years of research the jury is definitely in. The Ratio Theory is not consistent with observations and hence is now set aside. Indeed we now know that using the Ratio Theory as a basis for fertiliser recommendations can be and often is misleading. For example the Base Saturation Ratios of Ca in most New Zealand soils would suggest they are Ca deficient. The fact is they are not and Ca deficiency has never been recorded in New Zealand.

There are other problems with the Ratio Theory. It applies to only 3 nutrients (Ca, Mg and K – appreciating that Na is not required for plant growth (except on some crops such as sugar beet).

What about all the other 13 plant nutrients? Also we now know that soils have variable charge – this realization has occurred within my 30-year career. The consequence is that the CEC depends on the pH at which it is measured. The old method still used by the quack brigade measures the CEC at surprise, surprise the “ideal” soil pH of 7.0. This inflates the CEC thus reducing the base saturation ratios, especially for Ca. By sticking to this now disproved methodology the quacks can be certain that the soil test results will say the Ca base saturation ratio is low therefore apply my product because it contains Ca.

My region's soils are similarly well supplied with calcium. My agricultural consultancy mentors taught me to be skeptical of the Ca:Mg:K approach to evaluating soil nutrient status. In my region it was used to justify expensive formulations of foliar applied applied calcium, or to justify adding expensive soluble calcium to the irrigation water on soils with a good supply of calcium. Normally on high value crops in good years when adding extra nutrients for insurance has legs. Charlatans is not too strong a word. Back in the 1980's these folks would use A&L Laboratories, well established, amny offices, with an excellent professional reputation, and which reported Ca:Mg:K in a ratios friendly format. I'll bet this is still the case. You can't beat something like that for conferring legitimacy, can you?

The originator of the ratios approach, soil scientist William Albrecht was a brilliant observer of nature with a considerable body of work which still gets a lot of play. The basic premise of Albrecht's 1938 Loss of Soil Organic Matter and Its Restoration is solid: it takes a ready supply of soil calcium and nitrogen to build soil organic matter. His concepts continue to be stretched beyond to the breaking point both by well meaning folks exchanging advice on organic farming methods, as well as in efforts to sell product to the unsuspecting. Yet we don't read much in the way of criticism of the ratios approach. It is excellent of Doug Edmeades to voice his concern.

Sunnyside Wetland

One of my projects made the front page of the Yakima newspaper. Since the paper tends to paywall these things in short order, I thought the blog would make a handy archive.

The picture here is from the project site. The retaining wall in the picture was placed by the county in order to keep the road apron from impacting what was presumed from USFWS-NWI reconnaisance mapping to be a jurisdiction wetland. That mapping plus the observed standing water and the wetland vegetation seemed to the county to be proof positive that clearing the land was a violation of the county critical areas code. It wasn't.

Published on Monday, September 10, 2007

County learns lessons from fight with farmer
By PAT MUIR
YAKIMA HERALD-REPUBLIC

SUNNYSIDE -- Don Young didn't think his neighbor's irrigation water leaking into his property should qualify it as wetland, and after a yearlong fight, Yakima County agreed with him.

The saga, which Young documented in a meticulous inch-thick file he says makes him feel like an attorney, cost him about $6,000 by his count and kept him from using the land until last month. It also forced county leaders to rethink the way they apply the county's Critical Areas Ordinance. The ordinance, which has been under review for five years and is nearly finished, still will be enforced as mandated by state law, county Public Services Director Vern Redifer said.

"But where you can construe the law in the favor of property owners, we'll construe it that way," he said.

That's good news to Young, a self-described "stubborn old farmer" who believes he might not have prevailed in his dispute if he hadn't had the money for a consultant to make his case.

"This is a story that needs to be told, not for my benefit but for the taxpayers and the public," the 73-year-old retired rancher said.

The whole thing began when a county road crew spotted Young pulling up vegetation on the edge of his property. The county issued a cease-and-desist order in May 2006, about seven months after Young bought the 4-acre property south of Sunnyside. To his thinking, the Russian olive trees and other vegetation he removed were just trash like the piles of tires and garbage that were also on the property.

Thinking he was actually improving the land, Young took umbrage to the county's order, which included the possibility of $1,000-a-day fines.

"Nobody ever said anything about it being a wetland," he said.

He also didn't like the way county staff treated him when he disputed the matter. It was clear enough to Young that the land in question wasn't a wetland because the only source of water was the neighbor's irrigation runoff, or what his hired consultant labeled "water trespass." But he couldn't get the county to see it that way.

"The heading of their letter is 'public services,'" Young said. "I told them they need to change that, because there is no way in this world that they are serving the public."

The county's opinion on the matter didn't change until Young received a report he'd commissioned on the matter by wetlands delineation expert Phil Small of Spokane. Small's report, written after a visit to the property during which he drilled holes to measure groundwater levels, found there was no source of water other than the irrigation runoff. The county considered it a persuasive argument and in a July 31 letter lifted the cease-and-
desist order.

"What I want to know," Young said, "is why didn't the county have to hire him to prove it was a wetland instead of me having to hire him to prove it's not."

In the county staff's defense, the property did have signs of being a wetland, such as reeds, bulrushes and the Russian olive trees, Redifer said. The staff was simply following its procedures as laid out in its own policy and didn't err in that regard, he said.

County officials tried to work with Young along the way, planning manager Steve Erickson said. But the county's suggestion that Young "wait and see" if his property was a wetland based on whether groundwater returned even without irrigation runoff didn't fit into Young's schedule, Erickson said. That meant Young had to hire his consultant to force the issue, but that was up to him, Erickson said.

Where things might have been done differently, and will be in the future, is in the way county staff deals with people in such disputes, Redifer said.

Comparing it to baseball, in which "ties go to the runner," he said if there are questions about whether to act on a possible wetland scenario like Young's, the landowner will be "the runner." That is in line with the Yakima County Commissioners philosophy of a more user-friendly Critical Areas Ordinance application, which they have espoused during deliberations on the ordinance.

Staff also might call people in the future or knock on their doors, rather than sending formal letters specifying possible fines.

"I think (the letter) made him feel like a big lawbreaker, and that certainly wasn't the intent," Redifer said.

"That's another lesson learned -- how we go about engaging someone with a potential violation," Erickson added.

While he would be happy to see such changes, Young still isn't sure the county has done right by him. He's contemplating filing a claim to recoup the money he spent fighting the initial ruling. In the meantime, though, he's working the land for the first time in about a year.

He's put manure down and hopes to have the whole thing seeded for pasture by the end of September.

"I lost the production of that land for a year already," he said. "Over a year."

* Pat Muir can be reached at 577-7693 or pmuir@yakimaherald.com.

GeoAgro soil data collector

I just got back from the 20th Annual Meeting of the NSCSS in San Antonio, TX. Ed DiPollina, TekConsultants, was one of the presenters, and I was very impressed with the potential for a product his company is bringing to market, the GeoAgro Soil Data Collector. Designed for field soil scientists like myself, the Soil Data Collector helps us log soil profile descriptions and geo-reference our field notations, map features & test pit locations in the field on a Tablet PC.

I saw many NSCSS soil scientists sign on as beta testers. Considering the varied applications that field soils data is applied to, this is surely going to be an interesting process.

Similar field data solutions are available to government soil scientists (Pedon PC software was presented to us by USDA-NRCS in San Antonio), but the GeoAgro Soil Data Collector is the first one geared to consulting field soil scientists, arguably a larger and faster growing market than represented by government soil scientists.

It struck me during Ed DiPollina's presentation that the GIS and GPS portion of these types of products is becoming more of a commodity, with the forms and data entry portion holding the interest of the San Antonio audience.

Unlike similar solutions geared to institutional needs, this product will be affordable for the small business to enter into. This is not always a given since GIS solutions vary wildly in price relative to the value provided. If you are already using a GIS product like ESRI's ArcView (ESRI is the world leader in GIS software), no problem, the Soil Data Collector has the ability to export and import different types of files, such as shape, drawing and spreadsheet formats, along with substantial GIS functionality. Don't already have a GIS solution? A simplified non-ESRI solution is being provided.

Speaking of ESRI, affordable alternatives to ESRI products are on the rise. If you are already a locked into being a customer of ESRI, or you are a status quo driven public institution, this will not matter to you. A growing number of us are not. We constitute a market that ESRI has pointedly chosen, through proprietary file formatting and opportunistic pricing, not to serve. I don't fault ESRI for choosing a captive market business model. Its a legit choice. Unfortunately for ESRI, and ultimately ESRI's customers, it is difficult model to adapt to changing market conditions. If the monopolistic aspects of ESRI have escaped you, consider. GIS solutions are simple, ubiquitous, data processing solutions for publicly available georeferenced data. The algorithms used to project the data into only 2 dimensions were constructed long ago by federal agencies using public funds. The math and the data are both freely available to everyone. ESRI doesn't add value to data in the classic meaning of value, it locks it into a proprietary format and holds it for ransom.

A captive market business model smothers the necessity to innovate. Over at competitor Manifold System GIS, several sub$1K solutions are optimized for multiple core CPUs and 64 bit processing. This has been available since August, 2006. ESRI has yet to announce when they intend to provide multi-core or 64 bit functionality, even at the >$120K level. Some generally similar observations about ESRI: (1) (2) (3)

ESRI's loosening grip on the lead and a general increase in GIS software choice and capability are helping to bring innovators like TekConsultants onto the playing field.


Technorati Tags: gis gps pedology soil scientist innovation

My 2007 Field Season Begins

This week I field validated my hyporheic confinement hypothesis for a site I have been working on.

I had been out mapping wetlands and characterizing a system of ditches and stream-like features. Lucky for me, a chinook was blowing: soil thawed sufficiently to be observed each afternoon. With not-normal effects on vegetation and soil chemistry from seasonal saturation by a nearby irrigation ditch, I suspect these two particular wetlands would delineate smaller, jurisdictionally speaking, come the growing season in March. But I don't know for certain. The combination of river and irrigation induced hydrology can be confounding.

Many of the stream-like ditches used at the site to accommodate irrigation water and return flows were dry. For the ones that had flow I had a devil of a time getting into them safely to measure their cross sectional profile. Prior to my client's purchase for a residential/golf course project, the property was used to run a cow/calf operation. Much of the lower ditch (15 - 30 feet across) has 20 plus inches of anaerobic mud and manure, a sure recipe for disaster for the hip wader approach. The occasional gravel bar saved me from having to pontoon for my data.

The ditches are running with mostly hyporheic/phreatic Yakima River water. I say mostly, because some snowmelt was running in a small ditch onto the site from the upland terrace onto the floodplain. The Yakima is 1000 feet away and was running near bank-full. The ditches are running a few inches below the ordinary high water scour line, and I feel certain the two hydrologies are connected.

The concept that hyporheic/phreatic hydrology can reach this far is a challenge for most folks, including my fellow project team members. How can river groundwater hydrology be feeding it when the ditch is higher than the river? The answer lies in subsurface gravel filled channels. Rivers lose and gain the same water repeatedly. In losing reaches, water drops out of the bottom into permeable gravel filled channels. Where these channels are covered with less permeable material, confinement can result in a considerable buildup of gravitational head. Where the gravel channel reaches to the margin of the floodplain, confined water can upwell at considerable distance from the river, and can be confused with irrigation derived groundwater.

In the Yakima Valley, with its 500,000 irrigated acres and its network of leaky canals, irrigation induced seasonal wetlands are common. In the floodplain, upwelling hyporheic/phreatic river water can be masked by irrigation induced hydrology, but only while the canals are full, or recently so. During this January visit, long after irrigation diversions have ceased, there was no mistaking the dominant river-induced hydrology at the site. Especially telling was the water level in an existing stream-like ditch compared with the newly constructed closed ditch intended become its replacement. Closed at the upper end, the upwelling river derived groundwater flowing in the new ditch was higher by 14 inches than the water flowing in the adjacent, topographically upgradient, closer-to-canal, older, connected, irrigation district return flow structure. 14 inches is also consistent with seepage on the bank of the older ditch structure. In the photo these are separated by only 60 feet.

These 2 ditches provide the strongest validation I've seen in the 20 years I have been observing and puzzling over hyporheic confinement and upwelling.

Tech Tags: sample soil scientist wetland consulting hydrology yakima water drainage environment irrigation regulation

Missoula Soil Science Consultant Speaks

Tell someone you are a soil scientist and it invariably requires an explanation of what you do. It's interesting that few of us do the same things and the telling of it reveals much about the person as well as the community they serve. For that reason I like to collect other folks' descriptions of their work. Certainly the telling of Barry Dutton's life work stands among my favorites because he built his business from scratch in a particularly cost-conscious region. He did it largely without the benefit of the 2 main drivers of regional soil consulting booms: booming suburban sprawl and booming energy prices driving increased well drilling and surface mining for coal and oil shale. I've heard several iterations of Barry's telling over the years and look forward to future installments.

Barry Dutton consults out of Missoula, Montana for PBS&J which purchased his company last year. Barry addressed the June 14, 2004 National Cooperative Soil Survey Western Regional Conference in Jackson, Wyoming (pdf source):

I was asked to review what private soil scientists are up to these days and will use my own company to illustrate. I started Land and Water Consulting Inc. 25 years ago and now have 50 employees and five offices. Our staff includes soil scientists, hydrologists, botanists, wetland scientists, biologists, water rights specialists, engineers, surveyors, GIS specialists, technicians and support staff. Our wetland projects this year include wetland delineation on over 10,000 acres. We will restore over 60 wetlands impacted by ski area and golf course development. We will design several dozen wetland mitigation projects and will monitor over 100 wetland projects constructed as mitigation for highway project impacts.

Our vegetation projects this year include several thousand acres of vegetation mapping for EIS studies, vegetation management plans for ski areas, and vegetation TES inventories for project sites. We will also conduct weed and riparian area inventories on private, state, and federal lands.

Our streambank and shoreline projects include restoration along hundred of miles of streams and lakes. We are working on removing a 100 year old dam on a large river within the largest superfund site in the country. This work includes channel design, wetland rehabilitation and riparian area enhancement. We will also conduct watershed analyses and implement TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily Loads) for dozens of streams.

I do a lot of expert witness work and soil survey often has a role in the cases. My oldest case has been going on for over 30 years and the focus is the definition of Peat. The 1911 Soil Survey got it right in describing the site as “high organic content silt loam.” However, the 1959 soil survey called the site peat. The owner sold the “peat” and has been arguing over the definition of peat ever since with the peat miner who purchased it. In another expert witness case, a friendly NRCS soil scientist tried to do a county planner and a developer a favor and produce a wetland map. Unfortunately this person had insufficient training in wetland delineation. The developer filled up to the wetland line and built a parking area before the ---- hit the fan. He spent $250,000 on lawyers, experts, fines and restoration activities to correct his mistakes and is now considering sending NRCS the bill. I am also involved each year in a half-dozen wet basement lawsuits and in almost every case there is a soil survey covering the site that predicted the problem if anyone had known or taken the time to look.

We are also involved in numerous reclamation projects for mine sites, pipelines and other projects. If you want to evaluate soil survey accuracy there is nothing like a 300 milelong pipeline trench across the landscape.

Likely because a longer litany wouldn't add any value, Barry didn't mention several other areas: his extensive work with water use efficiency for irrigation districts, his work instructing health district personnel on soil features relevant to septic systems and his work mapping soils but using project specific approaches that describing would only have distracted NCSS audience from his core message:

The decline of the soil survey program is leading the decline of the soil survey profession.

This is a powerful statement to lay on NCSS, the keepers of the national soil survey program. I plan on discussing it further.

Barry Dutton's message is also at the core of the brand of concern for soil science survival that I was dismissive of at the end of my previous post, a position based on observing the ever increasing demand for consulting soil scientists. Speak with Barry, as I did this afternoon, and you will find his concern is not waning despite his considerable business success and despite the high demand for his individual services. I am reevaluating my position and will present it in a future post. Certainly we soil scientists have the work but without academe, without soil survey sufficient to maintain our critical mass, won't what we do continue to be parceled out among the other disciplines? Any comments on this issue would be most appreciated.

Tech Tags: soil science consulting pedology