The Soils of Elgin County - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
The Soils of Elgin County - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada The Soils of Elgin County - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Table 8 .Agricultural land suitability ratings for some fnvit and nut crops in Elgin County (continued)MapSymbolSoil or Misc.Land UnitNaturalDrainageSlope/classesManagementfactors 1Crop Groups **23WM Walsingham Imperfect Bb S3 S3 S3C,C S3 S3 S3D,d S4 S3 S3Drainage +1 +1 +1Irrigation +1 +1 +1Waterin Poor Bb S4 S4 S3C,C S4 S4 S3Drainage +2 +2 +1Irrigation - - -WU Wauseon Poor Bb S4 S4 S4C,C S4 S4 S4Drainage +2 +2 +2Irrigation - - -WU.T Wauseon Poor Bb S4 S4 S4till phase C,C S4 S4 S4Drainage +2 +2 +2AIrrigation - - -* A significant improvement in the ratings asa result of drainage or irrigation is indicated by a +1, +2, etc. Where drainage or irrigation would not affectthe ratings, a dash (-) is shown.** Crop Groups1 . Raspberries, Strawberries 2. Apples, Carpathian or 3. Pears, Plums, Heartnuts, Filbert nutsBlack Walnuts
C .Soil Interpretations for Water ErosionI.J. Shelton, Agriculture Canada, L.W. Schut,Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, andG.J. Wall, Agriculture Canada(1) IntroductionSoil erosion by water is a naturally occurringprocess that can be greatly accelerated by man'sactivity. Any practice that accelerates surfacerunoff, or reduces the natural protection affordedby vegetative cover, will generally lead toincreasing erosion levels . Uncontrolled soilerosion can reduce production potential, depletenutrients, and degrade soil quality . Sediment,fertilizers, and pesticides can adversely affectdownstream water quality after they have beenremoved from the land by water erosion .A widely accepted water erosion relationship,A = R x K x ILS x C x P, used to predict averageannual soil loss through sheet and rill erosion, iscalled the Universal Soil Loss Equation or US.L .E .(28), where:A is the average annual soil loss;R is the rainfall erosivity factor;K is the soil erodibility factor;L is the slope length factor;S is the slope gradient factor,C is the crop cover factor; andP is the conservation or management practicefactor .This section of the report provides basicinformation on the factors of the U.S.L.E. relevantto Elgin County. It also includes a briefdescription of the methodology needed to applythe U.S.L .E. to the soils in the County. For moredetailed information on the factors, andbackground informationon the methodology, referto Shelton and Wall (29) .In order to apply the U.S.L .E., values must bedetermined for the factors which compose it . ForElgin County the "R" value is 90 (30) . Soilerodibility or 'IC" values, and associated potentialsoil erosion classes for each soil type, are reportedin Table 9 . Slope length and gradient values, or"LS" values, for combinations of slope length andgradient and for representative map symbol slopeclasses, are given in Tables 10 and 11, respectively.A quick reference table for determining potentialsoil losses for given K values and slope conditionsin the County is provided in Table 12 . The soillosses provided in Table 12 are metric unit values.Crop cover values, or "C" values, for a variety ofcrops and rotations found in the County are givenin Tables 13, 14, 15, and 16. Management practicefactor 'P" values are provided in Table 17. Theguidelines used to assess potential soil erosionclasses are included in Table 18 . Information fromthese tables can be used to make site specific ormap symbol assessments of soil erosion potentialby water.(2) Potential Soil Erosion ClassesThe average annual soil loss, or "A", which isdetermined using the US .L .E. is an estimate of thepotential soil loss that can be expected for thatsoil . When the crop cover factor (C) andmanagement practice factor (P) are not included inthe equation, the calculated soil loss (A = R x K xLS) is an estimate of the potential soil loss that canbe expected under bare field conditions. Based onthis calculation, the soil can then be placed in toone of five potential soil erosion classes .Descriptions of the classes are as follows:Class 1 - Negligible - Soils in this class havevery slight to no erosion potential . Minimalerosion problems should occur if good soilmanagement practices are used . The soils in thisclass should be able to maintain sustainableproductivity under average managementpractices . The tolerable soil loss limit may beexceeded for soils that are shallow, low in organicmatter, of poor structure or previously eroded .Potential soil erosion loss is less than 6tonnes/hectare/year (3 tons/acre/year) . Thisamount represents the tolerable soil loss for mostOntario soils.Class 2 - Low - Without the use of croprotations and cross slope farming, low to moderatesoil losses will occur. Potential soil erosion lossesrange from 6-11 tonnes/hectare/year (3-5tons/acre/year) . This amount exceeds thetolerable soil loss limit for all but the deepestOntario soils.Class 3 - Moderate - Unless conservationmeasures such as conservation tillage, contourcropping and grass waterways are used, moderateto high soil erosion losses will occur. Potentialsoil erosion losses range from 11-22tonnes/hectare/year (5-10 tons/acre/year).Class 4 - High - Unless measures such asconservation tillage, forage-based rotations,terraces, cross-slope or contour strip cropping areemployed, high erosion losses will occur.Potential soil erosion losses range from 22-33tonnes/hectare/year (10-15 tons/acre/year) .Class 5 - Severe - Unless a soil cover ofpermanent vegetation is maintained, severe103
- Page 54 and 55: tillage practices, particularly no-
- Page 56 and 57: Organic (OR)Organic land units usua
- Page 58 and 59: eference and also Publication No .
- Page 60 and 61: Procedure :1) Locate the symbols 'B
- Page 62 and 63: Table 4.Agricultural alnd capabilit
- Page 64 and 65: Soil Suitability ClassesDescription
- Page 66 and 67: Procedure:1) Locate the symbols 'BV
- Page 68 and 69: Table 6.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 70 and 71: Table 6.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 72 and 73: Table 6 .Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 74 and 75: Table 6 .Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 76 and 77: Table 6. Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 78 and 79: Table 6.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 80 and 81: Table 7.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 82 and 83: Table 7.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 84 and 85: Table 7. Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 86 and 87: Table 7.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 88 and 89: Table 7. Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 90 and 91: Table 7.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 92 and 93: Table 8.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 94 and 95: Table 8.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 96 and 97: Table 8. Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 98 and 99: Table 8 .Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 100 and 101: Table 8.Agricultural land suitabili
- Page 102 and 103: Table 8 .Agricultural land suitabil
- Page 106 and 107: erosion losses will occur . Potenti
- Page 108 and 109: the average annual soil loss using
- Page 110 and 111: Table 9 . Mean K values, K ranges a
- Page 112 and 113: Table 10.LS values for different co
- Page 114 and 115: Table 13.C values for common field
- Page 116 and 117: Table 14 . C values for some field
- Page 118 and 119: Table 16.C values for some common c
- Page 120 and 121: GLOSSARYAlluvium materialBlanketCal
- Page 122 and 123: ProminentmottlesRaised shorelineSoi
- Page 124 and 125: 4. Schut, L.W. and W.G. Stevens . 1
- Page 126 and 127: APPENDIX 1Generalized Soil Informat
- Page 128 and 129: BERRIEN SOIL TILL PHASE (BE.T)GENER
- Page 130 and 131: BURFORD SOIL (BU)GENERALIZED PROFIL
- Page 132 and 133: CAMILLA SOIL (CM)GENERALIZED PROFIL
- Page 134 and 135: GOBLES SOIL (GO)GENERALIZED PROFILE
- Page 136 and 137: KELVIN SOIL (KE)GENERALIZED PROFILE
- Page 138 and 139: MAPLEWOOD SOIL - TILL PHASE (MA.T)G
- Page 140 and 141: NORMANDALE SOIL (NO)GENERALIZED PRO
- Page 142 and 143: STRATHBURN SOIL (ST)GENERALIZED PRO
- Page 144 and 145: TOLEDO SOIL - COARSE PHASE (TO.C)GE
- Page 146 and 147: WATTFORD SOIL (WF)GENERALIZED PROFI
- Page 148 and 149: APPENDIX 2Field Identification of S
- Page 150 and 151: 5. Proceed to Figure 13 and determi
- Page 152 and 153: Figure 13 : Field Site Key To Ident
C .Soil Interpretations for Water ErosionI.J. Shelton, <strong><strong>Agri</strong>culture</strong> <strong>Canada</strong>, L.W. Schut,Ontario Ministry <strong>of</strong> <strong><strong>Agri</strong>culture</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Food</strong>, <strong>and</strong>G.J. Wall, <strong><strong>Agri</strong>culture</strong> <strong>Canada</strong>(1) IntroductionSoil erosion by water is a naturally occurringprocess that can be greatly accelerated by man'sactivity. Any practice that accelerates surfacerun<strong>of</strong>f, or reduces the natural protection affordedby vegetative cover, will generally lead toincreasing erosion levels . Uncontrolled soilerosion can reduce production potential, depletenutrients, <strong>and</strong> degrade soil quality . Sediment,fertilizers, <strong>and</strong> pesticides can adversely affectdownstream water quality after they have beenremoved from the l<strong>and</strong> by water erosion .A widely accepted water erosion relationship,A = R x K x ILS x C x P, used to predict averageannual soil loss through sheet <strong>and</strong> rill erosion, iscalled the Universal Soil Loss Equation or US.L .E .(28), where:A is the average annual soil loss;R is the rainfall erosivity factor;K is the soil erodibility factor;L is the slope length factor;S is the slope gradient factor,C is the crop cover factor; <strong>and</strong>P is the conservation or management practicefactor .This section <strong>of</strong> the report provides basicinformation on the factors <strong>of</strong> the U.S.L.E. relevantto <strong>Elgin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. It also includes a briefdescription <strong>of</strong> the methodology needed to applythe U.S.L .E. to the soils in the <strong>County</strong>. For moredetailed information on the factors, <strong>and</strong>background informationon the methodology, referto Shelton <strong>and</strong> Wall (29) .In order to apply the U.S.L .E., values must bedetermined for the factors which compose it . For<strong>Elgin</strong> <strong>County</strong> the "R" value is 90 (30) . Soilerodibility or 'IC" values, <strong>and</strong> associated potentialsoil erosion classes for each soil type, are reportedin Table 9 . Slope length <strong>and</strong> gradient values, or"LS" values, for combinations <strong>of</strong> slope length <strong>and</strong>gradient <strong>and</strong> for representative map symbol slopeclasses, are given in Tables 10 <strong>and</strong> 11, respectively.A quick reference table for determining potentialsoil losses for given K values <strong>and</strong> slope conditionsin the <strong>County</strong> is provided in Table 12 . <strong>The</strong> soillosses provided in Table 12 are metric unit values.Crop cover values, or "C" values, for a variety <strong>of</strong>crops <strong>and</strong> rotations found in the <strong>County</strong> are givenin Tables 13, 14, 15, <strong>and</strong> 16. Management practicefactor 'P" values are provided in Table 17. <strong>The</strong>guidelines used to assess potential soil erosionclasses are included in Table 18 . Information fromthese tables can be used to make site specific ormap symbol assessments <strong>of</strong> soil erosion potentialby water.(2) Potential Soil Erosion Classes<strong>The</strong> average annual soil loss, or "A", which isdetermined using the US .L .E. is an estimate <strong>of</strong> thepotential soil loss that can be expected for thatsoil . When the crop cover factor (C) <strong>and</strong>management practice factor (P) are not included inthe equation, the calculated soil loss (A = R x K xLS) is an estimate <strong>of</strong> the potential soil loss that canbe expected under bare field conditions. Based onthis calculation, the soil can then be placed in toone <strong>of</strong> five potential soil erosion classes .Descriptions <strong>of</strong> the classes are as follows:Class 1 - Negligible - <strong>Soils</strong> in this class havevery slight to no erosion potential . Minimalerosion problems should occur if good soilmanagement practices are used . <strong>The</strong> soils in thisclass should be able to maintain sustainableproductivity under average managementpractices . <strong>The</strong> tolerable soil loss limit may beexceeded for soils that are shallow, low in organicmatter, <strong>of</strong> poor structure or previously eroded .Potential soil erosion loss is less than 6tonnes/hectare/year (3 tons/acre/year) . Thisamount represents the tolerable soil loss for mostOntario soils.Class 2 - Low - Without the use <strong>of</strong> croprotations <strong>and</strong> cross slope farming, low to moderatesoil losses will occur. Potential soil erosion lossesrange from 6-11 tonnes/hectare/year (3-5tons/acre/year) . This amount exceeds thetolerable soil loss limit for all but the deepestOntario soils.Class 3 - Moderate - Unless conservationmeasures such as conservation tillage, contourcropping <strong>and</strong> grass waterways are used, moderateto high soil erosion losses will occur. Potentialsoil erosion losses range from 11-22tonnes/hectare/year (5-10 tons/acre/year).Class 4 - High - Unless measures such asconservation tillage, forage-based rotations,terraces, cross-slope or contour strip cropping areemployed, high erosion losses will occur.Potential soil erosion losses range from 22-33tonnes/hectare/year (10-15 tons/acre/year) .Class 5 - Severe - Unless a soil cover <strong>of</strong>permanent vegetation is maintained, severe103