Detailed Soil Survey of the Mount Revelstoke Summit Area.

More documents

Recommendations

Info

59Terzaghi, K . and R .B . Peck . 1967 . Soil mechanics in engineeringpractice . John Wiley & Sons, New York .Toogood, J .A . and T .W . Peters . 1953 . Comparison of methods of mechanicalanalysis of soils . Can . J . Agric . Sci . 33 :159-171 .U .S . Army Corps of Engineers . 1957 . The unified soil classificationsystem . Tech . Memorandum No . 3-357, Appendix B . WaterwaysExpt . Sta ., Miss .U .S . Army Corps of Engineers . 1962 . Pavement design for frost conditions .E .M . 1110-1-306, pp . 5-8 .U .S . Department of Health, Education and Welfare . 1969 . Manual ofseptic-tank practice . Public Health Pub . No . 526, U .S . Supt .Documents, Washington .Washburn, A.L . 1956 . Classification of patterned ground and review ofsuggested origins . Bull . of the Geological Soc . of America .67 :823-866 .Weaver, J .E . and F .E . Clements . 1938 . Plant Ecology 2nd ed . McGraw-HillBook Co . Inc ., New York, 601 pp .Wheeler, J .0 . 1964 . Big Bend map-area, British Columbia (82 M - E 1/2)Geol . Surv . Can . Paper 64-32 . To accompany map 12-1964 .
ENVIRONMENTAL FRAGILITY RATINGL . Knapik and M.M . LandalsIntroductionThe rating of the landscape according to its sensitivity tothe effects of human use isincreasingly recognized as an importantconsideration in land use planning .Although reference is often madeto thelittlefragility of alpine and sub-alpine ecosystems, there has beenquantitative definition of actual levels of fragility .Kuchar (1972a, 1972b, 1972c) develo?ed fragility ratings foralpinePark .and sub-alpine ecosystems in three areas of Jasper NationalBy estimating the vulnerability of vegetation to trampling, therate of vegetation recovery and the susceptibility of the soil surfaceto erosion, he set up a five-point fragility scale .was devised without the benefit of quantitative data .This rating scaleLandals andKnapik (1972) devised a similar type of five-point scale to ratelandscape fragility with emphasis on trail location in Jasper NationalPark .This system was based on quantitative data from experimentaltrampling of five common plant communities and considerations ofsoilbearing capacity and erosion potential .As used in this report,an environmental fragility rating isdefined asa classification of vegetation and soil units according totheir predicted response to anthropogenic use .Response is evaluatedby the estimated amount of change in the naturalecosystem .Manyspecific types of human usemust be made to retain somecould be considered, but some assumptionsuniversality of the system and eliminatethe need for a separate rating for each land use . If a site is subjectedto construction or very intensive use, it is destroyed as a natural
Page 2 and 3:
DETAILED SOIL SURVEYOF THEMOUNT REV
Page 4 and 5:
PageSOIL PRODUCTIVITY 53BIBLIOGRAPH
Page 6 and 7:
LIST OF PLATESPagePLATE 1 . Humo-Fe
Page 8 and 9:
INTRODUCTIONIn recent years Parks C
Page 10 and 11:
THE STUDY AREAGeographic LocationTh
Page 12 and 13:
calcareous rocks in the study area
Page 14 and 15: Mount Copeland (6,060 feet ASL) .At
Page 16 and 17: METHODS OF INVESTIGATIONField Techn
Page 18 and 19: 116 . Pyrophosphate-Extractable Alu
Page 20 and 21: 13FIGURE 2 .DIAGRAM OF A SOIL PROFI
Page 22 and 23: 15Soils of the Summit AreaThe soils
Page 24 and 25: MISCELLANEOUS MAPPING UNITSRBedrock
Page 26 and 27: AhBhf20 cm-Plate l .The Humo-Ferric
Page 28 and 29: 21extremely sloping land surfaces o
Page 30 and 31: Soil Map Unit 3(Orthic and Cumulic
Page 32 and 33: 25These soils have severe limitatio
Page 34 and 35: 27Horizon Depth (cm) Color Texture
Page 36 and 37: 295-a20 cm-5 -bPlate 5 .The hummock
Page 38 and 39: 31stands are made up of Abies lasio
Page 40 and 41: 6-aAeBfR20 cm-6 -bPlate 6 .The Lith
Page 42 and 43: 37INTERPRETATIONSSoil Properties an
Page 44 and 45: 39TABLE 4,GUIDES FOR ASSESSING SOIL
Page 46 and 47: 41TABLE 6 .GUIDES FOR ASSESSING SOI
Page 48 and 49: 43TABLE 8 .GUIDES FOR ASSESSING SOI
Page 50 and 51: 45especially where bedrock is close
Page 52 and 53: TABLE 10 . DEGREE AND NATURE OF SOI
Page 54 and 55: 49The soils of map units 1, 8 and 9
Page 56 and 57: 51compounds thus inhibiting percola
Page 58 and 59: 53PRODUCTIVITYProductivity ratings
Page 60 and 61: S4 XTABLE 11 . DISTRIBUTION OF SOIL
Page 62 and 63: 57BIBLIOGRAPHYAlberta Department of
Page 66 and 67: 61ecosystem .While the activities i
Page 68 and 69: TABLE A. CLASSES OF FRAGILITY FOR P
Page 70 and 71: TABLE B. CLASSES OF FRAGILITY FOR S
Page 72 and 73: 67than to channel use to a rarer ty
Page 74 and 75: 69approximately 10 cm thickness and
Page 76 and 77: 71ANALYTICAL DATA 1HorizonDepthcmCa
Page 78 and 79: 73several species of common occurre
Page 80 and 81: 75Soil Map Unit 3The imperfectly to
Page 82 and 83: 77Soil Classification :Orthic Regos
Page 84 and 85: 79ANALYTICAL DATA 3BHorizonDepthcmC
Page 86 and 87: 81Elevation : 6,000 ft . ASL (1,830
Page 88 and 89: 82ANALYTICAL DATA 4HorizonDepthcmCa
Page 90 and 91: Aspect :southeastElevation : 6,200
Page 92 and 93: Soil Map Unit 6Hummocky microrelief
Page 94 and 95: ANALYTICAL DATA 6HorizonDepthcmCaC1
Page 96 and 97: Location : S-7Parent Material :glac
Page 98 and 99: Soil Map Unit 8These soils have med
Page 100 and 101: Elevation : 6,250 ft . ASL (1,910 m
Page 102 and 103: orizonPyrophosphate96ANALYTICAL DAT
Page 104 and 105: Slope : 5%Aspect :northElevation :
Page 106 and 107: Soil Map Unit 10Map Unit 10 soils h
Page 108 and 109: Vegetation : Abies lasiocarpa (shru
Page 110 and 111: 104ANALYTTCAL DATAlOBHorizonDepthcm
Page 112 and 113: A further separation of sands is ma
Page 114 and 115:
(D1) Rapidly drained - soil moistur
Page 116 and 117:
110TABLE 13 . UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFI
Page 118 and 119:
GLOSSARYThis is included to define
Page 120 and 121:
illuviation -the process of deposit
Page 122 and 123:
pH - a notation used to designate t
Page 124:
LATIN AND COMMON NAMES OF PLANTS ME
show all

Detailed Soil Survey of the Mount Revelstoke Summit Area.

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?