Soil Data Join Recorrelation Initiative

1. Soil Data Join Recorrelation Initiative • Overview and Background • Purpose, Issues, Objectives, Initiative • Advisory Team / Technical Team • National Instruction Highlights • Reportable Measures • FY12 and Beyond

2. Overview and Background • Chief’s decision memo regarding NASIS • Improve the database • Accelerate MLRA approach by re-correlating data joins (harmonization) • Accelerate Phase 1 of MLRA update • Goal is seamless soil survey data

3. Soil Data Join Recorrelation (SDJR)(a.k.a. Harmonization) What is it? • Effort to provide seamless soil survey information in a timely fashion • Correlation and data enhancement using legacy soils data to provide seamless soils data • One data mapunit or consistent properties correlated to geographically consistent map units • Same named • Similar named • Uniquely named

4. SDJR Why now? • It has been a SSD Director priority for at least 2 years • With the completion of SSURGO many added value products are being generated • We need to provide consistent data for USDA programs • If we don’t do this, others (non-soil scientists) will make changes to make data consistent • We have enough data to make decisions for many instances • Many soil scientists that have key knowledge for making these decisions will likely be retiring soon

5. National Soil Survey Database Harmonization Project Why now? • Allows for SSOs and MOs to do a thorough analysis of all their data • Through this analysis long range and yearly plans, and projects can be developed and prioritized • Using Benchmark Soils, we can harmonize/make consistent a large percentage of our data

6. Division Priority • FY- 2012 Soils Division Priorities • Begin a multi-year initiative to complete SoilSurvey Data Join Re-correlation (often referred to as harmonization) so that soils information matches from county to county and state to state on 1 billion acres

7. Division Director Charge: • Establish Advisory and Technical teams to look at accelerating Phase I (data harmonization) of MLRA updates • Provide advice for implementation • Develop objectives, goals, and direction

8. Advisory Team • Cameron Loerch • Ken Scheffe • Paul Finnell • Jon Gerken • Dave Hoover • Amanda Moore • Mike Domeier • Tom Weber • Cleveland Watts • Dennis Williamson • Roy Vick • Jerry Schaar • Steve Park

9. Technical Team • Paul Finnell, NSSC • Ken Scheffe, NSSC • Cathy Seybold, NSSC • Steve Monteith, NSSC • Zamir Libohova, NSSC • Deb Harms, NSSC • Steve Peaslee, NSSC • Sub-Committees • Database • Climate • GIS • Correlation • Interpretations • ESD • Lab Data • Thorson, Thor - NRCS, Portland, OR • Tallyn, Ed - NRCS, Davis, CA • Fisher, John – NRCS, Reno, NV • Mueller, Eva- NRCS, Bozeman, MT • Wehmueller, William - NRCS, Salina, KS • Hahn, Thomas - NRCS, Denver, CO • Ulmer, Mike - NRCS, Bismarck, ND • Glover, Leslie - NRCS, Phoenix, AZ • Gordon, James - NRCS, Temple, TX • Whited, Michael - NRCS, St. Paul, MN • Endres, Tonie - NRCS, Indianapolis, IN • Finn, Shawn - NRCS, Amherst, MA • Dave Kingsbury - MOL, WV • Anderson, Debbie - NRCS, Raleigh, NC • Anderson, Scott - NRCS, Auburn, AL • Mersiovsky, Edgar - NRCS, Little Rock, AR • Mark Clark – MO Leader, AK • David Gehring - NRCS, Lexington, KY

10. What are the issues?

11. What are the issues? • K factors are one interpretation dependent on texture that are dependent on map unit concept

12. What are the issues? • Same map unit name, different composition

13. What are the issues? Lines join, interpretations differ

14. Issues: Statewide Interpretations

15. Bulk Density, 5-20 cm (Mg m-3) Issues: Nationwide Soil Property Data Users 2.33 0.02

16. What are the issues? Expectation of consistent interpretations: MLRA 75-Crete sil, 0-1% Dwellings with Basements Before After

17. Basic Objectives - SDJR • Support the development of seamless soils data for use with CDSI, USDA Farm Bill Programs, and added value SSURGO products • Process resulting in correlation of similar data map units taking into account existing legacy data, laboratory data, and expert knowledge

18. Basic Objectives - SDJR • Dissolve the perceived data faults in interpretations visible in geospatial presentation of soil survey information • Often resulting from minor variation in data population, horizon depths, composition, and vintage of guidance documents

19. Basic Objectives - SDJR • Improve the database • Reduces the number of DMU’s for same and similarly named soil map units • Identify priority update needs • Builds the foundation for next generation of soil survey – disaggregation

20. National Instruction https://nrcs.sc.egov.usda.gov/ssra/nssc/default.aspx

21. National Instruction Highlights • Conducted through a review of existing data: • Map Unit Concept and Composition

22. National Instruction Highlights • Focus on Same and Similarly named map units • Integrating Uniquely Named Map Units • SRSS/SDQS additional ideas to utilize SDJR approach

23. National Instruction Highlights • Creating SDJR Projects in NASIS

24. National Instruction Highlights • Harmonized Soil Data is:

25. National Instruction Highlights • Lab data reviewed • The pedons will be reviewed and updated • Updating the correlated name and correlated classification for sampled pedons • OSD reviewed and updated; • Classification updated to current taxonomy if necessary • Other updates to the OSD will follow the standard operating procedures for the MLRA regional office

26. National Instruction Highlights • Legacy Data Populated and Archived • Published manuscript TUD’s • Pedon data • ESD’s • Component productivity • Component ecological site • Work with ecological site inventory specialist and local rangeland management specialist • Map unit certified by QA process through MO

27. National Instruction Highlights • Identification of project needs that require future field work and analysis • Document in NASIS as a proposed project • Brief description • Estimated extent • Areas not joining spatially across political boundaries are identified as future projects and documented • Capture ESD inventory and development needs

28. Reportable measure’s • SDJR (Harmonization) projects • 20% of total map unit acreage • Report when QA milestone in project has been completed. • Post to SDM when scheduled (annual) • Initial soils mapping = 100% • MLRA field projects = 100% • High priority extensive revision = 100%

29. FY 2012 – SDJR

30. FY 13 and Beyond

31. National Bulletin

32. Summary SDJR Process

33. Discussion • Questions?