MANITOBA Soil Resource
Soils of the Rural Municipality of Louise
Report No. D83
Agriculture and Manitoba Agri-Food Canada Agriculture Soils Report No. D83 1998
SOILS OF THE RURAL MUNICIPALITY OF LOUISE
by
G. P. Podolsky
SOIL RESOURCE SECTION MANITOBA AGRICULTURE in cooperation with MANITOBA LAND RESOURCE UNIT AGRICULTURE AND AGRI-FOOD CANADA and DEPARTMENT OF SOIL SCIENCE, UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA PREFACE
This report and accompanying map provide detailed information on the soil resources of the Rural Municipality of Louise . It is one in a new series of such reports providing a more detailed comprehensive soil survey to complement and expand on information contained in the reconnaissance surveys for southern Manitoba. New mapping techniques, more intensive field investigations, use of aerial photographs and topographic maps combined with improved methods of studying soils in the laboratory and accumulated knowledge of the properties and uses of soils over the years have all contributed to the increased information in these reports.
Information in this report is presented in both a descriptive form for users who wish to derive their own interpretations and also in an interpretive form to assist other users who require some initial assessment of soil behaviour under different management systems. Descriptive information is provided for soils that occur in the project area, as well as interpretations for land uses related to agriculture, irrigation farming, engineering and outdoor recreation . Soil map information is provided at a scale of 1 :50,000 on a photobase map .
During the course of this resurvey a large volume of site specific soil data was gathered and recorded on field sheet input forms that for practical reasons cannot be included in this report. This data also exists in digital form on PC based software format to permit automated manipulation and statistical evaluation for both map and soil characterization and interpretation . Thematic interpretive maps showing general agricultural land capability or single feature maps showing various soil properties or landscape features such as texture, drainage class, slope, erosion, etc ., can be derived from the basic soil maps and other data files . Individual requests for such data should be directed to: Manitoba Soil Resource Section, Department of Soil Science, Room 362, Ellis Building., University of Manitoba, Winnipeg Manitoba, R3T 2N2 .
The staff of the Soil Resource Section trust that this report and accompanying maps will be of value, in terms of providing a basic inventory of the properties of soils, to all who may be involved in the planning, development and management of the soils in this project area. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The report on the Soils of the Rural Municipality of Louise was conducted as a joint project of the Manitoba Department of Agriculture, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Soil Science Department, University of Manitoba.
The soils were mapped by G.P . Podolsky, I.G . Podolsky and D. Swidinsky assisted by R. Von Hertzberg, P. Magnone and D. Wilke.
Laboratory analysis were provided by R. Mirza, K.C. Yeung, J. Madden and E. St. Jacques under the direction of P. Haluschak.
Map and sketch compilation, digitizing in preparation for publication and addition to the digital files was provided by J . Griffiths, R. DePape and C.L . Aglugub.
Assistance in soil correlation was provided by R.E. Smith, R.G. Eilers, W. Michalyna and G.F. Mills.
I .G . Podolsky for editing map and report .
C.L. Aglugub for providing computer processing, programming and report formatting .
Barb Allison for assisting in report typing .
HOW TO USE THIS SOIL REPORT
This soil report contains considerable information about the soils, their origin and formation, their classification and their potential for various uses such as dryland agriculture and irrigation. The report is divided into four parts: Part 1 provides a general description of the area; Part 2 describes the methodology used in the study; Part 3 discusses the development, scientific classification and morphological characteristics of the soils in the study area, and Part 4 provides an interpretation of soil properties and associated landscape features as they affect soil capability or suitability for various uses. The accompanying soil map is presented at a 1 :50,000 scale on an air photo base to assist the user in locating the soil areas in relation to landscape features, roads and field boundaries. The following steps are suggested to assist the user in retrieving soil information from the map and report:
STEP 1 - Consult the soil map in pocket of report folder. Locate the area(s) of interest on the map and identify the pertinent map unit symbols. Arabic numerals placed as superscripts following map symbols indicate the approximate proportion of each soil type within the map unit.
STEP 2 - Consult the extended legend accompanying the soil map for an alphabetical listing of soil symbols giving the soil name, surface texture, drainage, related information concerning landform and stratigraphy of the soil materials and soil classification .
STEP 3 - For interpretive information on the soil capability for dryland agriculture, water erosion risk, suitability for irrigation, selected engineering and recreation uses consult the appropriate section in Part 4.
STEP 4 - Further information concerning the morphological properties and extent of the soils is presented in Part 3 of the report.
STEP 5 - Additional site specific information not contained in this report is available on request from the Manitoba Soil Resource Section, Manitoba Agriculture, Ellis Bldg., University of Manitoba. Also available on request are: * Guides for Evaluating Soil Suitability for Selected Uses * Detailed Soil Descriptions * Glossary of Terms
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE ...... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... ii
HOW TO USE THIS SOIL REPORT ...... iii
PARTI ...... 1
1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA ...... 1 1 .1 LOCATION AND EXTENT ...... 1 1 .2 LAND USE ...... 1 1 .3 RELIEF AND DRAINAGE ...... 1 1 .4 PHYSIOGRAPHY ...... 4 1 .5 SURFACE DEPOSITS ...... 4 1 .6 GEOLOGY ...... 6 1 .7 CLIMATE ...... 6 1 .8 VEGETATION ...... 10
11PART 2 ......
2 METHODOLOGY ...... 11 2 .1 MAPPING AND MAP SCALE ...... 11 2 .2 MAP UNITS ...... 11 2.3 SIMPLE AND COMPOUND MAP UNITS ...... 12 2 .4 PHASES ...... 12 2 .5 SAMPLING ...... 13
PART 3 ...... 14
3 DEVELOPMENT, CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SOILS ...... 14 3 .1 SOIL DEVELOPMENT ...... 14 3 .2 SOIL CLASSIFICATION ...... 15 3 .3 GENERALIZED SOIL MAP ...... 15 3 .4 DESCRIPTION OF SOIL SERIES ...... 16
PART 4 ...... 27
4 USE AND MANAGEMENT INTERPRETATIONS OF SOILS ...... 27 4.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 27 4.2 SOIL CAPABILITY FOR AGRICULTURE ...... 27 Dryland Agriculture ...... 27 Soil Capability subclasses ...... 27 4.3 IRRIGATION SUITABILITY ...... 38 4.3 .1 Irrigation Suitability Rating ...... 38 4.3 .2 Environmental Impact ...... 39 4 .4 SOIL PROPERTIES AFFECTING CROP MANAGEMENT ...... 39 4 .4 .1 Soil Texture ...... 39 4.4.2 Soil pH ...... 40
4.4.3 Organic Matter ...... 40 4.4.4 Soil Moisture Properties ...... 44 4.4.5 Soil Salinity ...... 44 4.4.6 Stoniness ...... 44 4.4.7 Water Erosion Status and Risk Assessment ...... 44 4.5 CAPABILITY AND MANAGEMENT ...... 46 4 .6 GENERALIZED SOIL GROUPS ...... 46 4 .7 SOIL SUITABILITY FOR SELECTED ENGINEERING USES ...... 47 Definition of Soil Suitability Classes ...... 47 Soil Suitability Subclasses ...... 47 Guides for Assessing Soil Suitability ...... 47 4 .8 SOIL SUITABILITY FOR SELECTED RECREATION USES ...... 48 4.8.1 Single Factor and Derived Interpretive Maps ...... 60
APPENDIX A ...... 74 GUIDES FOR EVALUATING IRRIGATION SUITABILITY...... 74
APPENDIX B ...... 79 CORRELATION OF SOIL SERIES IN THE R. M. OF LOUISE WITH SOIL ASSOCIATIONS AND ASSOCIATES OF THE SOUTH-CENTRAL REPORT NOA, 1943 AND SOUTH WESTERN REPORT NO.3, 1940, RECONNAISSANCE SURVEYS ...... 79
APPENDIX C ...... 85 DAILY SITE DESCRIPTION AND DETAILED SOIL DESCRIPTION DATA ...... 85 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 86
APPENDIX D ...... 87 LOUISE SOIL LEGEND ...... 88 MAP UNIT SYMBOLOGY ...... 90 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 . Climate Data from a Climatological Station at Pilot Mound ...... 8 Table 2A. Relationship of the Soil Series in the Gtz Subregion to Soil Drainage, Subgroup and Parent Material ...... 19 Table 213 . Relationship of the Soil Series in the Gt3 Subregion to Soil Drainage, Subgroup and Parent Material ...... 20 Table 3A. Parent Materials and Related Soils of the Study Area Part I (Gt2 + Ll3s2) . . . . 21 Table 313. Parent Materials and Related Soils of the Study Area Part II (Gt3) ...... 25 Table 4. Summary of Land Resource Characteristics ...... 28 Table 5. Definitions of the Agricultural Capability Classes ...... 30 Table 6. Agricultural Capability Subclass Limitations ...... 31 Table 7. Agricultural Interpretations and Areal Extent of Soils in the Study Area ...... 32 Table 8. Areal Extent in Hectares and Percent Coverage by Soil Series in the R.M . of Louise ...... 37 Table 9. Summary of Physical and Chemical Properties of Soils from the R.M. of Louise 41 Table 10. Summary of Physical, Chemical and Moisture Properties of Soils from the RM of Louise ...... 43 Table It . Louise R.M ., Engineering Description of Soils and their Estimated Properties Significant to Engineering Uses ...... 49 Table 12 . Suitability Ratings and Limitations of Soils in the Study Area for Selected Engineering Uses ...... 55 Table 13 . Codes utilized to identify limitations in evaluating soil suitability for selected Engineering and Recreational Uses (Table 12 and 14) ...... 60 Table 14. Suitability Ratings of Soils For Recreational Uses ...... 61 Table 15 . Description of Irrigation Suitability Classes ...... 75 Table 16. Soil Features Affecting Irrigation Suitability ...... 76 Table 17 . Landscape Features Affecting Irrigation Suitability ...... 77 Table 18 . Soil and Landscape Conditions Affecting Environmental Impact Rating ...... 77 Table 19. Correlation of Soil Series in the R . M. of Louise with Soil Associations and Associates of the South-Central (1943) and South-Western (1940) Reconnaissance Survey, Reports ...... 80
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure l . Location of Study Area Map ...... 2 Figure 2 . Relief and Drainage Map ...... 3 Figure 3 . Physiographic Regions of the Study Area ...... 5 Figure 4. Geology of the Study Area ...... 7 Figure 5 . Ecoclimatic Regions of the Study Area ...... 9 Figure 6. Generalized Soil Map ...... 17 Figure 7. Interpretive Map for Agricultural Capability ...... 66 Figure 8. Interpretive Map for Irrigation ...... 67 Figure 9. Derived Map for Drainage ...... 68 Figure 10. Derived Map for Salinity ...... 69 Figure 11 . Derived Map for Stoniness ...... 70 Figure 12. Derived Map for Topography ...... 71 Figure 13. Derived Map for Erosion ...... 72 Figure 14. Interpretive Map for Water Erosion Risk ...... 73
PART 1
1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
1 .1 LOCATION AND EXTENT suitable for pasture and forage .
The Rural Municipality of Louise is located in The northern limit of the R.M . of Louise is the south central part of the province on the United marked by the Pembina Valley . The beauty and States-Canada boundary. It is bordered by the R.M . contrast of the valley provide excellent opportunities of Pembina on the east, the R.M. of Roblin to the for sport, recreation and wildlife . Campgrounds and west and by the Pembina River channel on the north picnic sites are located at various points including side. The municipality is situated about 115 km Swan Lake to take advantage of the diverse southeast of the city of Brandon or 42 km west of landscape and aesthetics of the area. The Morden. The R.M . of Louise covers an area of municipality is adjacent to excellent ski facilities at 97,261 ha., as shown in Figure 1 . The larger La Riviere and prime hunting and fishing at Rock towns in the area include Pilot Mound, Crystal City Lake. Among the points of interest in the area are and Clearwater. Local custom ports occur on routes the isolated rock knobs at Pilot Mound and Star south of Crystal City and Snowflake. Highway #3 Mound (Nebogwawin Butte). These sites served as dissects the study from east to west and Highway landmarks for Indians, explorers and settlers. #34 runs north-south. 1 .3 RELIEF AND DRAINAGE The soil survey project is a semi-detailed resurvey at a scale of 1 :50,000 (1 mile = 1 .26 The principal relief and drainage features in the inches) of an area formerly covered in the R.M. of Louise are shown in Figure 2 . The reconnaissance (1 :126,720 scale) survey of the maximum relief, ranging from a low point of South-Central Map Sheet Area, Report No . 4, 1943 . 1307 ft. (398 m) at Swan Lake in the channel to the The R.M. of Louise encompasses an area including top of Star Mound (Nebogwawin Butte) at 1671 ft. Ranges 10 to 12 W and Townships 1 to 4 . (509 m), is about 111 meters . The mean altitude of the project area is in the 1500 ft. to 1550 ft. (457 m 1 .2 LAND USE to 473 m) range and is likely closer to 1550 ft. Generally the slope of the plain is toward the Agriculture is the dominant and most significant northwest and locally turns toward the Pembina land use throughout the R.M. of Louise. Other trench. Surficial topography over a major portion of notable users of the land resource are urban and the area is nearly level to very gently undulating. rural residential, recreation, wildlife, wooded areas However, an end moraine crossing township 4 has and aggregate quarries . moderate to strong slopes in a hummocky landscape. Lands along the major channel and adjacent ravines The economic activity of the local towns is or gullies are characterized by moderate to steep primarily based on the agricultural service slopes. requirements of the surrounding area. Agriculture consists mainly of grain production, beef cattle, hog The natural drainage of the R.M . of Louise is raising, dairy and forages or some combination facilitated entirely by the Pembina River and its thereof. Wheat, barley and oats are the major cereal contributory rivers, creeks and drains. In the central crops as well as large acreages of flax and canola. and western parts of the study the drainage is The cattle operations often take advantage of the northwest by way of Cypress Creek, Crystal Creek rough slopes and low lying wet areas adjacent to and Pilot Creek. The northeast portion is drained by rivers, creeks and drains for grazing land. The McCoys Creek, Hammonds Creek and the Grand droughty sand and gravel areas are also more Forks Ravine. Stony Creek and Snowflake Creek
Lake
Wlnnlpeg
SHELL RIVER I KILLS- : OUR .
I ORANVIEW GILBEPT DAUPHIN PLAINS I
I - _ ELL SILVER ; CREEK ' gOSSBUPN LGO PARI
'i .i GLENELI L CLAN IRTLE ; SHOAL. ISTRATH- I . L KE AhRR1501~WIlLIAM' ' CLLIq _ ROSE. : _~ DALE La1$ .
ARCHE WOTA', AMIOTA~ BLM_ 'SASWLI. . ' IH SHARD ;CNEwAN', OB - AH WESTBOURN I UNOFOR . i
DAL, I ELNN O .WORTH! j IORTH CYPRESS :NORTH NORFOLIT
Figure 1 . Location of the Rural Municipality ofLouise Rural Municipality of Louise
u &1f ~J?
_-_~ _ c5 %sn- _ -_y',-_11 R-10
Figure 2. Relief and Drainage
drain the southeast corner of the area east-northeast steep sided, approximately 60 meters deep and about towards the Pembina River. There are numerous 1 .6 kilometers wide. At the time the continental ice small lakes and sloughs scattered throughout the sheet was melting back, drainage waters from municipality including the Goudney reservoir west of Western Canada flowed down the channel in a Pilot Mound and the Crystal City reservoir. mighty river that emptied into Lake Agassiz.
Generally surface drainage over the project area 1 .5 SURFACE DEPOSITS varies from good to fair. Poorer drainage exists in a number of depressional areas where natural Surface deposits vary in form and properties sloughs, potholes, intermittent lakes and ponding within each physiographic unit depending largely on occur. A summary of the soil drainage for the map the characteristics of the bedrock from which they area indicates 60% well drained, 31% imperfectly were derived and the mode of transport and drained and 9% poorly drained soils. Soil drainage deposition . In the study area, glaciation, glacial reflects a combination of surface runoff as well as meltwaters and subsequent laking have resulted in internal flow through. the deposition of variable depths of glacial till, fluvial outwash deposits and lacustrine or water 1.4 PHYSIOGRAPHY sorted sediments . Drift or surface deposit thickness over shale bedrock in the study ranges from 0.5 m The municipality of Louise is situated entirely to 23 m and averages about 4.5 metres . An within the Pembina River Plain section of the exception appears to be a buried valley which Saskatchewan Plain physiographic division. The extends along a line from Wood Bay to the Crystal Manitou Plain subsection accounts for a major City customs and has approximately 61 m of portion of the study (Figure 3). The extreme overburden . A few isolated hills or rounded mounds southwest corner of the municipality falls into the of shale protrude as local features above the general Boissevain Plain. The subsection boundary in the level of the landscape. southwest coincides closely with Cypress Creek. The majority of the R.M . of Louise is within The Manitou Plain is typified by a level to very the Manitou Plain which includes morainal deposits, gently undulating landscape characterized by thick morainal veneers over shale bedrock and lacustrine morainal deposits, morainal veneers on shale or water modified sediments . More specifically, a bedrock and lacustrine or water modified sediments . veneer (< 1 m) of weakly to moderately calcareous Most of the till plain has a topography which lacustrine deposits over till is greatest in extent conforms to the contour of the bedrock beneath. A covering 51 % of total area. A significant area number of glacially streamlined features, including (12%) of deep (> 1 m), loamy lacustrine sediments drumlinoids, are scattered throughout the area . occurs west of Pilot Mound extending to south and They are concentrated around Pilot Mound and trend west of Crystal City . Pockets of none to weakly in a northwest-southeast direction. Another notable calcareous, loam to clay loam, shale (Manitou) till feature in the study area is the presence of (13%) and moderately to very strongly calcareous, segmented eskers . These gravelly ridges are often loam to clay loam, higher lime (Darlingford) till southeast trending, short segments of larger (6.4%) are distributed throughout the area. glaciofluvial features which are scattered over the Manitou Plain. An interesting feature of the study area is the presence and form of fluvial sand and gravel The extreme southwest corner of the study is deposits. Small sub-areas of outwash gravel are within the Boissevain Plain subsection. This is an located throughout the area including one in sections undulating to gently rolling moraine of mixed till 5, 8 and 9 of Township 3 to Range 12 W. Most of with local areas of water modified till and sandy to the gravels have a shaly component which limits gravelly glaciofluvial outwash deposits. their potential use. Glaciofluvial deposits in the form of eskers are scattered over the area. Most of The physiography of the municipality is the segmented eskers are southeast trending with accentuated by the Pembina channel at its northern segments ranging from 0 .8 km to 4 .8 kin. in length edge. This section of the trench is flat bottomed,
SWAN LAKE SOMERSET E3. / TP 5
SWAN L.. . . MARIAPOLI
1
STUDY liLA RIVIERE TP. 3 . PILOT ...... I MOUND I
R./3 R. //
DIVISION SECTION SUBSECTION E Saskatchewan Plain E 2 Tiger Hills Upland
E 3 Pembina Hills Upland . I Pembina Hills
E7 Pembina River Plain , I Boissevali7 Plain .2 Manitou Plain
Figure 3 . Physiographic Regions of the Study Area 5
and 3 to 8 metres in height. Several short ridges Climatic data generated by a local climate often form longer esker systems such as those at station at Pilot Mound is central to, and Crystal City and Clearwater which are 7.5 km and representative of the study area. The climatological 3 .7 km long respectively . data for the station is presented in Table 1 . The mean annual temperature at Pilot Mound is 1 .9°C. The extreme southwest corner of the study is Mean annual precipitation recorded is 517 mm with comprised of glacial till which is sometimes 388 mm occurring as rainfall. June is the wettest modified and generally clay loam in texture. This month with 79 mm. Spring and fall precipitation is till plain is in a different climatic and physiographic often uniformly distributed throughout the area. area which is distinguished by slightly drier and However, in summer when local showers and warmer conditions. thunderstorms are frequent, rainfall distribution can be extremely variable from one area to another. At the northern boundary of the study is the Pembina River channel . The valley walls are The relationships that exist among climate, characterized by shale exposures at the lower slopes vegetation and soil in the study area are reflected in and glacial till at the upper levels. The bottom of the ecoclimatic map shown in Figure 5 the channel is covered by immature soils on Ecoclimatic Regions cover a continuous geographic relatively recent, stratified, loamy alluvial deposits . area and are characterized by distinctive ecological responses to microclimate as expressed by 1 .6 GEOLOGY vegetation, soil, fauna and aquatic systems . Soil types developed on similar parent material and under The bedrock geology for the R.M. of Louise is similar drainage conditions but in different shown in Figure 4 . The entire study is underlain ecoclimatic regions are identified by different series by Cretaceous rock of the Riding Mountain or association names to indicate that many of the formation. Hard grey siliceous shales of the Odanah associated ecologic conditions are dissimilar. member underlie the surface deposits of the area . Regions key on soil differences at the Great Group They correlate with the Pierre shale in North and Order level, while subregions recognize Dakota . The approximate thickness of the Odanah differences described at the Soil Series level. member in the area is about 95 m. The shale occurs both as thin fissile beds and as thick massive beds The R.M . of Louise is characterized by that are brittle and break with a subconchoidal conditions typical of the Grassland Transition (Gt) fracture . Odanah shale is notably a major ecoclimatic region . A major part of the study area component of the glacial drift, fluvial deposits, is covered by the Gtz subregion. The cool, including eskers and is the core of numerous subhumid climate which distinguishes this region drumlinoids and other ridges over the Manitoba provides sufficient moisture and length of growing Plain . season for persistence of dominantly native grassland vegetation and Chernozemic Black soils . The Gtz 1 .7 CLIMATE subregion has a mean annual temperature of 1 .6°C, an average frost free period of 111 days and a mean Relative to worldwide climatic conditions, the annual precipitation of 488 mm . The extreme study area occupies a position in the interior of southwest corner of the study falls into the Gt, North America beyond the range of the moderating subregion. This slightly warmer and drier subregion affects of oceans . Its location in mid northern has a mean annual temperature of 2.6°C, an average latitudes offers a continental climate with short, cool frost free period of 114 days and a mean annual summers and long cold winters. The climate of the precipitation of 478 mm. area is influenced mainly by three types of air masses ; cold dry air from the continental polar Soil climate consists of soil temperatures and region, cool and moist air from the Pacific and soil moisture, both of which are related to aerial occasionally warm and moist air from the Gulf of climate and consequently ecoclimatic regions . It has Mexico. Frequent changes in these air masses a direct influence on most biological, chemical and contribute to extreme variability of weather patterns physical processes in the soil. In the study area, soil in each season. climate conditions are described as dominantly
Glenboro TP. 7
i KR4
_ ,__ Baldur TP 5
TP3
. . . ':KRMo...... Kv Cartwnht . . . 1
;Snow ake TP. I
R.14 R. 12 R. /0 R.8
MESOZOIC Upper Cretaceous Riding Mountain Formation . Millwood Member (m) -soft greenish bentonitic shale. KRM m Odanah Member (o) -hard grey siliceous shale.
Vermilion River Formation : Morden Member - black carbonaceous shale. Boyne Member- KvR grey calcareous speckled shale and carbonaceous shale. Pembina Member -thinly interbedded corbonaceous shale , bentonite , and bentonitic shale .
KF Favel Formation : calcareous speckled shale, minor limestone , bentonite and ' ~oil shale"
Upper and Lower Cretaceous
Ashville Formation : dark grey carbonaceous shale , in part bituminous ; minor sand , silt and bentonite. Lower Cretaceous
Swan Formation : sandstone , in places glauconitic ; kaolinitic shale , minor lignite . KSR Also includes channel and/or karst fill within Paleozoic outcrop belt.
Figure 4. Geology of the Study Area
Table 1. Climate Data from a Climatological Station at Pilot Mound
Pilot nlound
Mean Annual Temperature 1 .9°C Frost Free Period (Days 0°C) 119 days Last Frost (Spring) May 20 First Frost (Fall) Sept 17 Degree Days (above 5°C) 1670 Total Precipitation 517 mm Mean Annual Rainfall 388 mm Mean Annual Snowfall 130 cm Corn Heat Units (2300 to 2400)
HOL LAND G GLENBORC t2 Gt2 Gt4
TP 6 S 2
*SOMERSET BALDUR
LAKE TP.4 ST DY A' EA MANl OU ~s1N .' PILOT:::.'.* ~~z ROCK' , F
TP. 2
Soil Climate Ecoclimatic Subregion 2 1 Dominant Soils I Temperature Moisture I Vegetation Region l Class Subclass Zone Grassland Gt2,3,4 Chernozemic Boreal, cool to Subhumid Grassland and Transition Black,Gleysols moderately cool Aspen Park- land
Low Boreal LBs 2 Chernozemic Cryoboreal, mod- Subhumid Grassland- Subhumid Dark Gray erately cold Forest Tran- Brunisolic sition Organic
Ecoclimatic Regions of Manitoba . Canada-Manitoba Soil Survey, 1985 . Unpublished Data, Revised 1985 .
Subregions Reflect Climatic Influence Which is Expressed in Local Soil and Vegetation Relations and Which Affect Land Use , Management and Potential Biomass Production.
Figure S . Ecoclimatic Regions of the Study Area
Boreal, cool to moderately cool subhumid. These soils are characterized by a mean annual soil temperature of 5 to 8°C and a mean summer soil temperature of 12 to 15°C at the 50 cm depth. Data from the closest soil temperature site at Manitou shows a MAST of 5.9°C and a MSST of 13.2°C at 50 cm. Generally, soils gain heat during the period from May to August and lose heat from September to March.
1 .8 VEGETATION
The study area occurs at the southeastern edge of the Aspen - Oak Section of the Boreal Forest Region of Canada (Rowe 1972). At this point the deciduous element of the boreal forest extends into a transition zone beyond the conifers forming a continuous closed forest or groveland where elements of the prairie are intermixed.
Most of the native vegetation in the study area has been modified or replaced by agricultural use. Where it occurs, the native vegetation is dominantly tall prairie grasses and herbs with scattered groves of aspen. Meadow grasses and sedges occur in the wetter positions . Islands of oak trees are scattered throughout the study, marking the mounds or well drained areas where the soils are often shallow over shale. Generally, stands of mixed deciduous cover are mainly aspen with inclusions of oak, maple and willow in low lying areas . Some of the more common shrubs are hazel, chokecherry, saskatoon, pincherry, rose and dogwood .
The northern limit of the municipality is marked by the wooded banks of the Pembina Channel which are covered with oak and poplar. The lower slopes and floor of the valley are protected with woods of elm, maple, ash, birch and willow. The maintenance of a good vegetative cover on the slopes is essential for erosion control, conservation of water and wildlife, as well as scenic and recreational value. PART 2
2 METHODOLOGY
2 .1 MAPPING AND MAP SCALE Soil maps show the distribution of kinds of soils and, as such, serve as a link so that the knowledge Semi-detailed (1 :50,000 scale) soil mapping was gained in one locality about the usefulness or completed throughout the R. M. of Louise . This behaviour of a kind of soil can be extended to other map scale requires that inspections be made to at bodies of the same soil. least one meter depth along road allowances and trails around the square mile at .4 km intervals A map unit comprises all delineations that resulting in an inspection density of approximately contain exactly the same symbol. This includes all one observation/30 ha. Occasionally additional soil the characters denoting soils, nonsoils, phases and inspection traverses or checks were made where soil deciles . While they represent real portions of the complexity necessitated additional field observation. landscapes, most map units are concepts because Certain minor soils or phases may not be their total range of properties is made up of the encountered during field investigations and thus aggregate of all their delineations and no one become part of the unnamed inclusions of the map. delineation will contain the full range of properties. Generally, the proportion of unidentified inclusions The proportions of each of the component soils and increases as inspection density decreases or as nonsoils and undescribed inclusions may vary within natural soil variability increases . reasonable limits from one delineation to another.
Semi-detailed soil maps provide soil information A map unit is named from its principal which can be used for many purposes including local component soils or nonsoils . It is described in terms regional planning (Mapping Systems Working of the properties of these components, their relative Group, 1981). Semi-detailed mapping was utilized proportions and other external land attributes . In in this area because of current landuse patterns and this project, units are described in terms of named because of predicted future landuse. soil series and phases of soil series. The soil series is defined as a naturally occurring soil body such that any profile within that body has a similar 2 .2 MAP UNITS number and arrangement of horizons whose colour, texture, structure, consistence, reaction and A map unit represents mappable portions of the composition are within a narrowly defined range. If soil landscape that together have characteristics and a soil has properties which vary slightly from the properties varying within more or less narrow limits prescribed range of the series, a soil series variant is that are determined by the intensity of the survey. established .
A map unit contains predominantly one or more Map units will always contain small proportions than one soil or nonsoil individual plus a certain of inclusions. These inclusions may be soil or non- proportion (varying within prescribed limits) of soil mapping individuals that are named and have unnamed and undescribed inclusions . They are their own map units elsewhere in the survey, or they delineated on the basis of the types and relative may be rare or insignificant soils or nonsoils that are proportions of their soils or nonsoils, as well as on not recognized or named at all in the survey . They the basis of external criteria such as slope, stoniness may, however, be mentioned in the description of or erosion . soil types in the report .
2.3 SIMPLE AND COMPOUND MAP UNITS 2 .4 PHASES
There are two major types of map units: simple It is frequently desirable to indicate by map unit and compound . The difference between them is symbol, a condition or quality of soil property or defined in terms of the proportion and contrast of landscape feature that deviates significantly from the their components. normal definition of map units. These indicated vari- ations or hp aces of soil properties and landscape A Simple Map Unit contains predominantly one features, varying from delineation to delineation, soil or nonsoil. The proportion of its components significantly affect soil behaviour and land vary according to their areal extent and contrasting management or use . characteristics as they may affect soil management or use. Its components vary as follows: the predominant It is not always easy to maintain a clear dis- component comprises at least 65 percent with up to tinction between a soil phase and a land phase. Soil 35 percent of nonlimiting, similar components properties that are frequently used as phase criteria (components that are alike in most properties and include texture, depth, surface peat, salinity and behaviour), or up to 25 percent of nonlimiting physical disruption . Properties of land that are used dissimilar components (components that do not affect include slope, wind and water erosion, stoniness, management of the map unit but have a significant rockiness and altered drainage. number of properties that vary from the predominant component), or up to 15 percent of limiting, dissimi- In this study the effect of four properties and lar components (components which have many con- land features are shown as a character in the trasting properties and usually affect management denominator of the map unit symbol and described differently) . outside the main soil map legend. The four properties and features are erosion, slope class, A Compound Map Unit contains predominantly degree of stoniness and salinity. The degree or two soils or nonsoils (or a combination of both) . The magnitude of each is designated in the following proportions of the two major components may vary manner; from one considerably exceeding the other to both being approximately equal. Complementary to the definition of a single map unit, the proportions of its Erosion components vary according to their areal extent and contrasting characteristics as they may affect soil x - noneroded or minimal management or use . Its major components vary as 1 - weakly eroded (25-75 % of A horizon) follows: if other components are similar and 2 - moderately eroded (> 75 % of A & part of B) nonlimiting no single component represents more 3 - severely eroded (most of A & B removed) than 65 percent; or if other components are dissimilar 0 - overblown and nonlimiting no single component represents 75 percent or more; or if other components are dissimi- Slope Class lar and limiting no single component represents 85 percent or more. x - 0 to .5% level b - .5 to 2 % nearly level A soil or nonsoil may occur in more than one c - 2 to 5 % very gently sloping compound unit. The complex nature of soil d - 5 to 9 % gently sloping landscapes requires that the surveyor be allowed the e - 9 to 15 % moderately sloping freedom to describe their combinations as they occur. f - 15 to 30% strongly sloping For the purpose of describing compound map units, g - 30 to 45 % very strongly sloping components are considered dominant if they occupy h - 45 to 70% extremely sloping over 40 percent of the unit, significant from 15-40 percent and minor if they occupy less than 15 percent. Minor components are described only if they are highly contrasting.
12
Stoniness Surfaced Covered 2.5 SAMPLING
x - nonstony < .01 % During the course of field investigations and 1 - slightly stony .01- .1% mapping, soil samples were taken at selected 2 - moderately stony .1 -3% locations for soil characterization, salinity and 3 - very stony 3 - 15 irrigation suitability studies . Nine profiles were 4 - exceedingly stony 15 -50 % described in detail and sampled for soil 5 - excessively stony > 50 characterization analysis (AppendixÇ). In areas where salinity was suspected to be sufficient to inhibit agricultural potential, soils were sampled at 10 to 25 cm and at 50 to 60 cm for electrical conductance x - nonsaline (0-4 mS/cm) measurements and soluble salt analysis. Selected s - slightly saline (4-8 mS/cm) surface and subsurface samples were routinely taken t - moderately saline (8-15 mS/cm) for additional analyses including texture, ph, organic u - strongly saline (> 15 mS/cm) matter, calcium carbonate, etc.
The convention employed to indicate these features in the map symbol is as follows:
If none of the above properties are observed to be significant, the map symbol representing the normal or unaffected soil series is used alone without modifiers .
If one or more phase features are recognized, the appropriate letter or number is placed below the soil series symbol in one of four designated locations in the map unit symbol . The designated order is ero- sion, slope class, stoniness and salinity. If a particular feature is not observed to be significant, an x is used in its appropriate designated location in the map symbol.
For example, the compound map unit coded:
Soil Series Percent of map unit
KUDS - ULHS xclx
erosion stoniness salinity topography
Is interpreted to mean that 50 percent of the mapping unit consists of Knudson (KUDS) series having no erosion (x), very gently sloping (c) topography, slight (1) stonniness, no salinity (x) : and 50 percent Ullrich (ULH) series having no erosion (x), very gently sloping (c) topography, slightly stony (1) surface conditions and no (x) salinity.
1 3 PART 3
3 DEVELOPMENT, CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SOILS
3 .1 SOIL DEVELOPMENT also very much influenced by soil drainage and groundwater hydrology. Soils developed on sandy The principal factors affecting soil formation to loamy materials are more permeable to water and are : the physical and mineralogical composition of permit greater leaching of soluble and colloidal the parent material; the climate under which the soil components as compared to clayey soils . Soil material has accumulated and existed since profiles developed on moderately calcareous sedi- accumulation; the plant and animal life on and in the ments are generally deeper than soils developed on soil; relief and drainage; the length of time the strongly calcareous sediments . Restrictions on forces of soil formation have acted on the soil normal soil development often result from periods of material; and influence resulting from the work of saturation in areas affected by surface ponding, man. The characteristics of a soil at any given place lateral inflow, seepage -or near surface groundwater. are determined by the interaction of these soil Under such conditions, leaching of soil material is forming factors . minimal and in some cases, the translocation of soluble materials is towards the surface . Poor soil Soil characteristics are observed in the soil drainage associated with depressional areas alters the profile. A profile is the sequence of natural layers soil environment from an oxidative state to a or horizons observed in vertical cross-section reductive state depleted of oxygen. Such soils with extending from the surface down into the relatively restricted drainage are characterized by dull (gleyed) unweathered and unaltered soil parent material . The soil colours, the presence of reddish yellow or main or master horizons have been designated by the brown mottles of iron and manganese, the presence letters A, B and C for mineral horizons. Horizon of lime carbonate and/or soluble salts near the characteristics and combinations of these horizons surface and a high water table. Very poorly drained form the basis for soil classification. The A and B depressional sites are saturated throughout the year horizons are a reflection of the active soil forming and soils are often characterized by accumulation of factors, climate and plant and animal life, chiefly shallow organic materials . plants operating on the parent material. Together the A and B horizons make up the solum. In gen- Soil development on the various parent materials eral, A horizons or surface layers are subjected to in the R. M. of Louise study is influenced by the the greatest amount of weathering and leaching regional climate, soil drainage, topography and and/or organic matter accumulation . The B groundwater hydrology . The soils of the area occur horizons, lying immediately below the A horizon dominantly in the Grassland Transition Ecoclimatic contain most of the material leached from the A Region (Gtz) and have developed under cool horizons; ie. clay, organic matter, iron and alu- subhumid climatic conditions which generally minum. provide sufficient moisture and length of growing season for persistence ofdominantly native grassland In some soils B horizons consist mainly of vegetation . This vegetation and climate have material that has been altered only slightly by soil resulted in a dominance of Chernozemic Black soils . forming processes, but has not been translocated . Dark Gray profiles with weakly leached surface The C horizons represent the relatively unaltered horizons (Ahe) and an accumulation zone (Btj or Bt parent material from which the solum has developed. horizon) may occur on some well drained sites under a more continuous tree cover, particularly areas Within a particular climatic zone, soils differ adjacent to ravines or valley walls . The imperfectly due to texture and mineralogical composition of the drained soils are characterized by Gleyed Black and parent material. The soil profile that develops is Gleyed Rego Black profiles with dark colored Ah
1 4 horizons . Humic Gleysol soils found in association levels of family and series affect management . The with poorly drained areas also have dark colored Ah five levels of generalization are defined as follows : horizons which grade into a dull colored, mottled parent material. Profile development of the Order - Soil orders are defined on the basis of imperfectly and poorly drained soils has been soil properties that reflect the soil environment and restricted by soil moisture regime and proximity of the kind and degree of dominant soil forming groundwater to the soil surface. process . An example is Chernozem in which soils with dark coloured surface horizons develop under The Boissevain Plain subsection of the study subhumid climate and dominantly grassland corresponds very closely with the Grassland environments . Transition (Gt3) Ecoclimatic Subregion boundary. This undulating to gently rolling till plain occurs as Great Group - Each order is subdivided into an open grassland area in the southwest corner of the great groups based on differences in strength of study. Climatic conditions are slightly less favorable dominant processes or a major contribution of a than the (Gt2) subregion to the east. Indications are process in addition to a dominant one . Such that temperatures are warmer and drier conditions processes result in particular kinds, arrangement and prevail. The vegetation and climate have resulted in degree of expressions of pedogenic horizons. An the development of dominantly Chernozemic Black example of a Luvic Gleysol in which the dominant soils. However, it is interesting to note that the soils process is considered to be gleying but clay of this subregion were described as a dark brown accumulation in the B horizon is also a major steppe - blackearth transition in the "South Central process. Reconnaissance Soil Survey 1943" . This western portion is more likely to experience conditions of Subgroup - Subgroups are subdivisions of great periodic drought. groups and are defined on the basis of kind and arrangement of horizons that indicate: the central Soil development in recent alluvial deposits on concept of the great group, eg. Orthic; intergrades floodplains along creeks and rivers has been toward soils in other orders, eg. Gleyed; or special influenced by periodic flooding and accretion of features such as lime carbonate in B horizons. sediments on the soil surface. The resulting immature soils are dominantly Cumulic Regosols Family - Families are established within a with little or no horizon development. The soils on subgroup based on similarity of physical and the upper levees and terraces along the Pembina chemical properties that affect management. Among River Channel are largely Regosolic, however they the properties considered important for recognizing may exhibit weak or varying degrees of profile families are particle size distribution, mineralogy, development. soil climate, soil reaction and thickness of solum.
Series - The series consists of soils that formed 3 .2 SOIL CLASSIFICATION in a particular kind of material and have horizons whose color, texture, structure, consistence, Soils in the study area were classified according thickness, reaction and chemical composition are to the System of Soil Classification for Canada. similar in differentiating characteristics and in This system is hierarchical employing 5 levels of arrangement in the soil profile. generalization or categories of classification. Beginning with the most generalized, these categories are the order, great group, subgroup, 3 .3 GENERALIZED SOIL MAP family and series . The classification is based on measurable soil properties that can be observed in A generalized soil map and associated legend the field, or can be inferred from other properties are included in Figure 6 showing map units for observable in the field. The properties selected as broad land use planning in the R. M. of Louise. criteria for the higher categories are the result of soil Each map unit is a unique, natural landscape that has genesis or of factors that affect soil genesis . a distinct pattern of soils, relief and drainage Properties utilized to differentiate soils at the lower features . A group typically consists of one or more
15 soils of major extent and some soils of minor extent . of the soil and the material in which it formed, The map units are named according to the dominant including extent of the soil, genetic profile type, and significant soil series identified in the area on texture, parent material type, topography and the detailed soil map. Soil phases, minor drainage for each series . A brief description of the components of compound map units and soil features which distinguish the named soil from inclusions are not recognized on the generalized soil similar soils is included. The generalized soil map . descriptions are based on summaries and averages of soil data systematically documented and recorded The generalized soil map provides an overview during the course of the field survey . of soil distribution and landscapes in the R. M. of Louise. It provides a basis for comparing the Information on the suitability and management potential of large areas for general kinds of land use. of the soils for various agricultural and This information is useful for broad scale planning nonagricultural uses is presented in Part 4 of this such as regional agricultural planning, regional report. engineering, recreational planning, conservation and municipal development plans. Similarly, areas of soils with properties that are distinctly unfavorable for certain land uses can be located .
The generalized soil map, because of its small scale does not show the kind of soil at a specific site. Therefore, it is not suitable for planning the management of a farm or for selecting a site for a road, building or other kind of infrastructure . The kind of soils in any one map unit ordinarily differ from place to place in slope, depth, stoniness, drainage or other characteristics that affect their management . A general discussion of the major soil groups is included in Part 4 under generalized soil groups .
3.4 DESCRIPTION OF SOIL SERIES
Soil parent material and soil moisture regime characteristics have a major influence on soil profile type and so become the major features used in classifying and mapping soils. A quick, convenient, abbreviated key form summary of these relationships and the soil series recognized within major areas of similar physiographic and climatic conditions is presented in Tables 2A and 2B . The relationship of parent material and drainage to soil profile type (genetic subgroup) and soil series in the study area is summarized in Tables 3A and 3B .
Generalized descriptions for each soil series mapped in the survey area are not included in the report due to the large volume of information, however, they may be obtained from the Soil Resource Section, Ellis Bldg. University of Manitoba. The descriptions include characteristics
16
Map Unit R.M. of Louise Legend Scale (1zm)
Ry 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 D m K W4 IMT Do B 3 log R F Ca Mo E« unclassified water
W3
M 2
IV
ae 12W Rge i IW Rge 11 OW
Figure 6 . Generalized Soil Map
1 7 GENERALIZED SOIL GROUPS LEGEND (Gt2 Subregion) Map Unit DARLINGFORD-DEZWOOD GROUP: Deep, moderately to very strongly calcareous, D loam to clay loam glacial till of shale, limestone and granitic origin. (6.4% of area) Associated soils - DGF, HEB, DZW, FRS, HOS MANITOU-FIFERE GROUP: None to weakly calcareous, loam to clay loam till deposits derived from cretaceous shales. Shale bedrock may occur within 1 to 1 .5 meters. (13% ofarea) Associated soils - MXS, FFR KNUDSON-ALTAMONT GROUP: A veneer offine loamy (L-CL), weakly to moderately calcareous lacustrine sediments over moderately to very strongly calcareous glacial till of mixed shale, limestone and granitic origin. (51 % of area) Associated soils - KUD, LRT, ATN, ULH, JYL, ZIM, GRR, WTI DORSET GROUP: Deep, moderately to strongly calcareous, stratified, sandy to sandy skeletal fluvial outwash deposits. (1 .2% ofarea) Associated soils - DOT, MRH CROYON-JAYMAR GROUP: Athin mantle of moderately to strongly calcareous, loam to clay loam lacustrine sediments overlying moderately to strongly calcareous fluvial outwash deposits and lacustrine sediments over outwash over till . (1 .5% of area) Associated soils - CYN, CXT, CAV, JAY, MXT, MDN RAMADA-WELLWOOD GROUP: Deep, moderately to very strongly calcareous, fine loamy (CL, SiCL) and fine loamy over sandy (FS, LFS) lacustrine sediments. (12% ofarea) Associated soils -RAM, FIR, CXV, PDA,TDP, WWD, SXP FAIRLAND-PROSSER-GLENBORO GROUP: Deep, moderately to very strongly calcareous, loamy (L, SiL, VFSL, FSL, VFS, LVFS) and loamy over sandy (FS, LFS), lacustrine sediments. (2.3% of area) Associated soils - FND, DRN, TOC, TGR, VDS, PSE, PLE, GBO, GRO STOCKTON GROUP: Deep, weakly to moderately calcareous, sandy (FS, LFS ) S lacustrine sediments. (.8% ofarea) Associated soils - SCK, HMO, SEE MOWBRAY GROUP: Moderately to strongly calcareous, stratified, loamy (L, SiL, SiCL) recent alluvial deposits. (3% ofarea) Associated soils - MOW, LEI, BKR (GO Subregion) RYERSON-TWO CREEKS GROUP: Deep, strongly calcareous, loamy (L, CL, SiCL), glacial till and thin lacustrine sediments overlying till . (2.8% of area) Associated soils - RYS, CSE, SYE, TWC, MOT, VLT, GNO BEDE-DROMORE GROUP: Deep, strongly calcareous, stratified, sandy skeletal B (MS,Gr) outwash deposits and loamy lacustrine sediments over fluvial outwash . (08% of area) . Associated soils - BED, DOM CAMERON-LYLETON GROUP: Deep, moderately to strongly calcareous, loamy (L, SIL, VFSL, FSL, VFS, LVFS) lacustrme sediments. (03% of area) Associated soils - CMR, LYT (Miscellaneous) ERODED SLOPE COMPLEX: A complex of undifferentiated materials on the steep slopes ofvalley walls, river channels and ravines. (5% ofarea) Associated soils - ERX
URBAN LAND: (.2% of area)
Water Bodies: (23% ofarea)
1 8
Table 2A. Relationship of the Soil Series in the Gt2 Subregion to Soil Drainage, Subgroup and Parent Material
Parent Materials
Till Lacustrine Lacustrine Fluvial : Lacustrine Lacustrine Allu Soil F.co Taxonomic over Till over Fluvial over vrum ', . Drainage Sub- Subgroup over Till Fluvial Un- Region differen- . Loamy (L, Loamy (L, Fine Loamy Loamy (L, Sandy . Loamy (L, Fine Loamy Loamy (L, , Coarse Fine Loamy: : ` Loamy. Sandy (FS, Loamy . : tiated CL, SiCL) CL) Non- (CL, SiCL) CL, SiCL) Skeletal . CL, SiCL) (CL, SiCL) S"tL, VFSL) Loamy (FSL, (CL, SiCL, : : (L,SrL, . LFS > (L, CL, :, over Sandy :VFSL) over . . ; LS) SiCL, Mixed Cal. Weakly. Cal . over Till over Sandy (S & Gr.)': over VFS, LVFS) ' Till Shalq Till Skeletal over 5'8r Gr . (FS, LFS>' . Sandyy (FS, SCL Loamy Till LS) LFS, ' Stratified
Well to Gq Cumulic Regosol Mowbray Moderately Well Otthic Black Darlingford Manitou(t.DCs) Knudson Jaymar(JAY) Dorset(DoT) Croyon(cYN) Râmada(RAM) Fairland(FND) Prosser(PSE) Wellwood Glenboro Stockton (DGF) (KUD) (WWD) (GBO) (SCK) Calcareous Black Marringhurst (MRH)
Eluviated Black Larrett(LRT)
Rego Black Hebbot(HEB) Durnan(DRN) Firdale(FBR) LBs Orthic Dark Gray Dezwood Fifere(FFR) Altamont Eroded 2 (DZW) (ATN) Imperfect Gt2 Gleyed Cumulic Levinei.El) Slopes Regosol Complex Gleyed Black LJllrich(ULH) Charman Torcan(roc) (CXV) (ERx) Gleyed Rego Black Ferris(FRs) Joyale(]YL) Melland(t.= Capell(CxT) Prodan(PDA) Taggart(TGR) Pleasant(PLE) Grover(oRo) Hummersto (HMO) LBs2 Gleyed Dark Gray Gleyed Solonetzic Zinmanaim) Dark Gray
Poor Gt Rego Humic Gleysol Guerra(GRR) Marsden Carvey(cAv) TadpolecrDP) Vordas(VDS) Sutton(sxp) Sewell(sEE) Basker(BKR) 2 (MDN) LBs2 Rego Humic Gleysol Horose(Hos) Humic Luvic Gleysol Watrine(wTq
Table 2B . Relationship of the Soil Series in the Gt3 Subregion to Soil Drainage, Subgroup and Parent Material
PARENT MATERIALS ' LACUSTRINE LACUSTRINE SOIL ECO TAXONOMIC TILL FLUVIAL LACUSTRINE SUBREGION SUBGROUP over over DRAINAGE FLUVIAL TILL
Fine Loamy . Sandy Skeletal Loamy (L,CL) Loamy (L,CL) Loamy Coarse Loamy (L,CL,SiCL) (S and Gr) over Sandy over Till (L,SiL,VFSL) (FSL,VFS, Strongly Cal . Skeletal (S&Gr) LV FS) Till
Well to Gt, Orthic Black Ryerson (RYS) Bede (BED) Dromore Cameron Lyleton (LYT) Moderately (DOM) (CMR) Well Imperfect Gt, Gleyed Black Two Creeks (TWC) Gleyed Rego Coatstone (CSE) Montgomery Black (MOT)
Gleyed Glenlorne Eluviated (GNO) Black Poor Gt, Orthic Humic Stoney Creek Villette (VLT) Gleysol (SYE)
Table 3A. Parent Materials and Related Soils of the Study Area Part I (Gt2 + LBs2)
Ecoclimatic Région A. GLACIAL TILL l . Soils developed on deep (> 100 cm) moderately to very strongly calcareous, fine loamy (loam to clay loam) glacial till of shale, limestone and granitic origin. a) Well drained * Darlingford Series (Orthic Black) DGF Gt2 * Hebbot Series (Rego Black) HEB Gt2 * Dezwood Series (Orthic Dark Gray) DZW LBs2 b) Imperfectly drained * Ferris Series (Gleyed Rego Black, carbonated) FRS Gt2 c) Poorly drained * Horose Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) HOS LBs2 2 . Soils developed on non to weakly calcareous, loamy, till deposits derived dominantly from cretaceous shales, these deposits may be underlain by weathered shale or shale bedrock within 1 to 1 .5 m. a) Well drained * Manitou Series (Orthic Black) MXS Gt2 * Fifere Series (Orthic Dark Gray) FFR LBs2
B. LACUSTRINE OVER TILL 1 . Soils developed on a thin veneer (< 1 m) of dominantly fine loamy, weakly to moderately calcareous lacustrine sediments overlying moderately to very strongly calcareous glacial till of shale, limestone and granitic origin. a) Well drained * Knudson Series (Orthic Black) KUD Gt2 * Larrett Series (Eluviated Black) LRT Gt2 * Altamont Series (Orthic Dark Gray) ATN LBs2 b) Imperfectly drained * Joyale Series (Gleyed Rego Black) JYL Gt2 * Ullrich Series (Gleyed Black) ULH Gt2 * Zinman Series (Gleyed Solonetzic Dark Gray) ZIM LBs2 c) Poorly drained * Guerra Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) GRR Gt2 * Watrine Series (Humic Luvic Gleysol) WTI LBs2
C. LACUSTRINE OVER FLUVIAL OVER TILL 1 . Soils developed on a thin mantle (40-70 cm) of moderately to strongly calcareous, loamy (L, CL) lacustrine sediments over a thin (30-60 cm) contact layer or wash zone of sandy skeletal (S, Gr.) materials over moderately to strongly calcareous, loamy (L, CL, SiCL) glacial till of shale, limestone and granitic origin.
a) Well drained * Jaymar Series (Orthic Black) JAY Gt2 b) Imperfectly drained * Melland Series (Gleyed Rego Black) MXT Gt2 c) Poorly drained * Marsden Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) MDN Gt2
D. FLUVIAL DEPOSITS 1 . Soils developed on deep (> 100 cm) moderately to strongly calcareous, stratified medium sand to gravelly fluvial outwash or beach deposits with shale, limestone and granitic fragments. a) Well drained * Marringhurst (Calcareous Black) MRH Gt2 * Dorset (Orthic Black) DOT Gt2
E. LACUSTRINE OVER FLUVIAL 1 . Soils developed on a thin mantle (< 1 m) of moderately to strongly calcareous, loamy (L, SCL, SiCL, CL) sediments overlying moderately to strongly calcareous, sandy and gravelly deposits . a) Well drained * Croyon Series (Orthic Black) CYN Gt2 b) Imperfectly drained * Capell Series (Gleyed Rego Black) CXT Gt2 c) Poorly drained * Carvey (Rego Humic Gleysol) CAV Gt2
F. LACUSTRINE 1 . Soils developed on deep (> 1 m) moderately to very strongly calcareous, fine loamy (CL, SiCL, SCL) lacustrine sediments . a) Well drained * Ramada Series (Orthic Black) RAM Gt2 * Firdale Series (Orthic Dark Gray) FIR LBs2 b) Imperfectly drained * Charman Series (Gleyed Black) CXV Gt2 * Prodan Series (Gleyed Rego Black) PDA Gt2 c) Poorly drained * Tadpole Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) TDP Gt2
22
2. Soils developed on deep (> 1 m) moderately to strongly calcareous, loamy (L, Sil, VFSL) lacustrine sediments . a) Well drained * Fairland Series (Orthic Black) FND Gt2 * Durnan Series (Rego Black) DRN Gt2 b) Imperfectly drained * Torcan Series (Gleyed Black) TOC Gt2 * Taggart Series (Gleyed Rego Black) TGR Gt2 c) Poorly drained * Vordas Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) VDS Gt2 3. Soils developed on deep (> 1 m) moderately to strongly calcareous, coarse loamy (FSL, VFS, LVFS) lacustrine deposits . a) Well drained * Prosser Series (Orthic Black) PSE Gt2 b) Imperfectly drained * Pleasant Series (Gleyed Rego Black) PLE Gt2 4 . Soils developed on thin (< 1 m) moderately to strongly calcareous, fine loamy (CL, SiCL, SCL) lacustrine deposits over moderately calcareous, stratified sand (FS, LFS, LS) deposits. a) Well drained * Wellwood Series (Orthic Black) WWD Gt2 b) Poorly drained * Sutton Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) SXP Gt2 5 . Soils developed on thin (< 1 m) moderately to strongly calcareous, loamy (L, SiL, VFSL) lacustrine sediments over moderately calcareous, stratified, sandy (FS, LFS, LS) lacustrine and deltaic deposits . a) Well drained * Glenboro Series (Orthic Black) GBO Gt2 b) Imperfectly drained * Grover Series (Gleyed Rego Black) GRO Gt2 6. Soils developed on deep (> 1 m), weakly to moderately calcareous, sandy (FS, LFS, LS) lacustrine and deltaic deposits. a) Well drained * Stockton Series (Orthic Black) SCK Gt2 b) Imperfectly drained * Hummerston Series (Gleyed Rego Black) HMO Gt2 c) Poorly drained * Sewell Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) SEE Gt2
G. ALLUVIUM 1 . Soils developed on moderately to strongly calcareous, stratified, dominantly loamy (VFSL, SL, L, SiL, SiCL, CL) recent alluvial deposits. a) Moderately well to well drained * Mowbray Series (Cumulic Regosol) MOW Gt2 b) Imperfectly drained * Levine Series (Gleyed Cumulic Regosol) LEI Gt2 c) Poorly drained * Basker Series (Rego Humic Gleysol) BKR Gt2
H. UNDIFFERENTIATED 1 . Soils developed on a complex of undifferentiated materials, with a wide range of properties and soil characteristics, adjacent to and including valley walls, ravines, gullies and drainage channels . * Eroded Slopes Complex ERX
Table 3B. Parent Materials and Related Soils of the Study Area Part II (Gt3)
Map Symbol Ecoclimatic Re ion A. GLACIAL TILL 1 . Soils developed on deep (> 1 m), strongly calcareous, fine loamy (L, CL, SiCL) glacial till of shale, limestone and granitic origin. a) Well drained * Ryerson Series (Orthic Black) Rio GO b) Imperfectly drained * Coatstone Series (Gleyed Rego Black) CSE Gt3 c) Poorly drained * Stoney Creek Series (Orthic Humic Gleysol) SYE GO
B. FLUVIAL DEPOSITS l . Soils developed on deep (> 1 m), strongly calcareous, sandy skeletal (MS, Gr.), stratified outwash deposits. a) Well drained * Bede Series (Orthic Black) BED Gt3
C. LACUSTRINE OVER FLUVIAL 1 . Soils developed on thin (< 1 m), strongly calcareous, loamy (L, CL, SiCL) sediments over sandy skeletal outwash deposits. a) Well drained * Dromore Series (Orthic Black) DOM GO
D. LACUSTRINE OVER TILL 1 . Soils developed on thin (< 1 m), loamy (L, CL), strongly calcareous, lacustrine sediments overlying glacial till. A very thin (< 5 cm) gravelly pebble line may occur at the overlay/till contact. a) Imperfectly drained * Two Creeks Series (Gleyed Black) TWC GO * Montgomery Series (Gleyed Rego Black) MOT GO * Glenlorne Series (Gleyed Eluviated Black) GNO GO
b) Poorly drained * Villette Series (Orthic Humic Gleysol) VLT GO
E. LACUSTRINE 1 . Soils developed on deep (> 1 m) moderately to strongly calcareous, loamy (L, SiL, VFSL) lacustrine sediments . a) Well drained * Cameron Series (Orthic Black) CMR Gt3 2 . Soils developed on deep (> 1 m), moderately calcareous, coarse loamy (FSL, VFS, LVFS), lacustrine sediments . a) Well drained * Lyleton Series (Orthic Black) LYT GO
PART 4
4 USE AND MANAGEMENT INTERPRETATIONS OF SOILS
4 .1 INTRODUCTION limitations for dryland farming, risk of damage when the soils are used and the way they respond to This sectionprovides predictions ofperformance management (Anon, 1965) . There are seven capa- or soil suitability ratings for various uses of soils bility classes, each of which groups soils together based on field observations of soil and landscape that have the same relative degree of limitation or characteristics, laboratory data and on observations hazard for agricultural use. The limitation becomes of soil behaviour under specified conditions of land progressively greater from Class 1 to Class 7. The use and management . Suitability ratings or inter- Viability class indicates the general suitability ofthe pretations are intended only to serve as guides for soils for agriculture. The first three classes are planners and managers . Caution, with an under- considered capable of sustained production of standing of the limitations of the soil map must be common field crops, the fourth is marginal for exercised when applying suitability ratings to soil sustained arable agriculture, the fifth is suitable only map units . The value of any rating or interpretation for improved permanent pasture, the sixth is capable depends upon the nature and composition of individ- of use only for native pasture while the seventh class ual map unit delineation which in turn depends on is for soils and land types considered incapable of the scale of mapping and intensity of ground truthing use for arable agriculture or permanent pasture. A employed in the survey. An overall acreage fact description of the capability classes is provided in sheet or summary ofland resource characteristics for Table 5 . the municipality is provided in Table 4 . Soil Capability subclasses are divisions within In this section, interpretive soil information is classes which group soils with similar kinds of provided for the following land use evaluations : limitations and hazards for agricultural use. The various kinds of limitations recognized at the sub- 1 . Agriculture class level are defined in Table 6 .
a) dryland farming capability A summary of the soils in the study area show- b) irrigation suitability ing their major characteristics and their interpretive classification for dryland agriculture and irrigation is 2 . Water Erosion Risk presented in Table 7 . The areal extent in hectares and percent coverage by series for the soils in the 3 . Engineering Uses R.M. of Louise is summarized in Table 8 .
4. Recreation Uses
4.2 SOIL CAPABILITY FOR AGRICULTURE
Uryland Agriculture
Soil capability classification for dryland agricul- ture is based on an evaluation of both internal and external soil characteristics that influence soil suit ability and limitations for agricultural use . In this classification, mineral soils are grouped into capabil- ity classes, and subclasses and units based on their
27
Table 4. Summary of Land Resource Characteristics
Soil Drainage
Well to Rapid 59329 . 148323 . 61 Imperfect 29179 . 72948 . 30 Poor to Very Poor 8754 . 21885 . 9
Agricultural Capability Class
Class 1 24954 62385 25 .7 Class 2 36088 90220 37.1 Class 3 19693 49232 20.3 Class 4 1976 4940 2 .0 Class 5 6893 17232 7 .1 Class 6 6664 16660 6.9 Class 7 994 2485 1 .0
Irrigation Suitability Rating
Excellent 838 2095 0.9 Good 52271 130677 53 .7 Fair 21165 52912 21 .8 Poor 22570 56425 23 .2
Water Erosion Risk Class
Negligible 10915 27288 11 .2 Low 32298 80745 33.2 Moderate 37052 92630 38.1 High 10801 27003 11 .1 Severe 5778 14445 6 .0
Slope Class
x (0-.5 %) Level 34334 85835 35 .3 b (.5-2%) Nearly Level 32423 81057 33 .3 c (2-5%) Ver Gently 21008 52520 21 .6 d (5-9%) Gently 3267 8167 3 .4 e (9-15%) Moderately 1336 3340 1 .4 f (15-30%) Strongly 35 88 0.1 g (30-45%) Very Strongly 4859 -T 12148 5 .0 Stoniness Class
1 slightly stony 6216 15540 6.4 2 moderately stony 722 1805 .7 3 very stony 818 2045 .8 4 exceedingly stony 328 820 .3 5 excessively stony 82 205 .l
Salinity Class
s slightly saline 9534 23835 9.8 t moderately saline 1162 2905 1 .2 u strongly saline 83 208 .1
Erosion Class
III Erosion 1 Slightly 687 1717 .7 Erosion 2 Moderately 41 103 .04 Erosion 3 Severely
29
Table 5. Definitions of the Agricultural Capability Classes
Class 1 tices. These soils are low to medium in productivity for a narrow range of crops but may have higher Soils in this class have no important limitations productivity for a specially adapted crop . The for crop use. The soils have level or gently sloping limitations include the adverse effects of one or more topography, they are deep, well to imperfectly of the following: climate, accumulative undesirable drained and have moderate water holding capacity. soil characteristics, low fertility, deficiencies in the The soils are naturally well supplied with plant storage capacity or release of soil moisture to plants, nutrients, easily maintained in good tilth and fertil- structure or permeability, salinity, erosion, topogra- ity; soils are moderately high to high in productivity phy, overflow, wetness, stoniness, and depth of soil for a wide range of cereal and special crops. to consolidated bedrock.
Class 2 Class 5
Soils in this class have moderate limitations that Soils in this class have very severe limitations reduce the choice of crops or require moderate that restrict their capability to producing perennial conservation practices . The soils have good water forage crops, and improvement practices are feas holding capacity and are either naturally well sup- ible. These soils have such serious soil, climatic or plied with plant nutrients or are highly responsive to other limitations that they are not capable of use for inputs of fertilizer . They are moderate to high in sustained production of annual field crops . However, productivity for a fairly wide range of crops . The they may be improved by the use of farm machinery limitations are not severe and good soil management for the production of native or tame species of and cropping practices can be applied without perennial forage plants . Feasible improvement serious difficulty . practices include clearing of bush, cultivation, seeding, fertilizing and water control . Class 3 Some soils in Class 5 can be used for cultivated Soils in this class have moderate limitations that field crops provided unusually intensive management restrict the range of crops or require moderate is used. Some, of these soils are also adapted to conservation practices . The limitations in Class 3 special crops requiring soil conditions unlike those are more severe than those in Class 2 and conserva- needed by the common crops. tion practices are more difficult to apply and main- tain. The limitations affect the timing and ease of Class 6 tillage, planting and harvesting, the choice of crops and maintenance of conservation practices. The Soils in this class are capable only of producing limitations include one or more of the following: perennial forage crops and improvement practices moderate climatic limitation, erosion, structure or are not feasible. Class 6 soils have some natural permeability, low fertility, topography, overflow, sustained grazing capacity for farm animals, but wetness, low water holding capacity or slowness in have such serious soil, climatic or other limitations release of water to plants, stoniness and depth of soil as to make impractical the application of improve- to consolidated bedrock. Under good management, ment practices that can be carried out on Class 5 these soils are fair to moderately high in productivity soils . Soils may be placed in this class because their for a fairly wide range of field crops . physical nature prevents the use of farm machinery, or because the soils are not responsive to improve- Class 4 ment practices, or because stock watering facilities are inadequate. Soils in this class have severe limitations that restrict the choice of crops or require special conser- Class 7 vation practices or both. These soils have such limitations that they are only suited for a few crops, Soils in this class have no capability for arable or the yield for a range of crops may be low, or the culture or permanent pasture because of extremely risk of crop failure is high. The limitations may severe limitations . Bodies of water too small to seriously affect such farm practices as the timing and delineate on the map are included in this class. ease of tillage, planting and harvesting, and the These soils may or may not have a high capability application and maintenance of conservation prac- for forestry, wildlife and recreation .
30
Table 6 . Agricultural Capability Subclass Limitations
C - Adverse climate: This subclass denotes a N - Salinity: Designates soils which are significant adverse climate for crop pro- adversely affected by the presence of duction as compared to the "median" soluble salts. climate which is defined as one with suffi- ciently high growing season temperatures P - Stoniness : This subclass is made up of to bring field crops to maturity, and with soils sufficiently stony to significantly sufficient precipitation to permit crops to hinder tillage, planting, and harvesting be grown each year on the same land operations . Stony soils are usually less without a serious risk of partial or total productive than comparable non-stony crop failures. soils.
D - Undesirable soil structure and/or low R - Consolidated bedrock: This subclass permeability : This subclass is used for includes soils where the presence of soils difficult to till, of which absorb water bedrock near the surface restricts their very slowly or in which the depth of root- agricultural use . Consolidated bedrock at ing zone is restricted by conditions other depths greater than 1 meter from the sur- than a high water table or consolidated face is not considered as a limitation, bedrock. except on irrigated lands where a greater depth of soil is desirable. E - Erosion: Subclass E includes soils where damage from erosion is a limitation to T - Topography: This subclass is made up of agricultural use . Damage is assessed on soils where topography is a limitation. the loss of productivity and on the diffi- Both the percent of slope and the pattern culties in farming land with gullies . or frequency of slopes in different direc- tions are important factors in increasing F - Low fertility : This subclass is made up of the cost of farming over that of smooth soils having low fertility that either is land, in decreasing the uniformity of correctable with careful management in the growth and maturity of crops, and in use of fertilizers and soil amendments or is increasing the hazard of water erosion. difficult to correct in a feasible way. The limitation may be due to lack of available W- Excess water: Subclass W is made up of plant nutrients, high acidity or alkalinity, soils where excess water other than that low exchange capacity, high levels of brought about by inundation is a limitation carbonates or presence of toxic com- to their use for agriculture . Excess water pounds . may result from inadequate soil drainage, a high water table, seepage or runoff from Inundation by streams or lakes : This sub- surrounding areas . class includes soils subjected to inundation causing crop damage or restricting agricul- X Cumulative minor adverse characteristics : tural use . This subclass is made up of soils having a moderate limitation caused by the cumulat- L - Coarse wood fragments : In the rating of ive effect of two or more adverse charac- organic soils, woody inclusions in the teristics which singly are not serious form of trunks, stumps and branches (> 10 enough to affect the class rating . cm diameter) in sufficient quantity to significantly hinder tillage, planting and harvesting operations.
M- Moisture limitation: This subclass consists of soils where crops are adversely affected by droughtiness owing to inherent soil characteristics. They are usually soils with low water-holding capacity .
3 1
Table 7. Agricultural Interpretations and Areal Extent of Soils in the Study Area
$UR /xxxx Urban land 190.640 0.196 ATN /xblx Altamont 2kxA Good Low 12.000 0.012 ATN /xbxx Altamont 1 2kxA Good Low 171.008 0.176 ATN /xcxx Altamont 2T 2kxBt2 Good Low 33 .936 0.035 ATN /xxxx Altamont 1 2kxA Good Low 147 .280 0.151 BED /xdxx Bede 5M 4m Ct2 Poor High 0.560 0.001 BED /xxxx Bede 5M 4m A Poor High 48.760 0.050 BED /ldxx Bede 5M 4m Ct2 Poor High 11 .400 0.012 BKR /xbxx Basker 5WI 4w Di Poor Low 44.940 0 .046 BKR /xcxx Basker 5WI 4w Di Poor Low 430.172 0.442 BKR /xxxx Basker 5WI 4w Di Poor Low 402.756 0.414 BKRp /xxxx Basker, peaty 6WI 4w Di Poor Low 35 .960 0 .037 CAV /xxxx Carvey 5W 4w A Poor Moderate 27 .400 0.028 CMR /ldxx Cameron 3T 1 Ct2 Fair Low 16.600 0 .017 CSE /xcxx Coatstone 2TW 3w Bt2 Fair Low 25.460 0.026 CXT /xcxx Capell 2MT 3wgBt2 Fair Moderate 2 .320 0.002 CXT /xxxx Capell 2M 3wgA Fair Moderate 13 .800 0.014 CXV /xbxx Charman 2W 3w A Fair Minimal 208 .340 0 .214 CXV /xxxx Charman 2W 3w A Fair Minimal 522.728 0.537 CYN /xcxx Croyon 3M 2m Bt2 Good Moderate 218.340 0.225 CYN /xdxx Croyon 3MT 2m Ct2 Fair Moderate 113 .720 0.117 CYN /xxxx Croyon 3M 2m A Good Moderate 20.720 0.021 CYN1 /xbxx Croyon, Shaly Var. 3M 2m A Good Moderate 362.756 0.373 CYN1 /xcxx Croyon, Shaly Var. 3M 2m Bt2 Good Moderate 151 .208 0.156 CYN1 /xdxx Croyon, Shaly Var. 3MT 2m Ct2 Fair Moderate 98.480 0.101 CYNI /xxxx Croyon, Shaly Var. 3M 2m A Good Moderate 66.760 0.069 DGF /xblx Darlingford 2X 2k A Good Low 309.500 0.318 DGF /xbxx Darlingford 2X 2k A Good Low 640.428 0.659 DGF /xclx Darlingford 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 1314.872 1 .352 DGF /xcxx Darlingford 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 1884.720 1 .938 DGF /xdxx Darlingford 3T 2k Ct2 Fair Moderate 192.188 0.198 DGF /xxlx Darlingford 2X 2k A Good Low 85 .128 0.088 DGF /xxxx Darlingford 2X 2k A Good Low 215.076 0.221 DGF /ICXX Darlingford 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 5.560 0.006 DGF /ldxx Darlingford 3T 2k Ct2 Fair Low 3.960 0.004 DOM /xdxx Dromore 3MT 2m Ct2 Fair Moderate 9 .680 0 .010 DOM / 1 dxx Dromore 3MT 2m Ct2 Fair Moderate 9.120 0.009 DOT /xcxx Dorset 5M 4m Bt2 Poor High 24.480 0 .025 DOT /xdxx Dorset 5M 4m Ct2 Poor High 44.480 0.046 DOT /xxxx Dorset 5M 4m A Poor High 10.320 0.011 DOT1 /xbxx Dorset, Shaly Var. 5M 4m A Poor High 306 .764 0.315 DOT1 /xc3x Dorset, Shaly Var. 5M 4m Bp Poor High 13 .280 0.014 DOT1 /xcxx Dorset, Shaly Var. 5M 4m Bt2 Poor High 335 .440 0.345 DOT1 /xdxx Dorset, Shaly Var. 5M 4m Ct2 Poor High 390.440 0 .401 DOT1 /xxxx Dorset, Shaly Var. 5M 4m A Poor High 29.240 0.030 DRN /2dxx Durnan 3T 1 Ct2 Fair Moderate 74.232 0 .076 DZW /xclx Dezwood 2T 2kxBt2 Good Low 112.920 0.116
32 DZW /xe3x Dezwood 4T 2kxCt2 Fair High 22.640 0 .023 DZW /xcxx Dezwood 2T 2kxBt2 Good Low 551 .112 0.567 DZW /xd3x Dezwood 3T 2kxCt2 Fair Moderate 209.328 0.215 DZW /xdxx Dezwood 3T 2kxCt2 Fair Moderate 45.040 1 0.046 DZW /xelx Dezwood 4T 2kxCt2 Fair High 344.020 ~ 0.354 ERX /xxxx Eroded Slope Compl 6T 2k Dt2 Poor High 4754.4401 4.888 FFR /xblx Fifere 2X 2k A Good Low 79.320 0.082 FFR /xb2x Fifere 2P 2k A Good Low 193.880 0.199 FFR /xbxx Fifere 2X 2k A Good Low 83.272 0.086 FFR /xclx Fifere 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 333.440 0.343 FFR /xcxx Fifere 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 636 .620 0.655 FFR /xdlx Fifere 3T 2k Ct2 Fair Moderate 115 .040 0.118 FFR /xd3x Fifere 3TP 2k Ct2 Fair Moderate 488 .432 0.502 FFR /xd5x Fifere 5P 2k Dp Poor Moderate 82.200 0.085 FFR /xelx Fifere 4T 2k Ct2 Fair High 344.020 0.354 FFR /xe4x Fifere 4PT 2k Ct2p Fair High 109.680 0.113 FFR /xxlx Fifere 2X 2k A Good Low 207 .360 0.213 FFR /xx2x Fifere 2P 2k A Good Low 80.880 0.083 FFR (xxxx Fifere 2X 2k A Good Low 43 .640 0 .045 FFR /lelx Fifere 4T 2k Ct2 Fair High 134.200 0.138 FIR /xbxx Firdale 1 2kxA Good Minimal 615.560 0.633 FIR /xcxx Firdale 2T 2kxBt2 Good Low 140.500 0.145 FIR /xdxx Firdale 3T 2kxCt2 Fair Moderate 380.260 0.391 FIR /xexx Firdale 4T 2kxCt2 Fair High 55.400 0.057 FND lxbxx Fairland 1 1 A Excellent Low 733 .928 0.755 FND /xcxx Fairland 2T 1 Bt2 Good Low 361 .804 0.372 FND /xdxx Fairland 3T 1 Ct2 Fair Moderate 53 .004 0.055 FND /xxxx Fairland 1 1 A Excellent Low 289.336 0.298 FND /lcxx Fairland 2T 1 Bt2 Good Low 10.040 0.010 FND /ldxx Fairland 3T 1 Ct2 Fair Moderate 46.404 0.048 FRS /xxxx Ferris 2W 3w A Fair Low 10.880 0 .011 FRS /xc 1s Ferris 3N 3wsBt2 Fair Low 27.408 0 .028 GBO /xbxx Glenboro 2M 1 A Excellent Moderate 18.320 0.019 GBO /xcxx Glenboro 2MT 1 Bt2 Good Moderate 45.240 0.047 GBO /xdxx Glenboro 3T 1 Ct2 Fair Moderate 6.240 0.006 GNO /xxxx Glenlorne 2W 3w A Fair Low 23 .840 0.025 GRO /xxxx Grover 2W 2w A Good Moderate 94.096 0.097 GRR /xclx Guerra 5W 4w Bt2 Poor Low 1 .988 0.002 GRR /xx2x Guerra 5W 4w A Poor Low 25.400 0.026 GRR /xx4x Guerra 5WP 4w Cp Poor Low 28.080 0 .029 GRR /xxxx Guerra 5W 4w A Poor Low 3476.416 3 .574 GRR /xbxs Guerra 5W !4w A Poor Low 61 .720 0.064 GRR /xxls Guerra 5W 4w A Poor Low 87.128 0.090 GRR /xx2s Guerra SW 4w A Poor Low 67.120 0.069 GRR /xxxs Guerra 5W 4w A Poor low 709 .220 0.729 GRR /xxxt Guerra 5W 4wsA Poor Moderate 251 .392 0.259 GRRp /xxxx Guerra, peaty 6W 4w A Poor Low 470.816 0.484 GRRp /xxxs Guerra, peaty 6W 4w A Poor j Low 94.320 0.097 GRRp /xxxt Guerra, peaty 6W 4w A Poor Moderate 70.600 0.073 HEB /xbxx Hebbot 2X 2k A Good Low 119.224 0.123 HEB /xcxx Hebbot 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 11 .760 0.012 HMO /xxxx Hummerston 3M 2w A Good High 106 .760 0.110 HOS /xxxx Horose 5W 4w A Poor Low 93 .760 0.096
33 JAY /xxxx Jaymar 3M 2g A Good Moderate 97.184 0.100 JYL /xbxx Joyale 2W 3w A Fair Low 1533 .032 1 .576 JYL /xcxx Joyale 2T 3w Bt2 Fair Low 346.296 0 .356 JYL /xxlx Joyale 2W 3w A Fair Low 127.940 0 .132 JYL /xx2x Joyale 2P 3w A Fair Low 10.840 0 .011 JYL /xxxx Joyale 2W 3w A Fair Low 3049.088 3 .135 JYL /xbxs Joyale 3N 3wsA Fair Low 588.804 0.605 JYL /xcxs Joyale 3N 3wsBt2 Fair Low 157.160 0.162 JYL /xx2s Joyale 3N 3wsA Fair Low 21 .120 0.022 JYL /xx3s Joyale 3PN 3wsBp Fair Low 4.680 0.005 JYL /xx4s Joyale 4P 3wsCp Fair Low 17.320 0.018 JYL /xxxs Joyale 3N 3wsA Fair Low 3642.196 3.745 JYL /xxxt Joyale 4N 4s A Poor Moderate 252 .388 0.260 JYL /xx3u Joyale 5N 4s Bp Poor High 55 .240 0.057 KUD /xblx Knudson 1 2kxA Good Low 187 .964 0.193 KUD /xb2x Knudson 2P 2kxA Good Low 49.280 0.051 KUD /xbxx Knudson 1 2kxA Good Low 13434 .284 13.813 KUD /xclx Knudson 2T 2kxBt2 Good Low 78 .080 0.080 KUD /xcxx Knudson 2T 2kxBt2 Good Low 4638 .248 4.769 KUD /xdxx Knudson 3T 2kxCt2 Fair Moderate 41 .988 0.043 KUD /xx2x Knudson 2P 2kxA Good Low 40.240 0.041 KUD /xx3x Knudson 3P 2kxBp Good Low 24.280 0.025 KUD /xxxx Knudson 1 2kxA Good Low 3684.236 3 .788 KUD /lcxx Knudson 2T 2kxBt2 Good Low 3 .080 0.003 LEI /xbxx Levine 31 3w Bi Fair Low 44.940 0.046 LEI /xcxx Levine 31 3w Bi Fair Low 706.108 0.726 LEI /xxxx Levine 31 3w Bi Fair Low 910.772 0.936 LRT /xbxx Larrett 1 2k A Good Low 72.240 0.074 LYT /xdxx Lyleton 3T 1 Ct2 Fair Moderate 4.680 0.005 LYT /xxxx Lyleton 3M 1 A Excellent Moderate 3.920 0.004 MDN /xxxx Marsden 5W 4w A Poor High 21 .760 0 .022 MHC /xxxx Marsh 7W 4w Di Poor High 429.560 0 .441 MOT /xcxx Montgomery 2W 3w Bt2 Fair Low 124.860 0.128 MOT /xbxs Montgomery 3N 3wsA Fair Low 82 .820 0.085 MOT /xxxs Montgomery 3N 3wsA Fair Low 9.120 0.009 MOW /xcxx Mowbray 2TI 2k Bt2 Good Low 68 .292 0.070 MOW /xdxx Mowbray 3T 2k Ct2 Fair Moderate 8.760 0 .009 MOW /xxxx Mowbray 21 2k A Good Low 96.060 0 .099 MOW1 /xclx Mowbray, Shaly Var 2TI 2k Bt2 Good Low 85 .440 0 .088 MOW1 /xcxx Mowbray, Shaly Var 2TI 2k Bt2 Good Low 40.200 0.041 MOW1 /xxxx Mowbray, Shaly Var 21 2k A Good Low 4.280 0.004 MRH /xcxx Marringhurst 5M 4m Bt2 Poor High 16.280 0.017 MRH /xdxx Marringhurst 5M 4m Ct2 Poor High 3 .040 0.003 MRH 1 /xdxx Marringhurst,Shaly 5M 4m Ct2 Poor High 14.920 0.015 MRHI /xxxx Marringhurst,Shaly 5M 4m Ct2 Poor High 10.080 0.010 MXS /xblx Manitou 2X 2k A Good Low 1167 .744 1 .201 MXS /xbxx Manitou 2X 2k A Good Low 4281 .492 4.402 MXS /xclx Manitou 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 352 .680 0.363 MXS /xc2x Manitou 2PT 2k Bt2 Good Low 79 .720 0.082 MXS /xcxx Manitou 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 2690.156 2 .766 MXS /xd4x Manitou 4P 2k Ct2p Fair Moderate 140.880 0 .145 MXS /xdxx Manitou 3T 2k Ct2 Fair Moderate 528 .868 0.544 MXS /xe4x Manitou 4PT 2k Ct2p Fair High 73 .840 0.076
34 MXS /xexx Manitou 4T 2k Ct2 Fair High 25 .400 0.026 MXS /xfxx Manitou 5T 2k Dt2 Poor High 34.520 0 .036 MXS /xxlx Manitou 2X 2k A Good Low 128.560 0 .l32 MXS /xx2x Manitou 2P 2k A Good Low 107.576 0.111 MXS /xxxx Manitou 2X 2k A Good Low 86.600 0 .089 MXT /xxxx Melland 2W 2w A Good Moderate 139.852 0.144 MXT /xxxs Melland 3N 3s A Fair Moderate 1l6.720 0.l20 PDA /xbxx Prodan 2W 3w A Fair Minimal 227.760 0.234 PDA /xcxx Prodan 2T 3w Bt2 Fair Low 59.964 0.062 PDA /xxxx Prodan 2W 3w A Fair Minimal 7l5 .100 0.735 PDA /xbxs Prodan 3N 3wsA Fair Low 21.800 0.022 PDA /xxxs Prodan 3N 3wsA Fair Low 1226 .480 1 .26l PLE /xcxx Pleasant 2MT 2w Bt2 Good Moderate 28 .120 0.029 PSE /xdxx Prosser 3T 1 Ct2 Fair Moderate 14.080 0.015 PSE /lcxx Prosser 3M 1 Bt2 Good Moderate 57 .960 0.060 PSE /2dxx Prosser 3MT 1 Ct2 Fair Moderate 28 .280 0.029 RAM /xbxx Ramada 1 2k A Good Minimal 2690 .864 2.767 RAM /xclx Ramada 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 78 .080 0.080 RAM /xcxx Ramada 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 1660.436 1 .707 RAM /xdxx Ramada 3T 2k Ct2 Fair Moderate 273 .452 0.281 RAM /xxxx Ramada 1 2k A Good Minimal 1019.504 1 .048 RYS /xcxx Ryerson 2T 2k Bt2 Good Low 1623.844 1 .670 RYS /xdxx Ryerson 3T 2k Ct2 Fair Moderate 5.320 0.006 RYS /xxxx Ryerson 2X 2k A Good Low 8.360 0.009 SCK /xbxx Stockton 4M 2m A Good High 179 .376 0.l84 SCK /xcxx Stockton 4M 2m Bt2 Good High 52.280 0.054 SCK /xxxx Stockton 4M 2m A Good High 8 .000 0.008 SCK /lbxx Stockton 4M 2m A Good High 139.492 0.l43 SCK /lcxx Stockton 4M 2m Bt2 Good High 187.408 0 .193 SCK /ldxx Stockton 4M 2m Ct2 Fair High 28.440 0.029 SCK /2cxx Stockton 4M 2m Bt2 Good High 12.240 0 .013 SEE /xxxx Sewell 5W 4w A Poor High 29.840 0 .031 SXP /xxxx Sutton 5W 4w A Poor Low 60.320 0.062 SYE /xcxx Stoney Creek 5W 4w Bt2 Poor Low 25.460 0.026 TDP /xxxx Tadpole 5W 4w A Poor Minimal 779 .724 0.802 TDP /xxls Tadpole 5W 4w A Poor Low 89.080 0.092 TDP /xx3s Tadpole 5W 4w A Poor Low 55 .120 0.057 TDP /xxxs Tadpole 5W 4w Bp Poor Low 142.120 0.151 TDPp /xxxx Tadpole, peaty 6W 4w A Poor Minimal 6l9.816 0.637 TGR /xxxx Taggart 2W 2w A Good Low 2l2.644 0.2l9 TOC /xbxx Torcan 2W 2w A Good Low 128.6l6 0 .l32 TOC /xxxx Torcan 2W I2wA Good Low 4.560 0 .005 TWC /xblx Two Creeks 2W 3w A Fair Low 1l3.400 0.l17 TWC /xxxx Two Creeks 2W 3w A Fair Low 69 .040 0.071 TWC /xbxs Two Creeks 3N 3wsA Fair Low 468 .516 0.482 TWC /xxxs Two Creeks 3N 3wsA Fair Low 33 .960 0.035 TWC /xxxt Two Creeks 4N 4s A Poor Moderate 3 .160 0.003 ULH /xblx Ullrich 2W 3w A Fair Low 9.480 0.010 ULH /xbxx Ullrich 2W 3w A Fair Low 452.l56 0.465 ULH /xcxx Ullrich 2T 3w Bt2 Fair Low 105.444 0.108 ULH /xxlx U11rich 2W 3w A Fair Low 170.900 0.l76 ULH /xxxx Ullrich 2W 3w A Fair Low 1293.052 L330 ULH /xbxs Ullrich 3N 3wsA Fair Low 53.340 0.055
35 ULH /xxxs U11rich 3N 3wsA Fair Low 854.288 0 .878 ULH /xbxt Ullrich 4N 4s A Poor Moderate 288.408 0 .297 ULH /xxxt Ullrich 4N 4s A Poor Moderate 103.900 0.107 ULH /xxxu Ullrich 5N 4s A Poor High 28.160 0.029 VDS /xxxx Vordas 5W 4w A Poor Moderate 47.160 0.049 VLT /xxxx Villette 5W 4w A Poor Low 82.560 0.085 WTI /xxxx Watrine 5W 4w A Poor Low 18.520 0.019 WWD /xbxx Wellwood 1 2k A Good Moderate 107 .480 0.111 WWD /xcxx Wellwood 2T 2k Bt2 Good Moderate 96.340 0.099 WWD /xxxx Wellwood 1 2k A Good Moderate 17.600 0 .018 ZIM /xblx Zinman 3D 4d A Poor Minimal 226.940 0.233 ZIM /xbxx Zinman 3D 4d A Poor Minimal 356.732 0.367 ZIM /xx2x Zinman 3D 4d A Poor Minimal 46.104 0.047 ZIM /xxxx Zinman 3D 4d A Poor Minimal 4172.440 4.290 ZIM /xbxs Zinman 3DN 4d A Poor Low 1024.684 1 .054 ZIM /xx4s Zinman 4P 4d Cp Poor Low 32.000 0.033 ZIM /xxxs Ziuman 3DN 4d A Poor Low 1294.144 1 .331 ZIM /xbxt Zinman 4N 4s A Poor Moderate 1332.004 1 .370 ZZ /xxxx Water 7W 4w Di Poor High 226.600 0.233
36
Table 8 . Areal Extent in Hectares and Percent Coverage by Soil Series in the R.M. of Louise Soil Code Area Percent Soil Code Area . Percent $UR 190.6400 0.1960 LEI 1661 .8200 1 .7086 ATN 364 .2240 0.3745 LRT 72 .2400 0 .0743 BED 60.7200 0.0624 LYT 8 .6000 0.0088 BKR 913 .8280 0 .9396 MDN 21 .7600 0.0224 CAV 27.4000 0.0282 MHC 429.5600 0.4417 CMR 16 .6000 0 .0171 MOT 216.8000 0.2229 CSE 25 .4600 0.0262 MOW 303.0320 0.3116 CXT 16.1200 0.0166 MRH 44.3200 0.0456 CXV 731 .0680 0.7517 MXS 9698.0360 9.9711 CYN 1031 .9840 1 .0610 MXT 256 .5720 0.2638 DGF 4651 .4320 4.7824 PDA 2251 .1040 2.3145 DOM 18.8000 0.0193 PLE 28.1200 0.0289 DOT 1154.4440 1 .1869 PSE 100.3200 0.1031 DRN 74.2320 0.0763 RAM 5722.3360 5.8835 DZW 1285 .0600 1 .3212 RYS 1637 .5240 1 .6836 ERX 4754.4400 4 .8883 SCK 607 .2360 0 .6243 FFR 2931 .9840 3 .0145 SEE 29 .8400 0 .0307 FIR 1191 .7200 1 .2253 SXP 60 .3200 0 .0620 FND 1494.5160 1 .5366 SYE 25 .4600 0 .0262 FRS 38.2880 0.0394 TDP 1690.8600 1 .7385 GBO 69.8000 0.0718 TGR 212.6440 0.2186 GNO 23.8400 0.0245 TOC 133.1760 0.1369 GRO 94 .0960 0.0967 TWC 688.0760 0.7074 GRR 5344.2000 5.4947 ULH 3359.1280 3 .4537 HEB 130.9840 0 .1347 VDS 47.1600 0.0485 HMO 106.7600 0.1098 VLT 82.5600 0.0849 HOS 93 .7600 0.0964 WTI 18 .5200 0.0190 JAY 97 .1840 0.0999 WWD 221 .4200 0 .2277 JYL 9806.1040 10.0822 ZIM 8485.0480 8 .7239 KUD 22181 .6800 22.8062 ZZ 226.6000 0.2330 4 .3 IRRIGATION SUITABILITY 4 .3 .1 Irrigation Suitability Rating The irrigation suitability classification is an interpretive assessment of land suitability for The most limiting soil property or landscape irrigated agriculture and is made from soil survey feature is combined to determine the placement of a data. The irrigation rating provided in this section is land area in one of 16 classes of irrigation suitability an initial rating based on general information about which are grouped and described by 4 ratings of specific soils indicated on the soil map . The decision general suitability as Excellent, Good, Fair and to irrigate a parcel of land will require additional Poor (Appendix A , Table 15 ) . The guidelines field investigation that utilizes the same criteria utilized for evaluating the effect of soil properties but will include on site examination of water and landscape features on long term irrigation are tables, salinity and stratigraphy to a depth of 3 included in Appendix A , (Tables 16 and 17 meters . respectively).
The rating guidelines in this section are derived An example of an irrigation suitability class from "An Irrigation Suitability Classification System rating is shown below: for the Canadian Prairies" (ISC, 1987) . This classification system takes into account recent advances in irrigation management and technology and provides general guidelines for irrigation Soil Landscape suitability classification that are applicable to both Limitation Limitation local and regional conditions . The irrigation suitability rating of the soils is based on soil and landscape characteristics. These characteristics are ranked in terms of their sustained quality under long- Landscape term management under irrigation . It does not Feature consider factors such as method of water application, water availability, water quality or economics of this Soil Factors type of land use.
Soil properties considered important for A maximum of 3 codes is used to identify the evaluating irrigation suitability are: texture, soil subclass rating . Geological uniformity (g) and drainage, depth to water table, salinity and drainability (x) are soil factors contributing to the geological uniformity . Landscape features soil rating of Class 3, Moderate . Complex considered important for rating irrigation suitability topography is the limiting landscape characteristic of relate mainly to the influence of topography and the area for rating irrigation suitability . As the soil stoniness. factor (Class 3, Moderate) is more limiting than the landscape feature (Class B, Slight) the general rating The irrigation suitability classification of the soil for this land area is Fair . and landscape characteristics in the study area will assist in making initial irrigation plans . The decision An ideal soil area to be used for irrigation will to irrigate a parcel of land should first be based on have the following characteristics: a ranking of suitability based on information presented in this report. The next step should loam texture involve on site field investigation to examine the uniform texture both vertically and depth to water table, salinity and geological horizontally uniformity to a depth of 3 m. Drainability, drainage uniformly well drained outlet requirement, organic matter status and non saline potential for surface crusting are other factors to permeable consider. This assessment should also consider nearly level potential impact of irrigation on "Non-target" non- non stony irrigated areas as well as on the irrigated area.
38 Any departure from these characteristics, i.e. sandy Use of this rating is intended to serve as a and clayey soils, presence of contrasting textural warning of possible environmental impact but it is layers vertically in the soil, horizontal variation in not part of the initial irrigation suitability soil texture within the landscape, imperfect and poor classification. The evaluation of potential drainage, salinity, reduced soil permeability, environmental impact has been separated from the undulating and hummocky topography and surface initial irrigation suitability rating provided in the ISC stoniness will lower the irrigation suitability. These system (1987) since it may be possible to design and factors may not only influence the sustenance of manage the irrigation system to overcome these irrigation but can also affect the type of irrigation limitations. The irrigator must determine the nature system that can be used and the type of management or cause of a specific environmental concern and needed. then give special consideration to soil-water-crop management practices that will mitigate the Areas with no or slight soil and/or landscape possibility for any adverse impact. limitations are rated Excellent to Good and can usually be considered irrigable. Areas with moderate Soil factors and landscape features considered in soil and/or landscape limitations are rated as Fair providing a potential environmental impact and considered marginal for irrigation providing evaluation are: adequate management exists so that the soil and adjacent areas are not adversely affected by water 1 . Soil Texture application. Soil and landscape areas rated as Poor 2 . Geological Uniformity have severe limitations for irrigation. 3 . Hydraulic Conductivity 4. Depth to Water Table The irrigation suitability ratings are based 5 . Salinity largely on soil characteristics in the upper 1 .2 m and 6. Topography the main landscape features for each soil series and phase. Limited information available to the 3 m depth was used to characterize the geological 4.4 SOIL PROPERTIES AFFECTING CROP uniformity of major soil types . Following the initial MANAGEMENT ranking of irrigation suitability, a more detailed investigation may indicate that portions of the area This section of the report examines specific soil are significantly better or poorer than the general properties that affect various management and rating indicated . associated tillage activities for crop production. The areal distribution of selected soil and landscape 4.3.2 Environmental Impact properties is shown in a series of single factor and interpretive maps . Selected chemical and physical An assessment ofpotential environmental impact characteristics of the soils for surface and subsurface from irrigation is provided in Table 7 . The depths are summarized in Table 9 . Additional data environmental impact from irrigation on either the on bulk density and soil moisture retention irrigated land or on "non-target", non irrigated properties for specific sites are provided in Table areas and crops is an important aspect to consider 10 . prior to irrigation development. The guidelines for environmental impact assessment provide a general 4.4.1 Soil Texture assessment of relative ratings ranging from "minimal to low, moderate and high" (Table 18) . The proportion of individual mineral particles This rating recognizes soil and/or landscape (sand, silt, clay) present in a soil is referred to as conditions which under irrigation could impact on texture. Soil texture strongly influences the soil's the irrigated area as well as a "non-target" non- ability to retain moisture, its general level of irrigated area. Examples of adverse environmental fertility, the ease or difficulty of cultivation, impact are higher water tables, more persistent soil permeability and erosion potential . The dominant saturation, increased soil salinity and contamination texture in the R.M. of Louise is loam to clay loam of groundwater or surface water . which contributes to good available water holding capacity and moderate to moderately slow
39 permeability .
The soils in the R.M ., particularly those on steeper slopes, are subject to erosion if the soil surface is not covered by vegetation or crop residue . Continuous cropping and minimum or zero tillage to maximize residue cover will minimize the risk of erosion. These practices will also maintain organic matter in the soil for improved water retention, structure and fertility.
4.4.2 Soil pH
Soil pH values express the degree of acidity and alkalinity . The surface values in the R.M. range from 5 .6 to 7 .9 with a mean of 6.7 . This range of values is characterized as slightly acid to mildly alkaline with the mean value being neutral . A summary of pH values is shown in Table 9 .
4.4 .3 Organic Matter
Surface organic matter content of the soils in the R.M . of Louise ranges from 3 .5 to 8.4 percent, with a mean of 6.1 percent, well within the range for loam textured soils in the Chernozemic Black zone of southern Manitoba. There is a general increase in organic matter content from the upper to lower slope positions in the landscape. The overall level of soil organic matter in the R.M . is satisfactory but cultural practices to maintain or increase the organic matter content are required to ensure good structure, fertility and tilth. The organic matter content of the surface soil in the R.M . is summarized in Table 9. M +n an I M r an so M M an no M rr M ~ M r..
Table 9. Summary of Physical and Chemical Properties of Soils from the R.M. of Louise
Soil A-Hoz Surface Subsurface Surface Horizon Subsurface Horizon 2CK Horizon . ., Symbol n pH n OC - -n EC--- n` EC n S SI C TEXT n S Sl C TEXT n S SI C : TEXT
ATN 1 5 .6 1 4.50 1 22 47 31 CL CXF 1 10 77 13 SIL CXT CXV 2 7.4 2 4.91 2 3 .5 5 8.7 1 4 49 47 sic DGF 1 6.7 1 4.20 1 0 .9 1 4.2 1 31 35 34 CL 4 42 36 22 L FFR 2 44 31 25 L FIR 1 17 56 27 SIL FND 5 6.8 5 2.80 3 0 .6 2 0.7 5 53 26 21 SCL 8 57 26 17 VFSL FRS 3 4 .3 GBO 1 81 7 12 VFSL GRR 1 7 .9 1 7 .3 6 8 .7 2 19 41 40 SICL JYL 20 7 .8 9 3.84 19 10.1 33 9 .2 8 34 39 27 L 9 23 47 30 CL 4 46 35 19 L KUD 7 6.2 6 3.55 1 1 .3 8 8 .0 7 27 44 29 CL 3 35 38 27 L 4 29 34 37 CL LRT 1 5.8 1 2 .93 1 25 46 29 CL MOT 1 1 .8 1 42 29 29 CL MXS 4 5 .6 4 3 .63 3 30 41 29 CL 2 27 50 23 SIL PDA 9 7.8 5 3 .27 9 6.9 19 10.8 2 15 53 32 SICL 7 24 46 30 CL PSE 1 5.8 1 2 .00 1 81 8 11 VFSL 3 79 6 15 VFSL RAM 9 6.9 9 4 .50 1 0.8 7 4.5 9 23 48 29 CL 11 14 57 29 SICL RYS 2 46 32 22 L 40 SICL TDP 6 7.8 2 11 54 35 SICL 2 16 44 TGR 1 7.4 1 2.44 1 76 9 15 VFSL TOC 1 6.5 1 1 .93 1 81 9 10 LFS TWC 3 16.2 3 41 27 32 CL 42 38 20 L ULH 5 7.2 2 4.36 5 5 .2 25 10.3 3 21 48 31 CL 13 24 45 31 CL 1 WKD 1 44 38 18 L 35 17 CL ZIM 10 6.7 9 3.96 5 9.0 76 8.8 7 24 48 28 CL 19 29 37 34 CL 1 34 ZIM 2 6.4 2 3.5 1 6.9 5 9.9 2 12 55 33 SICL 4 12 45 43 SICL ZIM 1 5.9 1 4 .31 1 0.4 4 8.9 1 12 64 24 SIL 1 5 44 51 SIC
= texture class n = number of samples; pH CaCI .2; OC = organic carbon % ; EC = electrical conductivity mS/cm; S = sand % ; SI = silt % ; C = clay % ; TEXT Table 9 cont'd. Summary of Physical and Chemical Properties of Soils from the R.M. of Louise
Soil Surface Subsurface Surface Subsurface 2CK Symbol n ,CaC03. n CaC03 n Ca Mg Na n Ca Mg Na n' ca Mg
ATN CXF CXT 1 9.4 CXV DGF 1 0.8 3 16.1 FFR FIR FND 2 1 .1 2 18.8 FRS GBO GRR JYL 4 1 .1 6 12.0 2 30.8 19.6 17 .9 1 61 .0 6.7 9.7 KUD 1 0.9 3 21 .7 LRT MOT 1 5 .9 MXS 1 12.3 PDA 1 1 .1 3 15.4 PSE RAM 5 0.7 6 22 .8 RYS 2 23 .1 TDP TGR 1 1 .2 TOC TWC 2 15 .9 2 42.9 9 .1 10.2 ULH 1 0.3 2 12.4 3 23.8 10 .0 6.0 WKD 1 21 .4 ZIM 1 0.4 5 12.6 40 22.1 10.4 8.2 1 22 .4 12.4 7.9 ZIM 2 15.9 9.9 6.5
CaC03 = %, (Ca, Mg, Na) = exchangeable cations meq/1, n = number of samples
42
Table 10. Summary of Physical, Chemical and Moisture Properties of Soils from the R.M. of Louise
SITE SN HORIZ D_U D_L ORG C CAC03 C-F VC CS MS FS VF S SI C TEXT B-D PWP FCAP SATmm FCmm PWPmm AWmm AW C/C FND 39 AP 0 15 2 .77 0 .0 0 0 0 1 15 46 62 18 20 VFSL 1 .04 7 .2 21 .8 91 34 11 23 0 .15 FAIRLAND 39 AI4 15 30 2 .01 0 .0 0 0 0 1 12 48 61 19 20 VFSL 1 .31 6 .8 20 .5 76 40 13 27 0 .18 NW14-02-12W 39 BM 30 47 1 .01 1 .7 0 0 0 0 11 51 62 17 21 SCL 1 .38 6 .2 18 .9 81 44 15 30 0 .17 39 CK1 47 60 0 .00 19 .4 0 0 0 0 14 47 61 16 23 SCL 1 .36 7 .5 18 .0 63 32 13 18 0 .14 39 CK2 60 120 0 .00 15 .5 0 0 0 0 12 56 68 15 17 VFSL 1 .37 5 .1 16 .9 290 139 42 97 0 .16 601 289 94 195
DGF 19 AP 0 19 4 .21 0 .8 2 1 3 6 9 12 31 35 34 CL 0 .96 11 .7 31 .0 121 57 21 36 0 .19 DARLINGFORD 19 BM 19 31 1 .78 2 .2 2 2 3 6 9 12 32 36 32 CL 1 .29 10 .6 25 .0 62 39 16 23 0 .l9 NE08-03-10W 19 BC 31 61 0 .00 22 .9 1 1 2 4 5 7 19 43 38 SICL 1 .32 10 .6 23 .0 151 91 42 49 0 .l6 19 CK1 61 89 0 .00 21 .2 1 2 3 5 7 9 26 48 26 L 1 .32 10 .9 24 .3 14l 90 40 50 0 .l8 19 CK2 89 120 0 .00 17 .0 2 1 3 5 7 14 30 45 25 L 1 .40 9 .7 23 .3 146 101 42 59 0 .l9 621 378 161 217
KUD 57 AP 0 15 4 .81 0 .0 1 1 2 4 4 7 18 50 32 SICL 0 .89 12 .3 35 .4 100 47 16 31 0 .21 KNUDSON 57 BTJ1 15 27 1 .04 0 .0 0 0 1 2 4 11 18 50 32 SICL 1 .27 10 .8 26 .4 62 40 16 24 0 .20 NW07-04-09W 57 BTJ2 27 53 0 .80 0 .0 0 0 1 2 4 11 18 50 32 SICL 1 .29 10 .8 24 .3 133 82 36 46 0 .17 57 CCA 53 82 0 .00 15 .0 0 1 1 2 4 6 14 51 35 SICL 1 .27 10 .9 26 .2 151 96 40 56 0 .19 57 2CK 82 120 0 .00 25 .0 7 2 5 8 9 10 34 40 26 L 1 .22 12 .8 29 .1 205 135 59 76 0 .20 651 400 167 233
RAM 37 AP 0 16 3 .05 0 .0 0 0 0 1 11 39 51 24 25 SCL 1 .11 9 .8 25 .0 93 44 17 27 0 .17 RAMADA 37 AH 16 28 2 .34 0 .0 0 0 0 1 9 44 54 21 25 SCL 1 .38 9 .3 23 .5 58 39 15 24 0 .20 NW14-02-12W 37 BM 28 47 0 .76 2 .6 0 0 0 1 9 44 54 23 23 SCL 1 .34 8 .4 21 .3 94 54 21 33 0 .17 37 CK 47 120 0 .00 22 .0 0 0 0 0 3 37 40 30 30 CL 1 .41 9 .9 25 .0 342 257 102 155 0 .21 587 394 155 239
ZIM 135 AP 0 16 4 .33 0 .0 0 1 2 5 12 19 39 33 28 CL 0 .90 11 .4 41 .4 106 60 16 44 0 .27 ZINMAN 135 AHE 16 28 3 .03 0 .0 0 1 3 5 10 17 36 38 26 L 1 .18 10 .2 31 .4 67 44 14 30 0 .25 SE05-02-11W 135 BNTJ 28 41 1 .51 0 .0 0 0 2 4 7 16 29 34 37 CL 1 .33 14 .7 28 .5 65 49 25 24 0 .18 135 BC 41 59 0 .00 13 .7 0 0 1 3 5 9 18 46 36 SICL 1 .30 12 .4 27 .7 92 65 29 36 0 .20 135 CKGS 59 84 0 .00 20 .5 0 1 2 3 5 9 20 49 31 SICL 1 .49 12 .3 25 .0 109 93 46 47 0 .19 135 2CKGS 84 120 0 .00 16 .7 9 2 4 7 9 12 34 35 31 CL 1 .50 11 .6 23 .2 156 125 63 62 0 .17 595 436 193 243
JYL 55 AP 0 15 5 .02 0 .0 1 1 3 6 4 6 20 47 33 SICL 0 .96 11 .5 36 .1 96 52 17 35 0 .24 JOYALE 55 AC 15 30 1 .26 0 .0 1 0 2 7 5 8 22 43 35 CL 1 .38 10 .5 28 .1 72 58 22 36 0 .24 SE07-04-IOW 55 CCA 30 60 0 .00 20 .0 1 1 2 6 3 10 22 42 36 CL 1 .35 10 .4 28 .3 147 115 42 73 0 .24 55 2CKG1 60 90 0 .00 16 .0 5 2 8 18 7 7 42 27 31 CL 1 .34 9 .3 27 .6 148 111 37 74 0 .24 55 2CKG2 90 120 0 .00 17 .0 13 3 11 15 8 9 46 37 17 L 1 .49 9 .6 26 .7 131 119 43 76 0 .25 594 455 161 294 - Number D U = Depth Upper, D_L = Depth Lower, ORG-C = Organic Carbon, C_F Coarse Fragments, B_D = Bulk Density, SN = Sample 4.4.4 Soil Moisture Properties bodies .
Soil moisture properties were measured at six sites in the R.M . (Table 10 ). Various physical 4.4.6 Stoniness properties including organic carbon, carbonates, particle size and bulk density were analyzed on soil Approximately 8.4% or 8166 ha. in the R.M. horizons to a depth of 1 .2 meters . Soil moisture of Louise are stony (Figure 11 ) . Slightly stony content at field capacity, permanent wilting point and conditions account for 6.4% of the total . Stoniness available water holding capacity were determined for generally occurs on the till and lacustrine over till each soil to a depth of 1 .2 meters. deposits. Under slightly stony conditions only .01 to .1 % of the land surface is covered by stones and Field capacity. (FCC is the maximum amount of offer only little or no hindrance to cultivation. water held in a soil, measured a few days after it has been thoroughly saturated and allowed to 4.4 .7 Water Erosion Status and Risk drain freely. This is the optimum moisture Assessment condition for plant growth. Erosion is defined as the detachment and Permanent wilting point (PWP) is the water movement of soil particles by water, wind, ice or content at which plants cannot extract sufficient gravity . Soil erosion by water is the main concern water to meet their requirement and therefore on undulating and hummocky soil landscapes in the begin to wilt. As the moisture content of the soil agricultural region of Manitoba. Soil loss resulting declines, it becomes increasingly difficult for from rainfall-runoff is usually due to combinations plants to use the remaining soil water. of raindrop splash, sheet, rill, gully and channel bank erosion . Sheet and rill erosion are usually least Available water holding. apacity (AWHC) is the apparent in the landscape, but often the most amount of water held in the soil that plants can damaging as it causes gradual thinning of the soil use. The maximum amount of available water profile over the entire slope. Sheet erosion tends to held in the soil is the difference between the occur on upper slopes and ridges whereas the more field capacity and permanent wilting point, visible rills form in the area of concentrated runoff expressed in centimetres of water per unit depth on mid and lower slopes. The deposition of eroded of soil. soil at the base of slopes or in ditches constitutes additional losses and costs attributed to erosion. Soil 4.4.5 Soil Salinity erosion by water is a concern because it reduces production potential, depletes nutrients and degrades Salinity levels for soils sampled in the R.M . are tilth . This process can be accelerated by man's shown in Table _9 . The areal extent and level of activities which increase runoff and reduce surface salinity across the R.M . is also presented in a cover. derived map format shown in Figure 10 Generally, in salt affected areas, the mean surface The observed extent and severity of erosion in (0-15 cm) electrical conductivity level is 6.2 mS/cm the R.M. is minimal (Figure 13 ). Approximately while the subsurface level (50-70 cm) is at 9 .3 728 hectares or only .75 percent of the soils are mS/cm. Salinity affects approximately 10,800 characterized by slight erosion (up to 25 percent of hectares or 11 % of the R.M. of Louise. Slightly the original A horizon may have been removed) . saline conditions with a conductivity of 4-8 mS/cm Most soils with this degree of erosion are not account for 9.8% of the total area. significantly different in use capabilities and management requirements from noneroded soil . The origin and accumulation of soluble salts in soil is from continual evaporation of soil water and Evaluating the risk of water erosion is an the subsequent concentration of salt at the soil important management activity which serves to surface . The salinity in the soils results from seepage identify the relative susceptibility of various soil and evaporation from a saturated soil or from soil landscapes. This information can then be used to adjacent to semi-permanent sloughs and water design effective conservation practices for
44
susceptible areas . The higher the risk, the more Legend - Water Erosion Risk critical becomes the requirement for protective measures . Class Soil Loss The risk of water erosion Figure 14 can be Tonnes/ha/yr estimated using the Universal Soil Loss Equation Negligible <6.0 (Wischmeier and Smith, 1965). The Universal Soil Low 6-10.9 Loss Equation (USLE), Moderate 11 .0-21 .9 A=KRLSCP' High 22.0-32.9 Severe > 33 .0 expresses average annual soil loss (A) as a function of soil erosivity (K), rainfall intensity (R), Soil properties which affect infiltration rate, topography (LS), cover (C) and conservation permeability and total water holding capacity and practices (P) . Although soil and crop management those that affect dispersion, splashing, abrasion and practices are the only practical way to control transportation of soil particles by runoff vary across sediment loss, the inherent susceptibility of a soil to the R.M. and cause differences in soil loss from particle detachment and transport is a major factor in water erosion . Application of the USLE parameters the soil loss equation. Soil erosion due to rainfall and indicates the estimated soil loss differs significantly runoff may vary more than tenfold just because of according to differences in slope length and basic soil differences (Wischmeier et al, 1971) . steepness.
For calculating the soil loss potential in the R.M . Topographic characteristics in the R.M . are of Louise, the following parameters were applied . shown in Figure 12 . Slope steepness in the undulating and hummocky landscapes ranges from 2 R = 765 (rainfall and runoff erosivity factor) to 15 percent. Slope length in these landscapes varies K = Computed soil erodibility factor for each soil from 50 m to 200 m. Soils in landscapes series using data from soil names and layer characterized by steeper slopes and greater lengths files . are more susceptible to water erosion. Soils in nearly LS = Slope length and steepness factor calculated level areas (0 .5 to 2 percent slopes) and level to using: depressional areas (0 to 0 .5 percent slopes) are less susceptible to water erosion. These low relief areas (Slope Length) (Slope %) however, generally receive sediment removed from adjacent upper slopes and knolls. x, a, b =300 m. x,a= .25% c, d = 125 m. b = 1 .0% Soil loss from a bare, unprotected soil surface (no e,f,g =50m. c=3.5% soil protection from crop cover or management) is d=7.0% considered a worst case scenario and is used in e = 12.0 generating the map. Soil loss decreases dramatically f = 22.0% however, if the soil is managed under a minimum till system. The protection to the soil surface provided by C = 1 .0 - Crop cover and management factor crop residue results in a four to five fold reduction in using bare, unprotected soil surface. estimated soil loss . P = 1 .0 - Erosion control conservation practice factor . No special control practice used. The rate of soil loss is usually expressed in terms of average soil loss in tonnes per hectare per year . Estimation of potential soil loss in the R.M . ranged from 0 to 150 tonnes/ha/yr . A low to moderate risk of water erosion would apply to a major portion, 71 percent, of the R.M .
Soil conservation techniques should be practiced Approximately 87% of the project area is made in the R.M . of Louise, particularly on undulating to up of five basic soil groups (Figure 6 ) . The proper hummocky landscapes with steep, long slope maintenance and management of these soils is of situations. Grassed waterways, contour cultivation, utmost importance for sustained agricultural residue management and little or no fallow, all production. The Darlingford-Dezwood Group, of contribute to good soil conservation . good to excellent soils is well suited to any type of farming practise. Slight to moderate stoniness may cause some interference to cultivation and require 4.5 CAPABILITY AND MANAGEMENT some clearing. Local areas of moderate to strong slopes subject the soil to wind and water erosion, The soils in the rural municipality of Louise thus requiring careful management such as crop offer a wide range in agricultural capability . residue cover, grassed waterways, reduced tillage, *Class 1 soils comprise approximately 26 percent etc. Shallow soils on knolls or hillocks should be of the study. These are dominantly well drained, sown down to cover crops. loam to clay loam soils developed on deep lacustrine sediments or overlays on till . The class 1 soils have The Manitou-Fifere Group of soils includes no significant limitations for crop production. very good arable land which is adaptable to a wide *Class 2 soils which represent 37 percent of the range of crops. However, when the weathered shale area are largely the imperfectly drained soils with a till on which these soils are developed becomes dry, wetness limitation . Soils having a very gently the soil slacks to a powdery dust which is very sloping landscape or moderate stoniness are susceptible to wind erosion. Dust clouds which are included. Class 2X is made up of soils having a carried high in the air are characteristic of the moderate limitation caused by the cumulative effect Manitou soil area during dry, windy days. Soil of two or more adverse characteristics which singly management protective measures such as residue are not serious enough to affect the class rating. cover, reduced tillage and shelterbelts must be *Class 3 soils cover 20 percent of the study and adopted in order to prevent further erosion. Areas are characterized by the imperfectly drained of shallow soils over shale bedrock, particularly on solonetzic soil types and other weakly saline soils. the knolls, have a tendency to be droughty . Gently sloping areas are classed as 3T. Imperfectly drained soils subject to inundation are also part of Some of the best agricultural soils in the study this class. Areas of well drained, droughty soils are area belong to the Knudson-Altamont Group . in this class as 3M . These loam to clay loam lacustrine overlays are *Class 4 soils account for 2 percent of the found on level to very gently undulating landscapes. municipality . Included in this group are the Soil drifting and water erosion can occur where moderately saline soils, moderately sloping areas and cover is removed and the surface is exposed. Good soils with exceedingly stony phases . soil conservation and management practices should *Class 5 soils are spread out over 7 percent of the be employed in order to maintain a productive land area and include largely the poorly drained gleysols, base. excessively stony land and strong slopes. The well drained, droughty, gravelly soils are also in this A rather unique area which requires quite a class. different perspective on land use and management is *Class 6 land accounts for 7 percent of soils . The the Eroded Slopes Complex. This group includes major unit in this class is the Eroded Slopes the steep slopes of ravines and river channels, Complex which includes very rough topography with particularly the Pembina River. Generally the land steep slopes along deep ravines and river channels. is non arable due to the steep, erosional slopes. The Some very poorly drained pothole soils are also area is best maintained under tree cover and used for placed in this class . limited grazing. Recreational potential is excellent, *Class 7 land including the marsh and water units in accordance with the beauty and contrast of the makes up the remaining 1 percent of the area. valley . The rugged wooded slopes provide excellent refuge for wildlife habitat. Vegetative cover must be maintained and encouraged for the conservation 4 .6 GENERALIZED SOIL GROUPS of soil, water and wildlife.
46 The Ramada-Wellwood Group of soils are use. The limitations would easily be overcome naturally fertile and range from good to excellent for with minimal cost. all regionally adopted crops . They have thick solums which have a good reserve of organic matter and fair Fair -Soils in their present state have one or to good water retention properties . The Wellwood more moderate limitations that would affect the soils may have lower water retention due to a sand proposed use . These moderate limitations would substrate. In areas where the topography is very be overcome with special construction, design, gently to moderately sloping, the soils are very planning or maintenance. susceptible to water erosion. Wind erosion is a problem on fallow and open fields, as the soil (P) Poor -Soils in their present state have one or aggregates can pulverize or break down readily. more severe limitations that would severely With good soil management and conservation affect the proposed use. To overcome these practices, this group of soils can be maintained at a severe limitations would require the removal of high level of productivity . the limitation or difficult and costly alteration of the soil or of special design or intensive maintenance . 4 .7 SOIL SUITABILITY FOR SELECTED ENGINEERING USES (V) Very Poor -Soils have one or more features so unfavorable for the proposed use that the This section provides information which can be limitation is very difficult and expensive to used by engineers and land use planners concerned overcome or the soil would require such extreme with engineering and related geotechnical aspects of alteration that the proposed use is economically soil . It is intended to supplement the information on impractical . the soil map with additional data on engineering properties of soils. Soil Suitability Subclasses
The criteria used to evaluate soil suitability for The basic soil properties that singly or in selected engineering and related recreational uses are combination with others commonly affect soil adopted from guides found in Coen et al (1977), and suitability for selected engineering properties and from guidelines developed by the Soil Conservation recreation uses are provided in Table 13 . These Service, United States Department of Agriculture subclass designations serve to identify the kind of (USDA, 1971), and the Canada Soil Survey Com- limitation or hazard for a particular use. mittee (CSSC, 1973) . Guides for Assessing Soil Suitability Definition of Soil Suitability Classes Guides for assessing soil suitability for ten Evaluation of soil suitability for engineering and engineering related uses are available on request recreation uses is based on both internal and external from the Soil Resource Section, 346 Ellis Bldg ., soil characteristics . Four soil suitability classes are University of Manitoba. These tables provide as spe- used to evaluate both mineral and organic soils and cifically as possible, definitions of the soil properties hence, mapping units for selected uses . These which result in the specific suitability or degree of ratings express relative degrees of suitability or limitation. In assessing soil suitability for various limitation for potential uses of natural or essentially engineering uses, the degree of suitability is deter- undisturbed soils. The long term effects of the mined by the most restrictive or severe rating potential use on the behaviour of the soil are con- assigned to any one of the listed soil properties . For sidered in the rating. example, if the suitability is "Good" for all but one soil property and it is estimated to be "Very Poor", The four suitability class ratings are defined as then the overall rating of the soil for that selected follows : use is "Very Poor". Suitability of individual soil properties, if estimated to be "Fair" or "Poor", can (G) Good -Soils in their present state have few or be accumulative in their effect for a particular use. minor limitations that would affect the proposed Judgement is required to determine whether the
47
severity of the combined effects of several soil 6. Interpretations of map units do not eliminate the properties on suitability for a particular use will need for on-site evaluation by qualified pro result in downgrading an evaluation. This is left to fessionals . Due to the variable nature of soils, the discretion of the interpreter. It is incorrect to and the scale of mapping, small, unmappable assume that each of the major soil properties influ- inclusions of soils with different properties may encing a particular use has an equal effect. Class be present in an area where a development is limits established for rating the suitability of individ- planned. The need for or importance of on-site ual soil properties take this into account. For a studies depends on the use to be made of the soil selected use, therefore, only those soil properties and the kinds of soil and soil problems involved. which most severely limit that use are specified.
Engineering descriptions of the soils and their 4.8 SOIL SUITABILITY FOR SELECTED estimated properties significant to engineering are RECREATION USES provided in Table 11 . These data, in addition to information contained in other sections of the report This section provides interpretations of the soil have been used to rate the soils according to their suitability for recreational development. All types of suitability for ten selected engineering uses in Table soil can be used for recreational activities of some 12 . When using these interpretations, consid- kind. eration must be given to the following assumptions: Soils and their properties determine to a large 1 . Interpretations are based on predictions of soil degree, the type and location of recreational facil- behavior under defined conditions of use and ities . Wet soils are not suitable for campsites, management as specified in the preamble to each roads, playgrounds or picnic areas . Soils that pond of the guides . and dry out slowly after heavy rains present problems where intensive use is contemplated . It is 2. Soil ratings do not include site factors such as difficult to maintain grass cover for playing fields nearness to towns and highways, water supply, and golf courses on droughty soils. The feasibility aesthetic values, etc. of many kinds of outdoor activities are determined by other basic soil properties such as depth to 3 . Soil ratings are based on natural, undisturbed bedrock, stoniness, topography or land pattern, and soil . the ability of the soil to support vegetation of differ- ent kinds as related to its natural fertility. 4. Soil suitability ratings are usually given for the entire soil, but for some uses, they may be based The suitability of the various soil series and on the limitations of an individual soil horizon phases for selected recreation uses is shown in Table or other earthy layer, because of its overriding 14 , according to four classes, Good, Fair, Poor importance . Ratings rarely apply to soil depths and Very poor defined previously in the section on greater than 1 to 2 meters, but in some kinds of Engineering Uses . Subclasses are employed to soils, reasonable estimates can be given for soil identify the kind of limitation or hazard for a par- material at greater depths . It should be noted ticular use. An explanation of subclass symbols is here that the term "soil" has been used provided in Table 13 . throughout the report in the pedologic sense and differs in concept from that commonly used by The guidelines for various recreation uses are engineers. available from the Soil Resource Section, 346 Ellis Bldg., University of Manitoba. 5 . Poor and very poor soil ratings do not imply that a site cannot be changed to remove, correct or modify the soil limitations . The use of soils rated as poor depends on the nature of the limitations, whether or not the soil limitation can be altered successfully and economically, and on the scarcity of good sites .
48 M rr r M = = M M r M ~ s = M - r M r
Table 11. Louise R.M. Engineering Description of Soils and their Estimated Properties Significant to Engineering Uses
Map Soil Depth Textural Classification % Passing Sieve Disturbed Reaction Elec- Sulphate Shrink- Depth to Sym- Series (cm) Hydraulic (pH) trical Hazard Swell Seasonal bol Name USDA. . : Unified AASHO No, 10 No. 40 No. 200 Conduc- Conduc- Poten- Water 2.0 mm 0.42 mm 0.074 mm tivity tivity tial Table (m) (cm/hr) (mS/cm)
ATN Altamont 30-80 CL-C CL to CH A-6,A-7 85-95 75-85 60-75 .5-2.0 7.0-7.6 <0.5 low mod. > 2 80-100+ L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-95 55-75 40-60 < . 15 7.8-8.2 < 1 low mod.
BED Bede 0-38 GrLS GW A-1 - - 10-15 >25 7.0-7.5 - low low 38+ VGrLS GW A-1 - - 5-10 >25 7 .5-8.0 - low low >2.0
BKR Basker 20-60 FSL-SiL ML to CL A-4,A-7-6 100 100 65-100 - 7 .8-8.2 - low mod. at or strat. near 60-100 SiL-SiCL ML to CL A-4,A-7-6 100 100 75-100 - 7 .8-8 .2 - low mod. surface strat.
CAV Carvey 0-25 SCL-L SC or CL A-4,A-6 100 80-95 40-75 - 7 .8-8 .2 < 1 .6 low mod. seasonal 25-50 SL-L SM or CL A-4,A-6 100 60-95 35-75 - 7 .8-8 .4 < 1 .6 low mod. at or near 50-100 CS-GrS SP or GW A-1 var . < 60 < 5 - 7 .8-8 .4 < 1 .6 low low surface
CMR Cameron 0-25 L ML A-4 100 100 75-85 2-6.5 7 .0-7 .5 <0.5 low low 25+ L ML A-4 100 100 75-85 2-6.5 7 .5-8 .2 <0.5 low low > 2.0
CSE Coatstone 0-25 L ML A-4 80-85 70-75 60-65 2-6.5 7 .5-8 .2 < 1.6 low low 25+ L-CL ML-CL A-4 to A-6 80-85 70-75 60-65 .2-2 7 .7-8 .4 > 1.6 low mod < 1.5
CXT Capell 0-20 SCL-L CL - 95-100 85-95 40-55 1 .5-5.0 7 .6-8.0 < 1.6 low mod. 0 .8 20-40 SCL-L SC or CL AAA-4 95-100 85-95 30-50 1 .5-5 7 .8-8 .2 < 1.6 low mod. 40-70 Gr-SL SM A-1,A-2 - <50 15-30 15-50 7 .8-8 .2 < 1.6 low low 70-100 GrS SP or GP A-1 - <45 < 5 >50 7 .8-8.2 < 1.6 low low
CXV Charman 0-20 CL CL A-7-6 100 100 90-100 < 1 .5 7 .4-7 .8 <0.5 low mod. 20-80 SiCL CL A-7-6 100 100 90-100 < 1 .5 7 .8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. 1 .2 80-100 SiL-SiCL CL A-6,A-7-6 100 100 90-100 0.1-5.0 7 .8-8.4 <0.5 low mod.
CYN Croyon 0-25 SCL-L CL A-6 100 85-95 60-80 1 .5-5.0 7 .2-7 .8 < 0.5 low mod. 25-50 L-CL CL A-6 90-100 60-95 35-75 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. > 2 50-100+ CS-GrS SP A-1 - 20 < 5 > 25 .0 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low low
49 CYN-1 Croyon-1 25-50 L-CL CL A-6 90-100 60-95 35-75 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. >2 50-100+ Cs-GrS shale SP A-1 - <20 < 5 >25 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low low fragments
DGF Darling- 25-70 SiCL-L ML or CL A-4,A-6 85-90 75-95 60-85 1.5-5.0 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. >2 ford 70-100-1- CL-L CL A-4,A-6 85-90 55-75 40-60 <0.5 7.8-8.2 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod.
DZW Dezwood 25-70 SiCL-L ML-CL A-4,A-6 85-90 75-95 60-85 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. >2 70-100+ CL-L CL A-4,A-6 85-90 55-75 40-60 <0.5 7.8-8.2 <1 .6 low-mod. mod.
DOT Dorset 20-50 GrLS-GrS GP-SP A-1 35-60 - < 5 >10 7.4-7.8 - low low > 2 50-100 S-Gr GP-SP A-1 35-60 - < 5 >10 7.8-8.2 - low low
DOM Dromore 0-60 L ML A-4 100 100 40-50 2-6.5 7.2-7.6 - low low 60+ VGrLS GW A-1 - - 5-10 >25 7.5-8.0 - low low >2.0
DRN Duman 0-25 SiL-VFSL ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 1 .5-5.0 7.4-7.8 <0.3 low mod. 25-60 SiL-L ML A-4 100 100 90-100 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.4 <0.3 low mod. > 2
ERX Eroded 30-120 L-CL CL A-6 80-90 70-90 - .05-.5 7.8-8.2 <0.3 low mod. possible Slopes seepage Complex lower slopes
FND Fair- 0-25 VFSL-SiL ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 1 .5-5.0 7.0-7.4 <0.2 low mod. land 25-60 SiL-L ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.4 <0.2 low mod. > 2 60-100 SiL ML A-4 100 100 95-100 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.4 <0.3 low mod.
FRS Ferris 0-40 L-SiCL CL or ML A-4 95-100 85-95 60-95 0.5-2.0 7.6-8.0 < 1 .6 low mod. seasonal 40-100 L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-95 55-85 40-75 < .25 7.8-8.4 > 1 .6 low mod. 0.7
FFR Fifere 30-80 CL CL to CH A-6,A-7-6 90-95 80-95 75-90 1 .5-5.0 6.6-7.0 <0.5 low mod. >2 80-100 L-CL CL A-6 85-95 80-90 70-85 1 .5-5.0 7.6-8.2 <0.5 low mod.
FIR Firdale 0-40 CL CL A-7-6 100 100 90-100 0.5-2.0 6.6-7.3 < 1 .6 low mod. 40-60 Sic CL,MH A-6,A-7-6 100 100 95-100 0.2 6.6-7.3 <0.2 low mod. > 2 60-110 SiCL CL A-6 100 100 95-100 0.5-2.0 6.6-7.3 <0.3 low mod. 110+ SiL CL,ML A-6,A-4 100 100 95-100 0.5-2.0 7.4-7.8 <0.3 low mod.
GBO Glenboro 0-40 L-VFSL ML to CL A-4,A-6 100 100 80-90 1 .5-5.0 7.0-7.4 - low mod. 40-90 LFS-L SM to ML A-2,A-4 100 90-100 30-90 0.5-2.5 7 .4-7 .8 - low mod. 1 .5 strat. 90+ FS-LFS SM to SP A-2,A-4 100 85-95 5-40 1 .5-5 7.8-8 .4 - low low GNO Glenlorne 0-65 L ML A-4 100 100 95-100 2-6 6.5-7 .5 < 1 .6 low mod. 65+ L-CL ML-CL A-4 to A-6 80-85 70-75 60-65 .1-2.0 7.7-8 .2 > 1 .6 low mod . < 1 .5
GRO Grover 0-40 L-SCL ML to CL AAA-6 100 100 80-90 1 .5-5 7.4-7.8 - low mod. seasonal 40-90 LFS-L SM to ML A-2,A-4 100 90-100 30-90 1 .5-5 7.8-8.4 - low mod. 0.7 strat. 90+ FS-LFS SM to SP A-2,A-4 100 85-95 1 .5-5 5-40 7.8-8.4 < 1 .6 low low
GRR Guerra 40-70 SiCL-CL ML or CL A-4,A-6 85-95 75-85 60-75 <0 .2 7.8-8.4 > 1.6 mod.- mod. at high surface 70-100 L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-90 55-75 40-60 <0 .2 7.8-8 .4 > 1 .6 mod.- mod. high
HEB Hebbot 0-25 CL-L CL A-6 95-100 80-95 60-90 1 .5-5.0 7.2-7.6 <0.5 low mod. > 1 .5 25-70 SiCL-L ML or CL A-4,A-6 85-95 75-85 55-80 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. 70-100 CL-L CL A-6 85-90 55-80 40-70 <0.5 7.8-8.2 < 1 .6 low mod.
HOS Horose 0-25 L ML A-4 80-85 70-75 60-65 2.0-6.0 7.5-8.0 > 1 .6 low low seasonal 25+ L-CL ML-CL A-4,A-6 80-85 70-75 60-65 .1-2.0 7.7-8.4 > 1 .6 mod. mod. at surface
HMO Hummer- 0-20 LFS-FSL SM to SP A-2,A-4 95-100 85-95 5-40 6.0-12.5 7.3-7.6 < 1 .6 low low 0.8 ston 20-100 FS-LFS SM to SP A-2-4 95-100 80-95 5-35 6.0-12.5 7.6-8.0 < 1 .6 low-mod. low
JYL Joyale 30-60 SiCL-CL ML or CL A-4,A-6 85-95 75-85 60-75 <0 .2 7.8-8 .2 < 1 .6 mod, mod. 60-100+ L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-90 55-75 40-60 <0.1 7.8-8 .2 >2 high mod. 0.8
JAY Jaymar 0-40 SL-L ML to CL A-6 85-95 75-90 35-70 1-5 7 .3-7 .8 < 1 .6 low mod. 40-80 GrS Gp to Sp A-1 - <10 < 5 >25 7 .8-8.2 - low low > 2 80-100 L-CL CL A-6,A-4 80-90 60-80 50-70 .1-.5 7.8-8.4 < 1 .6 low mod.
KUD Knudson 0-50 CL CL A-6 100 100 70-85 1.5-2.5 7.2-7 .6 <0.5 low mod. > 1 .5 50-70 SiCL ML or CL A-4,A-6 85-90 75-85 60-75 .5-2.0 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. 70-100 L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-90 55-75 40-60 <0.5 7.8-8 .2 < 1.6 low mod.
LEI Levine 20-100 strat. ML to CL A-4,A-7-6 100 100 65-100 .5-2.0 7.8-8.4 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. flood SiL-CL prone
LRT Larrett 0-50 CL CL-OL - 100 100 70-85 1 .5-5 7.2-7.6 <0.5 low mod. > 1 .5 50-70 SiCL ML or CL A-4,A-6 85-90 75-85 60-75 1 .5-5 7.8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. 70-100 L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-90 55-75 40-60 .15-5 7.8-8.2 < 1 .6 low mod.
LYT Lyleton 0-35 LVFS-VFSL OL - 100 100 50-70 1 .5-5 7.0-7.4 < .5 low low >2 35-100+ LVFS-VFS ML A-4 100 100 50-70 1 .5-5 7.3-8.0 < 1 .6 low neg.
5 1 MDN Marsden 0-40 SL-L ML to CL A-6 85-95 75-90 35-70 < 1 .5 7.4-7.8 < 1 .6 low mod. at or 40-85 GrS Gp to Sp A-1 - 10-20 5 - 7.8-8.4 < 1 .6 low low near 85-100 L-CL CL A-6,A-4 80-90 60-80 50-75 - 7.8-8.4 > 1 .6 mod. mod. surface
MHC Marsh 0-15 peaty Pt - - - - - 7.5-8.2 <2 low-mod. - above Complex 15-100 var. var. var. - - - - 7.5-8.2 <6 low-mod. var. surface
MOT Mont- 0-70 L ML A-4 100 100 95-100 2-6 6.7-7 .5 < 1 .6 low mod. gomery 70+ L-CL ML-CL A-4 to A-6 80-85 70-75 60-65 .1-2.0 7.7-8 .2 > 1 .6 low mod. <2.0
MOW Mowbray 30-100 SiL-CL ML,CL A-4,A-6 100 85-95 65-90 .5-1 .5 7.4-7.8 <0.5 low low-mod. >1 .5
MOWI Mowbray Similar to Mowbray but with shale fragments present Shaly Variant
MRH Marring- 0-25 LFS-FSL SM to SP A-2-4 100 90-100 10-35 15.0-25 .0 7.4-7.8 <0 .5 low low hurst 25-55 GrLS-GrS GP or SP A-1 35-60 - < 5 > 15.0 7.8-8.0 <0.5 low low > 2 55-100 S-Gr GP-or SP A-1 35-60 - < 5 >20.0 7.8-8.0 <0.5 low low
MXS Manitou 40-80 L-CL ML to MH A-6,A-7-6 95-100 85-95 65-80 1 .5-5 6.7-7.3 < .5 low mod. > 2 80-110 L-CL ML to MH AAA-7-6 90-100 75-90 60-80 1 .5-5 7.8-8.2 < .5 low mod.
MXT Melland 0-40 SL-L ML to CL A-6 85-95 75-90 35-70 1 .5-5.0 7.4-7.8 < 1 .6 low mod. seasonal 40-85 GrS Gp to Sp A-1 - 10-20 5 >25 7.8-8 .4 < 1 .6 low low 0.8 85-100+ L-CL CL A-6,A-4 80-90 60-80 50-75 .1-.5 7.8-8 .4 1 .6 low mod.
PDA Prodan 0-30 CL CL A-7-6 100 100 90-100 1 .5-5.0 7.6-8 .0 <0.5 low mod. 30-60 CL-SiCL CL A-6,A-7-6 100 100 95-100 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8 .4 <0.5 low mod. 0.7 60-100 VFSL-SiL ML to CL A-6 100 100 95-100 0.5-1 .5 7.8-8 .4 1 .6 mod. low-mod.
PLE Pleasant 0-60 FSL-VFSL SM to ML A-2-4,A-4 100 100 30-75 1 .5-5.0 7.4-7.8 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. 60-90 VFS-FSL SM to ML A-2-4,A-4 100 100 30-75 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8 .2 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. 0.8 90+ strat. SM to ML A-2-4,A-4 100 100 30-75 0.5-2.0 7.8-8.2 1 .6 mod. mod. VFS-FSL
PSE Prosser 0-50 FSL-VFSL SM to ML A-2-4,A-4 100 100 30-75 1 .5-5 .0 7 .0-7.4 <0.2 low mod. 50-80 VFS-FSL SM to ML A-2-4,A-4 100 100 30-75 1 .5-5.0 7.4-7.8 <0.2 low mod. >2 80-100 Strat.VFS-L SM to ML A-2-4,A-4 100 100 30-75 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.4 <0.3 low mod.
RAM Ramada 0-20 CL CL A-7-6 100 100 90-100 0.5-2.0 7.3-7.8 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. 20-75 SiCL CL A-6,A-7-6 100 100 85-95 1 .5-5.0 7.4-7.8 <0.2 low mod. >2 75-100 L-SiCL CL A-6,A-7-6 100 100 80-90 0.5-2.0 7.8-8.4 <0.3 low mod.
RYS Ryerson 0-25 L ML A-4 80-85 70-75 60-65 2-3 .8 7.5-8.2 < .5 low low 25+ L-CL ML-CL A-4 to A-6 80-85 70-75 60-65 .1-2.0 7 .7-8.4 < 1 .6 low mod . >2.0
52 r M rr M M r M rr M r r r = M W r M
SCK Stockton 0-30 LFS SM to SP A-2-4 100 85-95 5-35 10 .0-25.0 6 .8-7.2 <0.5 low low > 2 30-75 LFS-FS SM A-2-4 100 95-100 15-35 10.0-25 .0 6.8-7.2 <0.5 low low 75-110 FS-LFS SM(SW) A-2-4,A-3 100 80-95 10-35 10.0-25.0 7 .8-8 .2 <0.5 low low
SEE Sewell 0-20 LFS-FSL SM,SP A-2-4,A-4 100 100 5-50 7 .6-8.0 < 1 .6 low-mod. low at 20-100 FS-LVFS SM,SP, A-2-4,A-4 100 100 5-50 7 .8-8 .4 < 1 .6 low-mod. low surface ML
SXP Sutton 0-25 CL CL A-7-6 100 100 60-90 < .5 7.6-8.0 < 1 .6 low mod. at or 25-90 SCL-CL CL A-6 100 100 60-80 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8 .4 1 .6 low mod. near 90+ FS-LVFS SM,SP,ML A-2-4,A-4 100 100 5-50 6.-15. 7.8-8 .4 > 1 .6 low low surface
SYE Stony 0-25 CL CL A-6 79-85 70-75 60-65 2.5-4. 7.5-8 .2 > 1 .6 low mod. at or near Creek 25+ L-CL ML-CL A-4 to A-6 80-85 70-75 60-65 .1-2. 8.0-8.4 > 1 .6 low mod. surface
TDP Tadpole 0-30 CL CL A-7-6 100 100 90-100 7.6-8 .0 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. at 30-60 CL-SiCL CL A-6,A-7-6 100 100 95-100 7.8-8 .4 < 1 .6 tow-mod. mod. surface 60-100 strat. ML to CL A-4,A-6 100 100 95-100 7.8-8.4 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. VFSL-SiL-SiCL
TGR Taggart 0-25 VFSL-SiL ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 0.5-1.5 7.6-8.0 <0.5 low low 25-60 SiL-L ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 0.5-1.5 7.8-8.4 <0.5 low low 0.8 60-100 SiL ML A-4 100 100 95-100 0.5-1 .5 7.8-8.4 < 1 .6 low-mod. low
TWC Two 0-65 L-CL CL A-4, A-6 100 90-100 65-75 3.-12. 6.5-7.5 < 1 .6 low mod. Creeks 65+ L-CL CL A-4, A-6 85-95 75-90 55-70 3.0 7.7-8.2 1.6 low mod. < 1 .5
TOC Torcan 0-25 VFSL-SiL ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 1 .5-5.0 7.0-7.4 <0.5 low low 25-60 SiL-L ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 1 .5-5.0 7.4-7.8 <0.5 low low-mod. 1 .0 60-100 SiL ML A-4 100 100 95-100 0.5-1 .5 7.8-8.4 ULH Ullrich 40-80 CL-C CL-CH A-4 85-100 75-95 60-90 .5-1.5 7 .8-8.2 <0.5 low mod. 1 .2 80-100 L-CL CL AAA-6 85-90 55-80 40-70 .15-.5 7.8-8.2 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. VDS Vordas 0-25 SiL-CL CL A-6,A-7-6 100 100 95-100 - 7 .6-8.0 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. at 25-60 SiL-L ML A-4,A-6 100 100 90-100 - 7 .8-8 .4 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. surface 60-100 SiL-L ML A-4,A-6 100 100 95-100 - 7 .8-8 .4 1 .6 mod. mod. VLT Villette 0-75 L CL A-4 100 100 95-100 2 .5-4.0 6.5-7 .5 < 1 .6 low mod. at or near 75+ LCL ML-CL A-4, A-6 80-85 70-75 60-65 .1-2.0 7.7-8.2 > 1 .6 low mod. surface WTI Watrine 40-70 SiCL-CL ML or CL A-4,A6 85-95 75-85 60-75 .5-1 .5 7.8-8.4 < 1 .6 low-mod. mod. at 70-110 L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-95 55-75 40-60 < .5 7.6-8.2 <1 .6 low-mod mod surface WWD Wellwood 0-40 SCL-CL CL A-6 100 100 60-80 1 .5-5.0 7.0-7.4 - low mod. 40-85 SCL-CL CL A-6 100 100 60-80 1 .5-5.0 7.8-8.4 - low mod. >2 85-100 FS-LVFS SM,SP,ML A-2,A-6 100 100 5-50 6-13 7.8-8.4 - low ZIM Zinman 25-70 CL-C CH A-7-6 95-100 90-100 75-90 < .15 7.8-8.4 >2.0 high high 1 .2 70-110 L-CL CL A-4,A-6 85-90 55-80 40-70 .15-.50 8.2 >2.0 high mod. seepage Table 12 . Suitability Ratings and Limitations of Soils in the Study Area for Selected Engineering Uses Map Syuiboi Soil Name . Top . Sand & Road Permanent Local Sanitary Land- Cover Sewage Septic (Soil Code Soil Gravel Fin Bldgs. Roads anti Trench fill Material Lagoon Fields /Phase) w/Basement Streets . Area $UR /xxxx Urban land ATN /xblx Altamont Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk ATN /xbxx Altamont Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk ATN /xcxx Altamont Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk ATN /xxxx Altamont Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk BED /xdxx Bede Pbs G G G G Vsg Vkg Vs Vag Gg BED /xxxx Bede Pbs G G G G Vsg Vkg Vs Vak Gg BED /ldxx Bede Pbs G G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg BKR /xbxx Basker Pi Va Pw Vi vi vi Viw Vw Vik Vi BKR /xcxx Basker Pi Va Pw Vi vi Viii Viii Pw Vi Vhi BKR /xxxx Basker Pi Va Pw Vi vi vi Viw Pw vi vi III BKRp /xxxx Basker, peaty Vwi Va Vh Viw vi vi Viw Pw vi vi CAV /xxxx Carvey Fs Faq Pw Pw Pw Vwg Viik Pw Vk Vhg CMR /ldxx Cameron Ft Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Pt Fk CSE /xcxx Coatstone Fbs Va Fa Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fat Fk CXT /xcxx Capell Fsb G Fw Pw Fw Vsk Vkg7 Pq Vka Ph~~T CXT /xxxx Capell Fbs G Fw Pw Fw Vsk Vkg Pd Vk Phg CXV /xbxx Charman Fsb Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fa Ph CXV /xxxx Charnian Fsb Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fa Ph CYN /xcxx Croyon Fbs G G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg CYN /xdxx Croyon Fts G G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg CYN /xxxx Croyon Fsb G G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg CYN1 /xbxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Fbs Fqa G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg CYN1 /xcxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Fb Fqa G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg CYN1 /xdxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Ftb Fqa G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg CYN1 /xxxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Fbs Fqa G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg DGF /xblx Darlingford Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk DGF /xbxx Darlingford Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk DGF /xclx Darlingford Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk DGF /xcxx Darlingford Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk DGF /xdxx Darlingford Ft Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Pt Fk DGF /xxlx Darlingford Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk DGF /xxxx Darlingford Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk DGF /lcxx Darlingford Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk DGF /ldxx Darlingford Ft Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Pt Fk DOM /xdxx Dromore Fts G G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg DOM /ldxx Dromore Fts G G G G Vsk Vk Pq Vka Gg DOT /xcxx Dorset Pbs G G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg DOT /xdxx Dorset Pbs G G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg DOT /xxxx Dorset Pbs G G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg DOT1 /xbxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Pbs Fa G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg DOT1 /xc3x Dorset, Shaly Var. Pp Fap Fp Pp Fp Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg DOT1 /xcxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Pbs Fa G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg 55 DOT1 /xdxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Pbs Fa G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg DOTI /xxxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Pbs Fa G G G Vsk Vkg Vs Vak Gg DRN /2dxx Durnan Fb Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Pt Fk DZW /xclx Dezwood Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk DZW /xcxx Dezwood Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk DZW /xd3x Dezwood Pp Va Fap Pp Fap Pp G Pp Pt Fk DZW /xdxx Dezwood Fst Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Pt Fk DZW /xelx Dezwood Pt Va Fa Fat Fat Fs Ft Fts Vt Fkt DZW /xe3x Dezwood Ppt Va Fap Pp Fpt Pp Ft Pp Vt Fkt ERX /xxxx Eroded Slope Compl Vt Va Pt Vt Vt Pt Vt Vt Vt Vt FFR /xblx Fifere Fbs Va Fa Fa Fa Fk Fk Fs Fk Fk FFR /xb2x Fifere Fp Va Fa Fap Fa Fkp Fk Fsp Fk Fk FFR /xbxx Fifere Fbs Va Fa Fa Fa Fk Fk Fs Fk Fk FFR /xclx Fifere Fbs Va Fa Fa Fa Fk Fk Fs Ft Fk FFR /xcxx Fifere Fbs Va Fa Fa Fa Fk Fk Fs Ft Fk FFR /xdlx Fifere Ft Va Fa Fa Fa Fk Fk Fs Pt Fk FFR /xd3x Fifere Pp Va Fap Pp Fap Pp Fk Pp Pt Fk FFR /xd5x Fifere VP Va VP VP VP VP Fk VP Vp Fk FFR /xelx Fifere Pt Va Fa Fat Fat Fk Fkt Fst Vt Fkt FFR /xe4x Fifere Ppt Va Pp Pp Pp Pp Fkt Pp Vt Fkt FFR /xxlx Fifere Fbs Va Fa Fa Fa Fk Fk Fs Fk Fk FFR /xx2x Fifere Fbp Va Fa Fap Fa Fkp Fk Fk Fsp Fk FFR /xxxx Fifere Fb Va Fa Fa Fa Fk Fk Fs Fk Fk FFR /lelx Fifere Vb Va Fa Fat Fat Fk Fkt Fst Vt Fak FIR /xbxx Firdale Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk FIR /xcxx Firdale Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk FIR /xdxx Firdale Fst Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Pt Fk FIR /xexx Firdale Pt Va Fa Fat Fat Fs Ft Fst Vt Fkt FND /xbxx Fairland G Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Fak Fk FND /xcxx Fairland G Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Fat Fk FND /xdxx Fairland Ft Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Pt Fk FND /xxxx Fairland G Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Fak Fk FND /lcxx Fairland Fb Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Fat Fk FND /ldxx Fairland Fbt Va Fa Fa Fa G G G Pt Fk FRS /xxxx Ferris Fbs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk FRS /xcl s Ferris Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fkt Fk GBO /xbxx Glenboro G Pq G G G Pk Gg G Pk Gg GBO /xcxx Glenboro G Pq G G G Pk Gg G Pk Gg GBO /xdxx Glenboro Ft Pa G G G Pk Gg G Pkt Gg GNO /xxxx Glenlorne Fs Va Fa Pw Fwa Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk GRO /xxxx Grover G Paq G Pw Fw Pw Fw G Pka Fh GRR /xclx Guerra Fs Va Paw Vw Pw Vhw Vhw Pw Ph Vh GRR /xx2x Guerra Fsp Va Vh Vh Pw Vw Vh Pw Vh Vh GRR /xx4x Guerra Pp Va Vh Vh Pwp Vw Vh Pwp Vh Vh GRR /xxxx Guerra Fs Va Vh VII Pw Vw Vh Pw Vh Vh GRR /xbxs Guerra Pn Va Vh Vh Pw Vw Vh Pw Vh Vh GRR /xxls Guerra Pn Va Vh VII Pw Vw Vh Pw Vh Vh GRR /xx2s Guerra Pn Va Vh Vh Pw Vw Vh Pw Vh Vh GRR /xxxs Guerra Pn Va Vh Vh Pw Vw Vh Pw iVh Vh 56 GRR /xxxt Guerra Vn Va Vh Vh Pw Vw Vh Pw Vh Vh GRRp /xxxx Guerra, peaty Ps Va Vwa Vhw Vw Vhw Vhw Vw Vh Vh GRRp (xxxs Guerra, peaty Pn Va Vh Vhw Vw Vhw Vhw Vw Vh Vh GRRp /xxxt Guerra, peaty Vh Va Vw Vh Vw Vhw Vhw Vw Vh Vh HEB /xbxx Hebbot Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk HEB /xcxx Hebbot Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fa Pk HMO /xxxx Hummerston Ps Pa Fw Pw Fw Vsk Vk Fs Vk Phg HOS lxxxx Horose Fs Va Vh Vh Pw Vhw Vh Pw Vh Vh JAY /xxxx Jaymar Fbs Paq Fa Fa Fa Pkg Pkg Pq Pkg Fkg JYL /xbxx Joyale Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk JYL /xcxx Joyale Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fkt Fhk JYL /xxlx Joyale Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk JYL /xx2x Joyale Fsp Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fsp Fk Fhk JYL /xxxx Joyale Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk JYL /xbxs Joyale Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk JYL /xcxs Joyale Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fkt Fhk JYL /xx2s Joyale Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk JYL /xx3s Joyale Pnp Va Fap Pp Fap Pwp Fw Pp Fkp Fhk JYL /xx4s Joyale Pnp Va Pp Pp Pp Pwp Fw Pp Pp Fhk JYL /xxxs Joyale Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk JYL /xxxt Joyale Vn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk JYL /xx3u Joyale Vn Va Fap Pp Fp Pwp Fw Pp Fkp Fhk KUD /xblx Knudson Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk KUD /xb2x Knudson Fsp Va Fa Fap Fa Fsp G Fp Ft Fk KUD /xbxx Knudson Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk KUD /xclx Knudson Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk KUD /xcxx Knudson Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk KUD /xdxx Knudson Fst Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Pt Fk KUD /xx2x Knudson Fsp Va Fa Fap Fa Fsp G Fp Fk Fk KUD /xx3x Knudson Pp Va Fap Pp Fap Pp G Pp Fp Fk KUD /xxxx Knudson Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs 'Fk Fk KUD /lcxx Knudson Fb Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk LEI /xbxx Levine Fis Va Faw Piw Pi Pi Pi Fs ~I Vi Pi LEI /xcxx Levine Fis Va Faw Piw Pi Pi Pi Fs Vi Pi LEI /xxxx Levine Fis Va Faw Piw Pi Pi Pi Fs Vi Pi LRT /xbxx Larrett Fs Va 'Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk LYT /xdxx Lyleton Ft Va ~ Fa Fa Fa Pk Pk Fs Pk Fk LYT /xxxx Lyleton G Va i Fa Fa Fa Pk Pk Fs Pk Fk I MDN /xxxx Marsden Fsb Pa Pw Vh Pw Vwg Vhg Pw Vhg Vhg i MHC (xxxx Marsh Vw Va Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw Vh Vw !MOT /xcxx Montgomery I Fs Va i Fa Pw Faw Pw Faw Fs Fk Fkh MOT /xbxs Montgomery ~Pn Va Fa Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fkh I MOT /xxxs Montgomery 'Pn Va Fa Pw Faw li Pw Fw Fs Fh Fkh MOW /xcxx Mowbray ~, Fa IVa Fa i Fa Fa Fis Fi Fs Fat Fk MOW /xdxx Mowbray Fit Va Fa Fa Fa Fis Fi Fs Pt Fk MOW /xxxx Mowbray I~ Fs !Va Fa Fa Fa Fis Fi Fs Fa Fk l'I 'MOW1 /xclx Mowbray, Shaly Var Fs ~I Va Fa Fa Fa Fis ~, Fi Fs Fat Fk MOW1 /xcxx Mowbray, Shaly Var Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fis Fi Fs Fat Fk MOWl /xxxx Mowbray, Shaly Var Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fis Fi Fs Fa IFk 57 MRH /xcxx Marringhurst Ps G G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg MRH /xdxx Marringhurst Pbt G G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg MRH 1 /xdxx Marringhurst, Shaly Pbt G G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg MRH 1 /xxxx Marringhurst, Shaly Ps G G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg MXS /xblx Manitou Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fks Fk Fs Fk Fk MXS /xbxx Manitou Fs Va Fa Fa Fâ Fs Fk Fs Fk. Fk. MXS /xclx Manitou Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs Fk Fs Fkt Fk MXS /xc2x Manitou Fp Va Fa Fap Fa Fsp Fk Fp Fkt Fkt MXS /xcxx Manitou Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fsk Fk. Fs Fkt Fk MXS /xd4x Manitou Ft Va Pp Pp Pp Pp Fk Pp Pt Fk. MXS /xdxx Manitou Ft Va Fa Fa Fa Fsk Fk. Fs Pt Fk MXS /xe4x Manitou Ppt Va Pp Pp Pp Pp Ft Pp Vt Ft MXS /xexx Manitou Pt Va Fa Fat Fat Fks Fkt Fst Vt Fkt MXS /xfxx Manitou Vt Va Fat Pt Pt Ft Pt Pt Vt Pt MXS /xxlx Manitou Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs Fk. Fs Fk Fk MXS /xx2x Manitou Fp Va Fa Fap Fa Fsp Fk Fsp Fk Fk MXS /xxxx Manitou Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fks Fk Fs Fk Fk MXT /xxxx Melland Fsb Pa Faw Pw Fw Pwg Pkg Pq Pkg Fkg MXT /xxxs Melland Pn Pa Faw Pw Fw Pwg Pkg Pq Pkg Fkg PDA /xbxx Prodan Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk. Ph PDA /xcxx Prodan Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fkt Ph PDA /xxxx Prodan Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw i Fs Fk Ph PDA /xbxs Prodan Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw 'Fs Fk i Ph PDA /xxxs Prodan Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Ph PLE /xcxx Pleasant G Va Faw Pw Faw Pkw I Pk G Pk Phg PSE /xdxx Prosser Ft Va Fa Fa Fa Pk Pk G Pkt G PSE /Icxx Prosser G Va Fa Fa Fa ~Pk Pk G Pk G PSE /2dxx Prosser Fbt Va Fa Fa Fa Pk Pk G Pt G RAM /xbxx Ramada Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk Fk RAM /xclx Ramada Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk RAM /xcxx Ramada Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fkt Fk RAM /xdxx Ramada Fts Va Fa Fa ~I Fa Fs G Fs Pt Fk RAM /xxxx Ramada Fs Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fk. Fk RYS /xcxx Ryerson Fsb Va Fa Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fat Fk ' RYS /xdxx Ryerson Ft Va Fa 'Fa Fa Fs G Fs Pt Fk. I RYS /xxxx Ryerson Fsb ~i Va Fa ~ Fa Fa Fs G Fs Fa Fk SCK /xbxx Stockton Ps jFa G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg SCK /xcxx Stockton ~ Ps Fa G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg SCK /xxxx Stockton ~ Ps Fa G G G Vsk Vk Fs Vk Gg SCK /lbxx Stockton Ps Fa G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg SCK /lcxx Stockton Ps Fa G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg SCK /ldxx Stockton Ps Fa G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg SCK /2cxx Stockton Psb Fa G G G Vsk Vk Vs Vk Gg SEE /xxxx Sewell Ps Pa Pw Pw Pw Vws Vk Vs Vk Vh SXP /xxxx Sutton Fs Pq Pw Pw Pw Vhw Pw Pwg Vk Vh SYE /xcxx Stoney Creek Fs Va Vh Vh Pw Vw Vh Pw Vh Vh TDP /xxxx Tadpole Fs Va Pw Pw Pw Vw Pw Pw Ph Vh TDP /xxls Tadpole Pn Va Pw Pw Pw Vw Pw Pw Ph Vh TDP /xx3s Tadpole Pnp Va Pw Pw Pw Vw Pw Pw Ph Vh 58 TDP /xxxs Tadpole Pn Va Pw Pw Pw Vw Pw Pw Ph Vh TDPp /xxxx Tadpole, peaty Ps Va Vw Vw Vw Vw Vhw Vw Vh Vh TGR /xxxx Taggart G Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw G Fak Ph TOC /xbxx Torcan G Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw G Fak Ph TOC /xxxx Torcan G Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw G Fak Ph TWC /xblx Two Creeks Fs Va Fa Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk TWC /xxxx Two Creeks Fs Va Fa Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk TWC /xbxs Two Creeks Pn Va Fa Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk TWC /xxxs Two Creeks Pn Va Fa Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk TWC /xxxt Two Creeks Vn Va Fa Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk ULH /xblx Ullrich Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk ULH /xbxx Ullrich Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk ULH /xcxx Ullrich Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fkt Fhk ULH /xxlx Ullrich Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk ULH /xxxx Ullrich Fs Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk ULH /xbxs Ullrich Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk ULH /xxxs Ullrich Pn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk ULH /xbxt Ullrich Vn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk ULH /xxxt Ullrich Vn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fhk ULH /xxxu Ullrich Vn Va Faw Pw Faw Pw Fw Fs Fk Fk VDS /xxxx Vordas G Va Pw Pw Pw Vw Pw Pw Pk Vh VLT /xxxx Villette Fs Va Vh Vh Pw Vw VII Pw Fa Vh WTI /xxxx Watrine Fs Va Vh VII Pw Vw Vh Pw Fk Vh WWD /xbxx Wellwood Fs Pq Fa G Fa Vk Gg Fs Vk Fk WWD /xcxx Wellwood Fs Pq Fa G Fa Vk Gg Fs Vkg Fk WWD /xxxx Wellwood Fs Pq Fa G Fa Vsk Gg Fs Vk Fkg ZIM /xblx Zinman Ps Va Pal Pwa Pa Psh Fw Ps G Vk ZIM /xbxx Zinman Ps Va Pal Pwa Pa Phs Fw Ps G Vk ZIM /xx2x Zimnan Ps Va Pal Pwa Pa Psh Fw Ps G Vk ZIM /xxxx Zinman Ps Va Pal Pwa Pa Phs Fw Ps G Vk ZIM /xbxs Zinman Psn Va Pal Pwa Pa Psh Fw Ps G Vk ZIM /xx4s Zimnan Ppn Va Pp Pwp pp Pp Fw Pp Pp Vk ZIM /xxxs Zinman Psn Va Pal Pwa Pa Plis Fw Ps G Vk ZIM /xbxt Zinman Vn Va Pal Pwa Pa Phs Fw Ps G Vk ZZ /xxxx Water Vw Va Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw Vh 59 Table 13, Codes utilized to identify and indicate the degree of soil limitation or potential limitations in evaluating soil for selected agricultural uses and environmental applications . suitability for selected Engineering and Recreational GIS techniques can help the land manager in Uses (Table 12 and 14) understanding soil and landscape relations and in implementing research and demonstration activities . a subgrade properties In addition, use of the GIS can assist in the design of b thickness of topsoil sampling and instrumentation sites for monitoring c coarse fragments on surface soil quality and assessing environmental impact. d depth to bedrock e erosion or erodibility A series of derived and interpretive maps f susceptibility to frost hazard for the R.M . of Louise are provided in Figures 7 g contamination hazard of to 14. These colour thematic maps are generated by groundwater the PAMAP Geographic Information System from h depth to seasonal water table the 1 :50,000 scale soil map and related soil analysis i flooding or inundation and landscape information. The maps portray a thickness of slowly permeable selection of individual soil properties or landscape material conditions for each map unit delineation . k permeability or hydraulic Combinations of soil properties or landscape features conductivity affecting land use and management are derived as 1 shrink-swell properties specific interpretations . m moisture limitations or deficit n salinity or sulphate hazard The interpretive and single factor themes 0 organic matter generated for the R.M. of Louise are: p stoniness q depth to sand or gravel r rockiness s surface texture Interpretive Map for Agricultural t topographic slope class Capability ...... Figure 7 u moist consistence Interpretive Map for Irrigation . . . Figure 8 w wetness or soil drainage class Derived Map for Drainage . . . . . Figure 9 z permafrost Derived Map for Salinity . . . . . Figure 10 Derived Map for Stoniness . . . . Figure 11 Derived Map for Topography . . Figure 12 Derived Map for Erosion . . . . . Figure 13 4 .8 .1 Single Factor and Derived Interpretive Map for Water Erosion Interpretive Maps Risk ...... Figure 14 Evaluation of soil resource information (soil properties) is most appropriate in relation to the landscape and environment in which the soil occurs . Management of soil and landscape data using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology enables rapid and more quantitative analysis of natural soil variability than is possible using manual techniques. The areal distribution of various soil components and properties that occur in complex landscapes can be highlighted in map form and so assist in planning and managing the soil resource . Such single factor maps and interpretative maps show the distribution of individual soil properties 60 Table 14 . Suitability Ratings of Soils For Recreational Uses Map: Symbol :,: . . Soil Name '' play Picnic . Camp Path and Permanent Bldgs:' (Soil Code/Phase) Ground Area . . . Area Trails ` without Basement $UR /xxxx Urban land ATN /xblx Altamont Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa ATN /xbxx Altamont Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa ATN /xcxx Altamont Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa ATN /xxxx Altamont Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa BED /xdxx Bede Pt Fs Fs G G BED /xxxx Bede Fsm Fs Fs G G BED /ldxx Bede Ptg Fs Fs G G BKR /xbxx Basker Viw Viw Viw Pw Vh BKR /xcxx Basker Piw Viw Viw Pw Vh BKR /xxxx Basker Viw Vwi Vwi Pw Vh BKRp /xxxx Basker, peaty Vsi Vwi Vwi Vs Vh CAV !xxxx Carvey Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw CMR /ldxx Cameron Pt G G G Fa CSE /xcxx Coatstone Fst Fsw Fsw Fw Faw CXT /xcxx Capell Fwt Fsw Fs Fsw Faw CXT /xxxx Capell Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Fw CXV /xbxx Charman Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw CXV /xxxx Charman Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw CYN /xcxx Croyon Fst Fsm Fs Fs G CYN /xdxx Croyon Pt Fsm Fs Fs G CYN /xxxx Croyon Fs Fsm Fs Fs G CYN1 /xbxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Fs Fsm Fs Fs G CYN1 /xcxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Fst Fsm Fs Fs G CYN1 /xdxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Pt Fsm Fs Fs G CYN1 /xxxx Croyon, Shaly Var. Fs Fsm Fs Fs G DGF /xblx Darlingford Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /xbxx Darlingford Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /xclx Darlingford Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /xcxx Darlingford Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /xdxx Darlingford Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /xxlx Darlingford Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /xxxx Darlingford Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /lcxx Darlingford Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa DGF /ldxx Darlingford Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa DOM /xdxx Dromore Pt Fsm Fs Fs G DOM /ldxx Dromore Pt Fsm Fs Fs G DOT /xcxx Dorset Pmq Fs Fs G G DOT /xdxx Dorset Ptq Fs Fs G G DOT /xxxx Dorset Pmq Fs Fs G G DOT1 /xbxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Psq Fs Fs G G DOT1 /xc3x Dorset, Shaly Var. Ppq Fsp Pp Fp Fp DOT1 /xcxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Psq Fs Fs G G DOT1 /xdxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Pst Fs Fs G G DOT1 /xxxx Dorset, Shaly Var. Psq Fs Fs G G 61 DRN /2dxx Durnan Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa DZW /xclx Dezwood Fts Fs Fs Fs Fa DZW /xcxx Dezwood Fts Fs Fs Fs Fa DZW /xd3x Dezwood Ptp Fsp Pp Fsp Fap DZW /xdxx Dezwood Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa DZW /xelx Dezwood Vt Fst Fts Fs Fta DZW /xe3x Dezwood Vt Fpt Pp Fsp Fpt ERX /xxxx Eroded Slope Compl Vt Vt Vt Pt Vt FFR /xblx Fifere Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa FFR /xb2x Fifere Fsp Fs Fsp Fs Fa FFR /xbxx Fifere Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa FFR /xclx Fifere Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa FFR /xcxx Fifere Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa FFR /xdlx Fifere Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa FFR /xd3x Fifere Ptp Fsp Pp Fsp Fap FFR /xd5x Fifere VP Vp VP Vp Pp FFR /xelx Fifere Vt Fst Fst Fs Fat FFR /xe4x Fifere Vt Pp Pp Pp Fap FFR /xxlx Fifere Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa FFR /xx2x Fifere Fk Fs Fsp Fs Fa FFR /xxxx Fifere Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa FFR /lelx Fifere Vt Fst Fs Fat Fat FIR /xbxx Firdale Fs Fsa Fs Fs Fs FIR /xcxx Firdale Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa FIR /xdxx Firdale Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa FIR /xexx Firdale Vt Fst Fst Fst Fat FND /xbxx Fairland G G G G Fa FND /xcxx Fairland Ft G G G Fa FND /xdxx Fairland Pt G G G Fa FND /xxxx Fairland G G G G Fa FND Ilcxx Fairland Ft G G G Fa FND /ldxx Fairland Pt G G G Fa FRS /xxxx Ferris Fws Fws Fws Fws Faw FRS /xcls Ferris Fwt Pn Pn Fws Faw GBO /xbxx Glenboro G G G G G GBO /xcxx Glenboro Ft G G G G GBO /xdxx Glenboro Pt G G G G GNO /xxxx Glenlorne Fws Fw Fws Fsw Fwa GRO /xxxx Grover Fw Fw Fw Fw Fw GRR /xclx Guerra Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw GRR /xx2x Guerra Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw GRR /xx4x Guerra Pwp Pwp Pwp Pwp Pw GRR /xxxx Guerra Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw GRR /xbxs Guerra Pw Pwn Pwn Pw Pw GRR /xxls Guerra Pw Pwn Pwn Pw Pw GRR /xx2s Guerra Pw Pwn Pwn Pw 'Pw GRR /xxxs Guerra Pw Pwn Pwn Pw I Pw GRR /xxxt Guerra Pwn Vwn Vwn iPw Pw GRRp /xxxx Guerra, peaty Vws Vws Vws Vs Vaw 62 GRRp /xxxs Guerra,peaty Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw GRRp /xxxt Guerra,peaty Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw HEB /xbxx Hebbot Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa HEB /xcxx Hebbot Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa HMO /xxxx Hummerston Fsw Fsw Fsw Fw Fw HOS /xxxx Horose Pw Pw Pw Pw Ph JAY /xxxx Jaymar Fsq Fs Fs Fs Fa JYL /xbxx Joyale Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw JYL /xcxx Joyale Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw JYL /xxlx Joyale Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw JYL /xx2x Joyale Fsp Fsw Fsp Fsw Faw JYL /xxxx Joyale Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw JYL /xbxs Joyale Fsn Pn Pn Fsw Faw JYL /xcxs Joyale Ftn Pn Pn Fsw Faw JYL /xx2s Joyale Fpn Pn Pn Fsw Faw JYL /xx3s Joyale Pp Pn Pn Fsp Fap JYL /xx4s Joyale Pp Pnp Pn Pp Fap JYL /xxxs Joyale Fsw Pn Fsw Fsw Faw JYL /xxxt Joyale Pn Vn Vn Fsw Fa JYL /xx3u Joyale Vn Vn Vu Fsp Fp KUD /xblx Knudson Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa KUD /xb2x Knudson Fsp Fs Fsp Fs Fa KUD /xbxx Knudson Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa KUD /xclx Knudson Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa KUD /xcxx Knudson Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa KUD /xdxx Knudson Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa KUD /xx2x Knudson Fsp Fs Fsp Fs Fa KUD /xx3x Knudson Pp Fsp PP Fsp Fap KUD /xxxx Knudson Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa KUD /lcxx Knudson Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa LEI /xbxx Levine Fsi Fsi Pi Fsw Pi LEI /xcxx Levine Fsi Fsi Pi Fsw Pi LEI /xxxx Levine Fis Fis Pi Fsw Pi LRT /xbxx Larrett Fs Fs Fs Fs Fi LYT /xdxx Lyleton Pt G G G Fa LYT /xxxx Lyleton G G G G Fa MDN /xxxx Marsden Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw MHC /xxxx Marsh Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw MOT /xcxx Montgomery Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw MOT /xbxs Montgomery Fn Pn Pnw Fsw Faw MOT /xxxs Montgomery Fn Pn Pn Fsw Faw MOW /xcxx Mowbray Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa MOW /xdxx Mowbray Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa MOW /xxxx Mowbray Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa MOWI /xclx Mowbray, Shaly Var Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa MOW I /xcxx Mowbray, Shaly Var Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa MOWl /xxxx Mowbray, Shaly Var Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa MRH /xcxx Marringhurst Pmq Fms Fs G G MRH /xdxx Marringhurst Pmt Fs Fs G G 63 MRH1 /xdxx Marringhurst,Shaly Pmt Fs Fs G G MRH1 /xxxx Marringhurst,Shaly Pmq Fs Fs G G MXS /xblx Manitou Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa MXS /xbxx Manitou Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa MXS /xclx Manitou Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa MXS /xc2x Manitou Fpt Fs Fsp Fs Fa MXS /xcxx Manitou Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa MXS /xd4x Manitou Ptp Pp Pp Pp Fap MXS /xdxx Manitou Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa MXS /xe4x Manitou Vt Pp Pp Pp Fpt MXS /xexx Manitou Vt Fst Fst Fs Fat MXS /xfxx Manitou Vt Pt Pt Pt Pt MXS /xxlx Manitou Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa MXS /xx2x Manitou Fsp Fs Fsp Fs Fa MXS /xxxx Manitou Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa MXT /xxxx Melland Fws Fws Fws Fws Fw MXT /xxxs Melland Fwn PR Pn Fws Faw PDA /xbxx Prodan Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw PDA /xcxx Prodan Fst Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw PDA /xxxx Prodan Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw PDA /xbxs Prodan Fsn Pn Pn Fsw Faw PDA /xxxs Prodan Fsh Pn Pn Fsw Faw PLE /xcxx Pleasant Fwt Fw Fw Fw Faw PSE /xdxx Prosser Pt G G G Fa PSE /lcxx Prosser Ft G G G Fa PSE /2dxx Prosser Pt G G G Fa RAM /xbxx Ramada Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa RAM /xclx Ramada Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa RAM /xcxx Ramada Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa RAM /xdxx Ramada Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa RAM /xxxx Ramada Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa RYS /xcxx Ryerson Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa RYS /xdxx Ryerson Pt Fs Fs Fs Fa RYS /xxxx Ryerson Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa SCK /xbxx Stockton Fs Fs Fs G G SCK /xcxx Stockton Fst Fs Fs G G SCK /xxxx Stockton Fs Fs Fs SCK /lbxx Stockton Fs Fs Fs G G SCK /lcxx Stockton Fts Fs Fs ~i G G SCK /ldxx Stockton Pt Fs Fs G G SCK /2cxx Stockton Vs Vs Vs Vs G SEE /xxxx Sewell Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw SXP /xxxx Sutton Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw SYE /xcxx Stoney Creek Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw TDP /xxxx Tadpole Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw TDP /xxls Tadpole Pw Pwn Pwn Pw Pw TDP /xx3s Tadpole Pwp Pwn Pnp Pw Pw TDP /xxxs Tadpole Pwn Pwn Pwn Pw Pw TDPp /xxxx Tadpole, peaty Vw Vw Vw Pw Va 64 TGR /xxxx Taggart Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw TOC /xbxx Torcan Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw TOC /xxxx Torcan Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw TWC /xblx Two Creeks Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw TWC /xxxx Two Creeks Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw TWC /xbxs Two Creeks Fwn Pn Pn Fsw Faw TWC /xxxs Two Creeks Fwn Pn Pn Fsw Faw TWC /xxxt Two Creeks Pn Vn Vn Fsw Faw ULH /xblx Ullrich Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw ULH /xbxx Which Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw ULH /xcxx Ullrich Fwt Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw ULH /xxlx Ullrich Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw ULH /xxxx Ullrich Fsw Fsw Fsw Fsw Faw ULH /xbxs Ullrich Fwn Pn Pn Fsw Faw ULH /xxxs Ullrich Fwn Pnp Pn Fsw Faw ULH /xbxt Ullrich Pn Vn Vn Fsw Faw ULH /xxxt Ullrich Pn Vn Vn Fsw Faw ULH /xxxu Ullrich Vn Vn Vn Fsw Faw VDS /xxxx Vordas Pw Pw Pw Pw Pw VLT /xxxx Villette Pw Pw Pw Pw Vh WTI /xxxx Watrine Pws Pw Pw Pw Vh WWD /xbxx Wellwood Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa WWD /xcxx Wellwood Fst Fs Fs Fs Fa WWD /xxxx Wellwood Fs Fs Fs Fs Fa ZIM /xblx Zinman Ps Ps Ps Ps Pa ZIM /xbxx Zinman Ps Pws Ps Ps Pa ZIM /xx2x Zinman Ps PS Ps Ps Pa ZIM /xxxx Zinman Pws Pws Pws Ps Pa ZIM /xbxs Zintnan Ps Psn Pn Ps Pa ZIM /xx4s Zinman Pst Pnp Ppn Ps Pa ZIM /xxxs Zinman Pws Psn Psn Ps Pa ZIM /xbxt Zinman Pn Vn Vn Ps Pa ZZ /xxxx Water Vw Vw Vw Vw Vw -ji 65 Capability Agricultural R Classes .M. of Louise class 1 Scale (km) class 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 class 3 class 4 TWp4 class 5 class 6 class 7 unclassified water TW p3 TWp 2 TWp 1 Rge 12W Rge 1 1 W Rge 1 OW Figure 7. Interpretive Map for Agricultural Capability 66 R.M. of Louise Irrigation Suitability Scale (km) 0 1 2 3 4 8 excellent 5 6 7 good Twp4 fair poor water unclassified Twp3 Twp I Rge 12W Rge I 1 W Rge IOW Figure 8 . Interpretive Map for Irrigation 67 Soil Drainage R.M. of Louise Scale (km) = rapid 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4 well imperfect W poor = very poor water unclassified M3 "2 VP I ye IM Rge 1 IW Rge IM Figure 9 . Derived Map for Drainage 68 R.M. of Louise Salinity Scale (km) nonsaline, (x) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0-4 mS/cm weakly saline, (s) Twp4 4-8 mS/cm moderately saline, (t) 8-15 mS/cm strongly saline, (u) m >15 mS/cm water Twp 2 Twp } Rge 12w Rgc 1 11W Figure 10. Derived Map for Salinity 69 _ Lake r__i ai R.M. of Louise Stoniness Scale (km) nonstony, (x) O 1 2 3 4 5 6 i S slightly, (1) moderately, (2) Twp4 strongly, (3) exceedingly, (4) excessively, (5) water Twp3 Twp 2 Twp 1 Rge 12W Rge 11 W Rge IOW Figure 11 . Derived Map for Stoniness 70 R.M. of Louise Slope Scale (km) 0-.5% (x) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 .5 - 2% (b) 2 - 5% (c) Twp4 5 - 9% (d) 9- 15% (e) 15-30%(f) 30-45% (g) unclassified water Twp3 Twp 2 Twp 1 Rge 12W Rge i iW Rge I OW Figure 12. Derived Map for Topography 7 1 Lake R.M. of Louise Observed Erosion scale (km) noneroded (x) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 slightly eroded (1) Twp4 moderately eroded (2) Twp3 Twp 2 Twp 1 3, __ . Rge 12W Rge 1 1W Rge 1 OW Figure 13. Derived Map for Erosion 72 R.M. of Louise Water Erosion Risk Scale (km) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 negligible low Vp4 moderate high severe unclassified water TWP3 W 2 I- ye IM Rge I 1W Rge IM Figure 14 . Interpretive Map for Water Erosion Risk 73 APPENDIX A GUIDES FOR EVALUATING IRRIGATION SUITABILITY Table 15. Description of Irrigation Suitability Classes General Rating Excellent IA No soil or These soils are medium textured, well drained and hold landscape adequate available moisture. Topography is level to limitations nearly level . Gravity irrigation methods may be feasible . Good 2A Slight soil The range of crops that can be grown may be limited, 2B and/or landscape as well, higher development inputs and management 1B limitations skills are required. Sprinkler irrigation is usually the only feasible method of water application . Fair 3A Moderate soil and/ Limitations reduce the range of crops that may be 3B or landscape grown and increase development and improvement 3C limitations costs. Management may include special conservation 1C techniques to minimize soil erosion, limit salt 2C movement, limit water table build-up or flooding of depressional areas. Sprinkler irrigation is usually the only feasible method of water application. Poor 4A Severe soil and/ Limitations generally result in a soil that is unsuitable 4B or landscape for sustained irrigation. Some lands may have limited 4C limitations potential when special crops, irrigation systems, and 4D soil and water conservation techniques are used. 11) 2D 3D Table 16 . Soil Features Affecting Irrigation Suitability Degree of Limitation - Symbol Soil Feature Nonie(1) Slight(2) Moderate(3) Severe(4) d Structure Granular, Single Columnar Massive Massive Grained, Prismatic, Platy Blocky, Subangular Blocky k Ksat (mm/hr) >50 50- 15 15 - 1 .5 < 1 .5 (0 - 1.2m) x Drainability (1 .2 - 3m) > 15 5 - 15 0.5 - 5 <0 .5 (mm/hr) m AWHC subhumid > 120 120- 100 100-75 <75 mm/1 .2m (> 10) (8-10) (6-8) (<6) (% vol .) subarid > 150 120- 150 100-120 < 100 (>12) (12- 10) (10-8) (<8) q Intake Rate (mm/hr) > 15 1 .5 - 15 1 .5 - 15 < 1 .5 s Salinity depth(m) (dS/m) 0- .6 <2 2-4 4-8 >8 .6-1 .2 <4 4-8 8-16 >16 1.2-3 <8 8-16 >16 >16 n Sodicity (m) (SAR) 0-1 .2 <6 6-9 9-12 >12 1 .2-3 <6 6-9 9-12 >12 3 Textural Groups 9 Geological 0 - 1 .2m 1 Textural 2 Textural 2 Textural Groups Uniformity Group Groups, Coarser Finer Below Finer Below Below 3 Textural Groups Coarser Below 1 .2 - 3m 2 Textural Groups 3 Textural Groups 3 Textural Groups Coarser Below Finer Below r Depth to Bedrock (m) >3 3 - 2 2 - 1 < 1 h Depth to Watertable (m) >2 2 - 1 .2 2 - 1 .2 < 1 .2 (if salinity is a (if salinity is a problem) problem) w Drainage Well, Moderately Imperfect Imperfect Poor, Class Well, Rapid, Very Poor Excessive *Texture (Classes) L, SiL, VFSL, CL, SiCL, SCL, C, SC, Sic HvC 0 - 1 .2m FSL FSCL, SL, LVFS VFS, LS, CoSL GR, CoS, LCoS, S *Organic Matter % >2 1 - 2 1 - 2 < 1 Surface Crusting Slight Low Low Moderate Potential * Other important factors used to interpret type and degree of limitation but which do not present a limitation to irrigation themselves. No symbol is proposed for these factors since they will not be identified as subclass limitations . Table 17 . Landscape Features Affecting Irrigation Suitability Landscape Degree of Limitation Symbol Features None (A) Slight' (B) Moderate (C) Severe (D) t1 Slope - Simple % <2 2 - 10 10-20 >20 t2 -Complex % < 5 5 - 15 > 15 e Relief m < 1 1 - 3 3 - 5 > 5 (Average Local) p Stoniness -Classes 0, 1 & 2 3 4 5 -Cover (%) (0-3%) (3-15%) (15-50%) (> 50) i Inundation -Frequency 1 :10 1:5 1 :1 1 : < 1 of Flooding (period) (yr) (yr) (annual-spring) (seasonal) Table 18. Soil and Landscape Conditions Affecting Environmental Impact Rating Potential Degree of Impact Soil Property and Landscape Feature Minimal Low Moderate High Textural Groups' (Classes2) MF (SCL,CL,SiCL) M (Si,VFSL,L,SiL) MCo (CoSL,SL, VCo (VCOS,COS); Surface Strata (1 .2 m) F (SC,SiC,C) FSL,VFS, Co (LCoS,LS, LVFS) FS,LFS) Geological Uniformity MF to VF MF / MCo to Co; M / MCo to Co ; VCo to Co Weighted textural groupings' / M to VF ; F / Co; Co / M ; / VCo to Co, Surface Strata (1 .2 m) / M / MF to VF MCo to Co MF I VCo MCo I Co to VCo; Substrata (1 .2-3 .0 m) / MF to VF Co / VCo to MCo; M / VCo Hydraulic Cond < 1 .5 1 .5 - 15 15 -50 > 50 Ksat (mm/hr) Depth to Water Table (m) > 2 m (2 m ------1 m) < 1 m Salinity (dS/m) 0-4 4-8 T8-- 15 > 15 Topography (% Slope) 0-2 2-5 5 - 9 > 9 'Textural Groups: VF=Very Fine, F=Fine, MF=Moderately Fine, M=Medium, MCo=Moderately Coarse, Co=Coarse, VCo=Very Coarse 'Texture Classes: Very Coarse - VCo Moderately Coarse - MCo Moderately Fine - MF VCoS -Very Coarse Sand CoSL -Coarse Sandy Loam SCL -Sandy Clay Loam Cos -Coarse Sand SL -Sandy Loam SiCL -Silty Clay Loam S -Sand FSL -Fine Sandy Loam CL -Clay Loam Coarse - Co VFS -Very Fine Sand Fine - F LCoS -Loamy Coarse Sand LVFS -Loamy Very Fine Sand SC -Sandy Clay LS -Loamy Sand Medium - M Sic -Silty Clay FS -Fine Sand Si -Silt C -Clay LFS -Loamy Fine Sand VFSL -Very Fine Sandy Loam Very Fine - VF L -Loam HC -Heavy Clay SiL -Silt Loam 'Slash indicates surface strata (1 .2 m) overlying substrata (1 .2-3 .0 m), ie: MF to VF / M to VF 77 Notes for Table 18 . 1 . Guidelines developed for making this impact rating employ four relative degrees of risk of degradation: Minimal, Low, Moderate and High. This rating is not part of the irrigation suitability classification, but rather is intended to serve as a warning of possible adverse impact on the soil, adjacent crops or the environment. Since all situations cannot be completely covered by general guidelines, an on-site inspection is recommended for the evaluation of potential adverse environmental impact. 2. A major concern for land under irrigation is the possibility of adverse impact on the groundwater and surface water quality in and adjacent to the irrigated area. The soil factors selected for impact evaluation include those properties that determine water retention and movement through the soil and topographic characteristics that affect runoff and redistribution of moisture in the landscape. The risk of altering the soil drainage regime and soil salinity or the potential for runoff, erosion or flooding is determined by the detailed criteria for each property. Soil factors and landscape features considered in determining an environmental impact evaluation are: 1 . Soil Texture 2. Geological Uniformity 3 . Hydraulic Conductivity 4 . Depth to Water Table 5 . Salinity 6 . Topography 3 . Soil texture and the thickness and uniformity of geological deposits (assessed by weighting textures in surface strata and subsurface strata) combine to affect the soil's water holding capacity and hydraulic conductivity (ability to transmit water and leachate either vertically or laterally in the soil) . The presence and sequence of strongly contrasting soil textures within 3 m of the surface (geological uniformity) are used to determine the potential for downward movement (moderately coarse to fine materials underlain by coarse materials) or lateral movement (very coarse and coarse materials underlain by fine materials) of water and leachate. Uniform, highly permeable materials with low water holding capacity present the highest potential for adverse impact on groundwater quality. Uniform materials of low permeability provide the best buffer against impact on groundwater quality. A shallow depth (< 1 m) to water table has a higher risk for contamination than soils with a deep water table . Soils with high levels of salinity may adversely impact on groundwater quality due to the leaching associated with irrigation practices (ie: applied leaching fraction) . Topographic patterns with slopes in excess of 2 percent require special consideration for soil and water management to reduce the potential for runoff and erosion. The risk of runoff and potential for local flooding, build-up of water tables and soil erosion increases with slope gradient. Soil erosion results in loss of topsoil and transport of nutrients and pesticides to non-target areas . APPENDIX B CORRELATION OF SOIL SERIES IN THE R. M. OF LOUISE WITH SOIL ASSOCIATIONS AND ASSOCIATES OF THE SOUTH-CENTRAL REPORT NOA, 1943 AND SOUTH-WESTERN REPORT NO .3, 1940 RECONNAISSANCE SURVEYS. Table 19. Correlation of Soil Series in the R. M. of Louise with Soil Associations and Associates of the South- Central (1943) and South-Western (1940) Reconnaissance Survey, Reports. Soil Association or Associate Soil: Soil of the South-Central Map (1943) Symbol Name or South-Western- Map (1940) Remarks ATN Altamont Orthic Dark Gray Altamont The Altamont well drained, Grey-Black associate. BED Bede Orthic Black Bede(SW-1940) The well drained, Dark Brown Steppe-Blackearth associate. BKR Basker Rego Humic Gleysol Assiniboine Complex, Neelin The poorly drained, immature Meadow soil . CAV Carvey Rego Humic Gleysol Marringhurst A minor inclusion in and the same as the poorly drained Meadow soil of this Association. CMR Cameron Orthic Black Carroll(SW-1940) The well drained Blackearth associate of the Carroll very fine sandy loam to loam. CSE Coastone Gleyed Rego Black Waskada(undulating & rolling) The intermediately drained Meadow-Prairie associate of this association. CXT Capell Gleyed Rego Black Marringhurst The intermediately drained Meadow-Prairie soil with a loam to clay loam overlay on sand and gravel. CXV Charman Gleyed Black Carroll, Holland The intermediately drained Meadow-Prairie associates. CYN Croyon Orthic Black Marringhurst The well drained, Blackearth associate with a loam to clay loam overlay. DGF Darlingford Orthic Black Darlingford The typical or dominant, well drained associate. DOM Dromore Orthic Black Bede(SW-1940) The well drained associate having a deeper and finer surface texture . DOT Dorset Orthic Black Marringhurst The dominant, well drained Blackearth associate . DRN Durnan Rego Black Carroll, Holland The well drained, Blackearth, shallow phase, loam associate of these associations. DZW Dezwood Orthic Dark Gray Pembina The well drained, Gray-Black associate of the Pembina. FFR Fifere Orthic Dark Gray Manitou The well drained, Gray-Black associate of the Manitou 80 M M M M M r ====M;r M = m m m m r M = M M = M M M r M M M r Table 19. Correlation of Soil Series in the R. M. of Louise with Soil Associations and Associates of the South- Central (1943) and South-Western (1940) Reconnaissance Survey, Reports. (Cont'd) Soil Association or Associate Soil Soil of the South-Central Map (1943) Symbol Name Subgroup or South-Western Map (1940) Remarks association. FIR Firdale Orthic Dark Gray Carroll, Holland The typical well drained, Gray-Black associate ofthe Carroll or Holland association. FND Fairland Orthic Black Carroll, Holland The dominant, well drained, Blackearth, loam associate. FRS Ferris Gleyed Rego Black Darlingford Intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie associate. GBO Glenboro Orthic Black Glenboro The dominant well drained, Blackearth, associate of the Glenboro, very fine sandy loam, overlying sand. GNO Glenlorne Gleyed Eluviated Black Waskada(modified) A minor inclusion in the imperfectly drained associate. GRO Grover Gleyed Rego Black Glenboro The intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie Soil ofthe Glenboro association. GRR Guerra Rego Humic Gleysol Altamont The poorlydrained, Meadow soil occurring inassociation with the dominant soil. HEB Hebbot Rego Black Darlingford The well drained, Blackearth, shallow phase associate . HMO Hummerston Gleyed Rego Black Stockton The intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie associate of the Stockton. HOS Horose Rego Humic Gleysol Pembina Poorly drained, Meadow associate of the Pembina. JAY Jaymar Orthic Black Heaslip Complex The well drained, Blackearth associate of the gravelly waterworked Heaslip . JYL Joyale Gleyed Rego Black Altamont The intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie associate. KUD Knudson Orthic Black Altamont, Heaslip Complex Well drained Blackearth associate of the Altamont association or Heaslip Complex. 8 1 Table 19. Correlation of Soil Series in the R. M. of Louise with Soil Associations and Associates of the South- Central (1943) and South-Western (1940) Reconnaissance Survey, Reports. (Cont'd) Soil Association or Associate Soil Soil of the South-Central Map (1943) Svmbol Name Subgroup or South-Western Map (1940) Remarks LEI Levine Gleyed Cumulic Regosol Assiniboine Complex, Neelin The intermediately drained, immature soils of these associations on alluvial deposits. LRT Larrett Eluviated Black Altamont A well drained, leached Blackearth associate. LVH Lavenham Gleyed Black Stockton The intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie associate. LYT Lyleton Orthic Black Souris(SW-1940) The well drained, Blackearth associate ofthe Souris irae sandy loam. MDN Marsden Rego Humic Gleysol Heaslip Complex The poorly drained, calcareous Meadow associate ofthe Heaslip Complex. MOT Montgomery Gleyed Rego Black Waskada(modified) The imperfectly drained, Meadow-Prairie associate of the Waskada modified. MOW Mowbray Cumulic Regosol Assiniboine Complex, Neelin The well drained, immature soil on recent alluvium. MRH Marringhurst Calcareous Black Marringhurst The calcareous Blackearth associate of the Marringhurst . MXS Manitou Orthic Black Manitou The dominant Blackearth associate. MXT Melland Gleyed Rego Black Heaslip Complex An intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie associate of the Heaslip . PDA Prodan Gleyed Rego Black Carroll, Holland Intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie associate of the Carroll and Holland clay loam. PLE Pleasant Gleyed Rego Black Stockton The same as the intermediately drained Meadow-Prairie associate of the Stockton, fine sandy loam. PSE Prosser Orthic Black Stockton The dominantwell drained Blackearth associate ofthe Stockton fine sandy loam. 82 M = = = " r M " M M ~ r Table 19. Correlation of Soil Series in the R. M . of Louise with Soil Associations and Associates of the South- Central (1943) and South-Western (1940) Reconnaissance Survey, Reports . (Cont'd) Soil Association or Associate Soil Soil of the South-Central Map (1943) Symbol Name Subgroup or South-Western Map (1940) Remarks RAM Ramada Orthic Black Carroll, Holland The dominant Blackearth associate of the Carroll or Holland clay loam. RYS Ryerson Orthic Black Waskada The typical or dominant Blackearth associate of the Waskada till. SCK Stockton Orthic Black Stockton The dominant well drained Blackearth associate ofthe Stockton sands and loamy sands. SEE Sewell Rego Humic Gleysol Stockton Poorly drained, Meadow associate of the Stockton sands and and loamy sands. SXP Sutton Rego Humic Gleysol Glenboro Equivalent to the poorly drained, Meadow soil ofthe Glenboro clay loam over sand. SYE Stoney Creek Orthic Humic Gleysol Waskada The poorly drained, Meadow soil of the Waskada association. TDP Tadpole Rego Humic Gleysol Carroll, Holland The poorly drained, Meadow associate of the Carroll or Holland clay loam. TGR Taggart Gleyed Rego Black Carroll, Holland The intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie, loam associate. TOC Torcan Gleyed Black Carroll, Holland The intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie, loam associate of these associations . TWC Two Creeks Gleyed Black Waskada(modified) A significant inclusion in the Meadow-Prairie soils of the Waskada modified . ULH Ullrich Gleyed Black Altamont Intermediately drained, Meadow-Prairie associate. VDS Vordas Rego Humic Gleysol Carroll, Holland Poorly drained, loamy Meadow associate. VLT Villette Orthic Humic Gleysol Waskada(modified) The poorly drained or hydromorphic member ofthe Waskada. 83 Table 19 . Correlation of Soil Series in the R. M. of Louise with Soil Associations and Associates of the South- Central (1943) and South-Western (1940) Reconnaissance Survey, Reports. (Cont'd) Soil Association or Associate Soil Soil of the South-Central Map (1943) Symbol Name Subgroup or South-Western Map (1940) Remarks WTI Watrine Humic Luvic Gleysol Altamont The poorly drained, Degraded-Meadow associate. WWD Wellwood Orthic Black Glenboro The dominant, well drained Blackearth associate of the Glenboro clay loam over sand. ZIM Zinman Gleyed Solonetzic Dark Altamont The intermediately drained, alkalinized member ofthe Altamont. Gray 84 r rr r ~r rr rr ~r r~ r~ nr ~ r~ rr r~ r~ rr ~ r APPENDIX C DAILY SITE DESCRIPTION AND DETAILED SOIL DESCRIPTION DATA During the course of the field program, approximately 1958 Daily Site Description Forms were filled out to capture site and landscape observations covering the municipality. These daily site observations are backed up with samples for laboratory analysis to confirm attributes or properties that cannot be sufficiently determined on site, e.g. textural class or presence of salts . Nine profiles were characterized with observations recorded on a Detailed Soil Description Form. All nine profiles were sampled and brought to the laboratory for physical and chemical analysis. The data accumulated from Daily Site Descriptions, Detailed Soil Descriptions and laboratory analysis performed on the soil samples have resulted in the generation of voluminous information that can no longer be accommodated in this report. This data now resides in one of the several Canada-Manitoba Soil Survey Databases. For assistance and special requests of soil data contact: Manitoba Soil Resource Section/Land Resource Unit, Department of Soil Science, Rm. 362 Ellis Building, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg R3T 2N2 . Selected Detailed Profile Descriptions Available from the R.M. of Louise Series Name Location Sample Year Site Number Ferris (FRS) SW 16-3-IOW 1990 1 Darlingford (DGF) NE 8-3-IOW 1990 2 Manitou (MXS) NW 10-1-11W 1990 3 Ramada (RAM) NW 13-3-12W 1990 4 Zinman (ZIM) SE 5-02-11W 1990 5 Ramada (RAM) SE 23-02-12W 1990 6 Fairland (FND) NW 14-02-12W 1990 7 Zinman (ZIM) NE 17-04-10W 1990 8 Ramada (RAM) SE 07-04-10W 1990 9 BIBLIOGRAPHY Agriculture Canada Expert Committee on Soil Survey, 1987 . The Canadian System of Soil Classification . Second Edition. Publication No. 1646, Research Branch Agriculture Canada. Bannatyne, Barry B. 1970 . The Clays and Shales of Manitoba. Mines Branch, Department of Mines and Natural Resources . Publication No. 67-1 . Canada Department of Agriculture, 1972. Soil Climatic Map of Canada. Research Branch, Department of Agriculture, Ottawa. Canada-Manitoba Soil Survey, Ecoclimatic Regions of Manitoba Unpublished data. Ellis, J. H. and Shafer, Wm. H., 1943. Reconnaissance Soil Survey of South Central Manitoba, Soils Report No . 4, Manitoba Soil Survey, Manitoba Department of Agriculture. Elson, J . A. Surficial Geology of the Tiger Hills Region, Manitoba, Canada 1970. Environment Canada, Atmospheric Environment Service, Canadian Climate Normals, Volumes 2, 3, 4 and 6, 1951-1980, Printed 1982 . Koppen-Geiger, System of Climate Classification, after R. Geiger and W. Phol (1953). Manitoba Mineral Resources Division 1980, Mineral Map of Manitoba Map 80-1 . Mapping System Working Group . 1981 . A Soil Mapping-System for Canada: Revised . Research Branch, Agriculture Canada. Michalyna W., Podolsky G. and St. Jacques, E., Soils of the Rural Municipalities of Grey, Dufferin, Roland, Thompson, and Dart of Stanlg, Report No . D60, 1988. Canada-Manitoba Soil Survey. PFRA, 1964 Handbook for the Classification of Irrigated Land in the Prairie Provinces . PFRA, Regina, Saskatchewan . Rowe, J . S . 1972 . Forest Regions of Canada, Publication No. 1300 . Department of the Environment, Canada Forestry Service, Ottawa Sie, D. and Little, J., 1976 Groundwater Availability Map Series, Brandon Area. Manitoba Natural Resources, Water Resources . R.M . OF LOUISE SOIL LEGEND ATN Altamont CL WELL Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy O.DG BED Bede LS RAPID Fluvial Sandy-Skeletal O .BL BKR Basker SICL POOR Fluvial Loamy R.HG BKRp Basker, peaty M V.POOR Fluvial Loamy R. HG CAV Carvey SCL POOR Lacustrine/Glaciofluvial Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal R.HG CMR Cameron L WELL Lacustrine Loamy O.BL CSE Coatstone L-CL IMPER Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy GLR.BL CXT Capell CL IMPER Lacustrine/Glaciofluvial Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal GLR.BL CXV Charman CL IMPER Lacustrine Fine Loamy GL.BL CYN Croyon L-CL WELL Fluviolacustrine/Glaciofluvial Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal O.BL CYN 1 Croyon, Shaly Var. L-CL WELL Fluviolacustrine/Glaciofluvial Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal O. BL DGF Darlingford CL WELL Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy O.BL DOM Dromore L WELL Lacustrine/Glaciofluvial Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal O. BL DOT Dorset LS WELL Fluvial Sandy-Skeletal O. BL DOT1 Dorset, Shaly Var. LS WELL Fluvial Sandy-Skeletal O.BL DRN Durnan SIL WELL Lacustrine Loamy R.BL DZW Dezwood L-CL WELL Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy O.DG ERX Eroded Slopes Complex Var. RAPID Colluvial Texture Complex O.R FFR Fifere CL WELL Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy O.DG FIR Firdale SICL WELL Lacustrine Fine Loamy O.DG FND Fairland L WELL Lacustrine Loamy O.BL FRS Ferris CL IMPER Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy GLR.BL GBO Glenboro L WELL Lacustrine/Lacustrine Loamy/Sandy-Fine O. BL GNO Glenlorne L-CL IMPER Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Loamy/Fine Loamy GLE.BL GRO Grover L IMPER Lacustrine/Lacustrine Loamy/Sandy-Fine GLR.BL GRR Guerra CL POOR Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy R.HG GRRp Guerra, peaty M V.POOR Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy R.HG HEB Hebbot L-CL WELL Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy R.BL HMO Hummerston LFS IMPER Lacustrine Sandy-Fine GLR.BL HOS Horose CL POOR Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy R.HG JAY Jaymar L WELL Fluviolacustrine/Fluvial/Till(Morainal) Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal/Fine Loamy O.BL JYL Joyale CL IMPER Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy GLR.BL KUD Knudson CL WELL Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy O.BL LEI Levine SICL IMPER Fluvial Loamy GLCU .R LRT Larrett L-CL WELL Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy E.BL LYT Lyleton LVFS WELL Lacustrine Coarse Loamy O.BL MDN Marsden L POOR Fluviolacustrine/Glaciofluvial/Till Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal/Fine Loamy R.HG MHC Marsh Complex L V.POOR Mineral, Undiff Loamy R.G 88 s i M = = = = M = = r MOT Montgomery L-CL IMPER Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Loamy/Fine Loamy GLR.BL MOW Mowbray SiCL WELL Fluvial Loamy CU.R CUR MOW1 Mowbray, Slialy Var. SiCL WELL Fluvial Loamy CA.BL MRH Marringlmrst LS RAPID Glaciofluvial Sandy-Skeletal MRHI Marringhurst,Shaly Var. LS RAPID Glaciofluvial Sandy-Skeletal CA.BL MXS Manitou CL WELL Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy O.BL MXT Melland SL IMPER Fluviolacustrine/Glaciofluvial/Till Loamy/Sandy-Skeletal/Fine Loamy GLR.BL PDA Prodan CL IMPER Lacustrine Fine Loamy GLR. BL PLE Pleasant VFSL IMPER Lacustrine Coarse Loamy GLR.BL FSL WELL Lacustrine Coarse Loamy O.BL PSE Prosser .BL RAM Ramada CL WELL Lacustrine Fine Loamy O L-CL WELL Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy O .BL RYS Ryerson .BL SCK Stockton LFS WELL Lacustrine Sandy-Fine O SEE Sewell LFS POOR Lacustrine Sandy-Fine R.HG SXP Sutton CL POOR Lacustrine/Lacustrine Fine Loamy/Sandy-Fine R.HG SYE Stoney Creek L-CL POOR Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy O.HG TDP Tadpole CL POOR Lacustrine Fine Loamy R.HG TDPp Tadpole, peaty M V.POOR Lacustrine Fine Loamy R.HG TGR Taggart SIL IMPER Lacustrine Loamy GLR.BL TOC Torcan SIL IMPER Lacustrine Loamy GL.BL TWC Two Creeks L-CL IMPER Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Loamy/Fine Loamy GL.BL ULH Ullrich CL IMPER Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy GL.BL VDS Vordas SIL POOR Lacustrine Loamy R.HG VLT Villette L-CL POOR Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Loamy/Fine Loamy O.HG WTI Watrine CL POOR Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy HU.LG WWD Wellwood CL WELL Lacustrine/Lacustrine Fine Loamy/Sandy-Fine O.BL ZIM Zinman C IMPER Lacustrine/Till(Morainal) Fine Loamy/Fine Loamy GLSZ.DG ZZ Water MAP UNIT SYMBOLOGY Simple Map Units', Series Symbol DGF CXV xclx Topography/ Degree of Series with (very gently stoniness no phases sloping) (slightly) Compound Map Units Series Percentile Symbol /of Map Unit \DGF' - FRS' JYL5 - GRR' Degree of Degree of xcxx xbxs Salinity Salinity (none) \ (weakly) Degreéof Topography ~ Degree of No or Minimal Topography Erosion (Very gently Stoniness Phase Features (nearly level) (slight) sloping) (slightly) In a compound unit where two series share the same denominator, the phases apply to both series accordingly. Phases Degree of Erosion Stoniness (Surface covered) x noneroded or minimal x nonstony < .01 % 1 slightly eroded (25-75% of A horizon) 1 slightly stony .01-.1 % 2 moderately eroded (> 75 % of A & part of B) 2 moderately stony .1-3 % 3 severely eroded (most of A & B removed) 3 very stony 3-15 % 0 overblown 4 exceedingly stony 15-50 % 5 excessively stony >50 % Slope Class Degree of Salinity Cond. (rnS/cni) x 0-.5% level to nearly level b .5-2% nearly level c 2-5% very gently sloping x nonsaline 0-4 d 5-9% gently sloping s weakly saline 4-8 e 9-15% moderately sloping t moderately saline 8-15 f 15-30% strongly sloping u strongly saline 15+ g 30-45% very strongly sloping h 45-70% extremely sloping Variants A shaly variant of a normal series includes a high proportion of shale derived fragments in the parent material . e .g. CYN1, MOW1 -Croyon, shaly variant -Mowbray, shaly variant 90