History of the Soils Program in Region 5 USDA Forest Service by Andy

History of the Soils Program in Region 5 USDA Forest Service

By Andy Leven 1/ and Scott Miles 2/

May 2016

Introduction

This is a brief history of the Forest Service Soils Program in Region 5 from 1955 to 2006. I was motivated to put this history together after reading the book Profiles in the History of the U.S. Soil Survey [HED 2002] which contained a chapter on Soil Survey in the Forest Service, Chapter 7, by Dennis Roth. In my opinion, Roth’s information on Region 5 was incomplete with few details, whereas Regions 3, 4, 6, & 9 had more detailed coverage. Roth pointed out that in those Regions, conflicts developed in their cooperative working relationships with the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) over survey standards. Roth’s description left the impression that working relations between the Forest Service and SCS were in disarray. In California, Region 5, soil scientists in both the FS and SCS worked together to facilitate mutual solutions for changes needed in soil survey procedures and achieved favorable cooperative working relationships. I believe that this additional history for Region 5 is helpful to set the record straight and to show our soils program much more completely and accurately.

In addition to the Soil Survey, this paper includes information about the Soil Management Services portion of the Forest Service Soils Program, which was going on at the same time as the survey, and is the principal work of Forest Service soil scientists today. The first section of this paper deals with Soil Survey of National Forest lands. The second part of this paper deals with Soil Management Services for the management of these lands. ______

1/ Andy Leven: Director of Watershed Management, Pacific Southwest Region (R5), 1976- 1994 and Regional Soil Scientist for R5 from 1973-1976. Lead author of this paper covering R5 soil survey history from 1958 to 1994.

2/ Scott Miles: Zone Soil Scientist for northern Forests in Region 5, 1981-2006. Co-author of this paper covering R5 soil survey history from 1994 to 2006.

This paper was reviewed by Jerry Anderson, Chuck Goudey and Scott Miles in 2015-2016. Their comments have been included. I wish to express my appreciation for the editing provided by Dotty Leven. This paper will be submitted to the Regional Soil Scientist and Regional Historian in Region 5 to be included in the Region 5 History files and to the National Museum of Forest Service History in Missoula, Montana.

Soil Survey in Region 5 of the US Forest Service

In presenting the history of soil survey in Region 5, a short discussion of soil survey in the SCS (NRCS) and USFS is useful.

USDA SCS (NRCS): The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was renamed the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) in 1994. For convenience in this paper, I have used their previous name of SCS, rather than the NRCS, since it was known as SCS during the majority of the time period this paper covers. The fundamental purposes of a soil survey are to show the geographic distribution of soils and to make predictions about soil use and management. The soil survey program in the United States began in the early 1900s. The SCS was the agency in the USDA given the mission to develop techniques and standards for mapping soils. Focusing on soils important for agricultural use, their soil surveys were primarily on gentle landscapes that could be farmed. Landscapes with slopes exceeding 10 percent gradient were generally mapped as rough broken lands, stony mountain lands, etc. There was little attempt to identify differences in soil series on non-agriculture lands because of the heterogeneous nature of geology, landscapes (i.e. landforms) and steepness of slope. This type of land was given a Land Capability Rating of Class VIII, i.e. land not suitable for agricultural use.

Soil Classification in the United States, after World War II, had been evolving into a new taxonomy for classifying soils. The SCS, collaborating with many other federal and state agencies and universities began testing the new taxonomy in the 1950s. One objective of the new soil taxonomy was to establish hierarchies of groups that permit soil scientists to understand the relationship among soils and between soils, and the factors responsible for their character. Among many other factors, this system provided for grouping of similar soils into Series (the common level of soil identification), then Series into Families, Families into Subgroups, Subgroups into Great Groups, etc. The new system incorporated moisture and temperature regimes for classifying soils in addition to soil profile differences previously used. It was first published in 1963 [NRCS 1999_1].

Mapping soils using aerial photography became more commonplace after World War II. Soil mapping in the SCS was at map scales of 1:15,840 (4 inches per mile) and larger, which allowed map units to be delineated to show the detail needed for the management of agricultural lands. The mapper uses stereo-vision which portrays the aerial photos in three-dimension, allowing the mapper to more accurately delineate the soils. Since the scale of aerial photos can vary as the elevation of the landscape varies, soil mapping units are transferred from the aerial photos onto topographic maps so that the true position of the mapping unit is rectified to the landscape. Published soil surveys are often at 1:24,000 (2.64 inches per mile), a common scale of USGS topographic maps.

USDA Forest Service (FS): Soil surveys started in the Forest Service in the last half of the 20th Century. Dr. John Retzer, a soil scientist working for the Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Research Station at Fort Collins, Colorado, was transferred in 1955 from Research to Forest Service Administration, in the Washington Office, Watershed Management Division, to be the National Soils Coordinator [HED 2002]. In 1961 the Forest Service signed a

2 formal national agreement with the SCS stating that the Forest Service would follow the procedures of the National Cooperative Soils Survey [HED 2002]. Part of a cooperative soil survey entails a procedure to ensure soils mapped on one administrative unit (county, forest or state), would correlate with similar soils that occur on adjacent administrative units. This required that soils mapped on one National Forest would need to correlate with soils mapped on adjacent National Forests. Soil Correlation responsibilities were held by the SCS at the State level. The National Cooperative Soil Survey agreement also called for the SCS to edit and publish soil survey reports. Dr. Retzer, because of his research in mountainous terrain, understood the close relationship of landforms, hydrology and soils. He encouraged meeting SCS national cooperative soil survey standards and was keenly aware of the need to include landforms in designing soil survey mapping units. Up until this time, the SCS had not recognized landforms as a delineator in soil mapping and this resulted in some early disputes between the Forest Service and SCS during soil correlation in some Regions and states, adversely affecting their cooperative working relationships. As soil survey mapping began to occur in the late 1950s on National Forest lands, it was apparent that different levels of mapping detail and intensity were needed for the type of management that was to be applied. For example, lands used for timber and range production needed more detailed mapping than lands dedicated to wilderness. The majority of the soil mapping done by the SCS was detailed mapping, so the SCS began to recognize that the new soil survey standards were needed to accommodate the mapping being done on National Forest lands. Along with the new taxonomy being developed, new standards for five levels of soil mapping were also established. Order 1 was the most detailed mapping and Order 5 was the least detailed [NRCS 1999_2 Chapter 2]. Most of the agricultural lands that the SCS had been mapping were at intensity levels Order 1 and 2 surveys, whereas forest and rangelands could be managed with soils surveys using Order 3 and 4 standards. This new taxonomy and orders of survey detail proved to work well with the diverse elevations and aspects of mountainous lands the Forest Service managed.

Dr. Robert Ruhe, a geomorphology professor at Iowa State University working for the SCS, studied the relationship of landform and soil occurrence. He published findings in 1967 which helped the SCS incorporate landform as a delineator between soil mapping units [NMSU]. The SCS first published standards for using landform to delineate mapping units in 1975, in the first edition of publication USDA Handbook 436 [NRCS 1999_3, Chapter 5]. This smoothed the way for correlation to progress on FS lands. Delineating map units using landforms, hierarchical soil classification levels, and different levels of survey orders, the Forest Service was able to develop soil mapping units which fit the level of use and management that their lands would receive. Start of the Soil Survey Program in Region 5/Pacific Southwest Region: Region 5 was the focus for starting the National Forest Service Soil Survey program in 1955 [HED 2002]. Region 5 may have been selected for early startup of the Forest Service Soil Survey Program because of the existing California Cooperative Soil-Vegetation Survey, a project at the Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Research and Experiment Station (PSW) in

Berkeley, California that began in 1947. It was commonly known as the Soil-Veg Survey. This was a cooperative effort between PSW, the California State Extension Service, the California State Division of Forestry, and two Universities of California at Berkeley and Davis, CA. The purpose of this project was to develop and apply techniques and standards for mapping soils and vegetation on private and state forest lands, mainly in northern California [PSW Colwell]; [Garbourm 2007]. The Soil-Veg Surveys were not correlated to SCS soil survey standards.

Ken Bradshaw was the first Regional Soil Scientist to be assigned in the Forest Service in 1955 [HED 2002]. Bradshaw, a range conservationist working for PSW, had been associated with the Soil-Veg Survey since its beginning, before he transferred to Forest Service Administration to lead the Region 5 program. Initial soil mapping in the Region followed the Soil-Veg Survey protocol. Soil scientists were hired by the Forest Service to map FS lands adjacent to private or state forested land as the Soil-Veg Surveys progressed in California. Bradshaw worked with four other soil scientists to form Regional Office survey teams: Jack Fisher, Gene Rockey, Jerry Anderson, and Art Sherrell. Jack Fischer was a UC Berkeley graduate working on the Soil-Veg Survey for the PSW before transferring to R5. He later became the Regional Soil Scientist in R6. Gene Rockey previously worked for the SCS. Bradshaw, Fisher and Rockey mapped soils on the Mendocino NF along with Bill Colwell and Jim Mallory, PSW employees. Virtually all of the Mendocino National Forest was mapped using Soil-Veg Survey methodology. Jerry Anderson, a 1960 UC Berkeley graduate, began mapping soils on the Groveland Ranger District of the Stanislaus NF with Art Sherrell, who had transferred from the SCS. Later, Jerry Anderson and Gene Rockey mapped the Orleans Ranger District on the Six Rivers NF. The soil survey work being done by the Regional Office teams followed the Soil-Veg Survey protocol and the soils were being classified according to the SCS taxonomy published in 1963. When the National Cooperative Soil Survey Agreement was signed in 1961 at the Washington Office level, Region 5 began working together with the California state SCS to conduct soil surveys on National Forest Lands. Cooperative Soil Surveys in Region 5: Due to the need to concentrate on mapping of agricultural lands, the SCS excluded the National Forests in California from their early soil surveys. National Forests cover twenty million acres in California and occur as large contiguous blocks of land that were geographically separate from agricultural lands. To facilitate mapping of different administrative areas of federal responsibility, the California SCS office coordinated with the Forest Service (mainly R5 and small areas in R4 and R6) and the Bureau of Land Management to establish soil survey areas in California. Each agency had areas of responsibility. Sometimes survey area’s boundaries were straightened or smoothed out where FS boundaries were irregular. Consequently, some areas of FS land might fall in a SCS survey area and FS soil scientists would join SCS teams to map them.

Region 5 began working cooperatively with the SCS, mapping the Cleveland National Forest as part of the San Diego County soil survey. Jerry Anderson was the Forest Service soil scientist working on the San Diego soil survey, mapping all of the Cleveland NF within San Diego County, and adjacent Orange and Riverside Counties where the Cleveland NF lands also occurred (a good example of smoothing out boundaries of the survey area). The San

Diego Area, California, Soil Survey Report was published by the USDA SCS in 1973 [USDA 1973].

Another area with a cooperative soil survey was the Lake Tahoe Basin Administrative Unit. It was mapped from 1967-70 and the Tahoe Lake Area Soil Survey Report was published in 1974 [USDA 1974]. The survey area followed the watershed boundary for Lake Tahoe, which drained lands in both California and Nevada. This included Forest Service and some private land. Soil Scientists working on the field survey team were both SCS and FS employees. John Rodgers, who was the survey party leader, Chuck Goudey, Tom Ryan and George Kliewer were all SCS employees from California. Two others were from Nevada. Forest Service soil scientists were Jerry Anderson and Art Sherrell from R5 and Harry Summerfield from R4. Both of these cooperative surveys were led by SCS soil scientists acting as survey party leaders and principal authors of the resulting soil survey reports published by the USDA. Two or four-inch to the mile aerial photos were used for field mapping and the published soil survey map was 1:24,000 scale.

I point out the makeup of the Lake Tahoe Area survey team as an example of the positive leadership of SCS California State Soil Scientist, Dick Huff, in establishing cooperative working relationships with other federal agencies in mapping soils in California. Under Dick’s tenure, SCS soil survey standards began to be adapted to conditions existing on California’s forested lands, allowing for the SCS correlation of FS surveys. This cooperative atmosphere existed in a few, but not all, of the Forest Service Regions and State SCS offices as was earlier stated.

Soil Resource Inventory/Soil Survey: During the last half 1960s and early 1970s, soil scientists were being hired by individual National Forests to do their soil mapping rather than have Regional Office teams do the work. In 1973 Ken Bradshaw retired and Andy Leven transferred from Region 3 (Albuquerque, New Mexico) to be the Regional Soil Scientist for Region 5. He began working for the Forest Service in Region 3 while studying for an MS degree in Soil Science at New Mexico State University in 1959. Region 3 had been active in Cooperative Soil Surveys with the SCS since the beginning of their soils program in 1957, using four-inch/mile aerial photos (this scale aerial photo was also the common scale used by the FS for timber and range management). In addition to the cooperative soil surveys on the Cibola, Coconino, Prescott, and Santa Fe National Forests in Region 3, two broad hydrologic/soil surveys were made of the Salt-Verde River Basins and the Colorado River Basin in the mid-1960s. They used one-inch/mile aerial photos (one inch per mile = map scale 1:63,360, another common USGS topographic map scale) [Leven 1967]. Leven was trained in this scale while in aerial photo interpretation school in the US Army in the early 1960s and introduced it for soil resource mapping in the Forest Service in 1964. This small scale photography was suited for identifying landform-soils relationships as the initial delineator of soil mapping units. These hydrologic/soil surveys were special use surveys and were not designed to meet SCS standards. However, they provided experience in the use of small-scale aerial photos to delineate soil map units.

Soil Survey on National Forests was renamed as Soil Resource Inventory (SRI) to indicate their difference from SCS soil surveys. The National Forests had separate cooperative agreements with the SCS, with the FS having the lead for soil mapping and report writing. SRIs were required to meet SCS standards, being correlated by the California State SCS office. SRIs could include a mix of Order 3, 4 and 5-survey intensity depending on the land use. Mapping was to be on one inch/mile aerial photos. However, some forests had already acquired two or four inch/mile aerial photos so they continued to use them for their field mapping. Additional field work was required for the earlier Soil-Veg Surveys, so they could be correlated to the cooperative soil-survey standards. Each National Forest would have its own report instead of being included in a county soil survey, which was the usual practice of the SCS.

The Regional Office in R5 published a Soil Resource Inventory handbook to describe the standards needed to delineate mapping units since the SCS had not yet published a handbook for conducting these levels of survey intensity. Several training workshops were held by the RO to implement the mapping standards in the R5 handbook. Mapping methodology relied on first delineating landforms (geomorphic landscapes) using aerial photos, then following with field investigation to identify the soils occurring on the landforms. The hierarchical classification system [NRCS1999_1] allowed classifying the soils to the various levels of detail needed for forest management. For example, areas needing more precise soils information might be intensity mapped using Soil Series, or Soil Series Associations, whereas areas with less need for detailed information might be mapped as Families, Associations of Families, or Groups. This was generally how other Regions were mapping landforms. However, Region 5 went further to describe and classify the soils on the landforms using the hierarchical system. This allowed SCS correlation, whereas some other Regions did not describe the soils to this level of detail.

Region 5 rapidly increased the number of soil scientists on National Forest staff to conduct their SRIs (Appendix A- List of Soil Scientists in Region 5). At annual SCS state office soil survey planning meetings attended by the FS, other cooperating federal agencies, and California State Extension Service, it became apparent that the SCS, because of budget constraints, would not be able to correlate the number of National Forest SRIs being conducted. In addition to the Regional Office Soils staff of Andy Leven and Art Sherrell, who was the principal regional FS correlator, Region 5 established three Zone Soil Scientist positions to assist in correlation. They were located on the Angeles NF (Tom Ryan), Sierra NF (Gary Schmitt), and Shasta-Trinity NF (Scott Miles). Also, the Forest Service provided some funding to the SCS state office for their soil correlation staff.

In 1976, Jerry Anderson became the Regional Soil Scientist for Region 5. Jerry was the Eldorado National Forest soils scientist leading their Soil Resource Inventory before moving to the Regional Office. In 1978, he became the Watershed Staff Officer on the Shasta-Trinity National Forest. Chuck Goudey became Regional Soil Scientist for Region 5 in 1978 and served in that position until his retirement in 1994. Chuck’s early experience in mapping soils was with the SCS in Modoc, Lassen, Yolo, Nevada and Placer Counties. As mentioned earlier he was a

SCS survey team member during the Lake Tahoe Basin Area survey. He joined the Forest Service in 1970 as the lead soil scientist on the Tahoe National Forest before moving to the Regional Office in Region 5. When Art Sherrell retired, Dr. Earl Alexander joined the RO soils staff. He was the Klamath National Forest soil scientist leading their Soil Resource Inventory and had previous experience in Soil-Veg Surveys and the Peace Corps. Earl later became the Regional Soil Scientist in R10.

Soil mapping and correlation progressed steadily throughout the 1970s and 80s. When field work was completed, detailed SRI reports were written for each National Forest. The reports contained soil mapping unit and soil profile descriptions; soil survey maps at one inch to the mile scale; taxonomy; data of laboratory analysis of the physical and chemical properties of the soils; and interpretations of the soil/landscape’s qualities and limitations for plant growth and land use. The SCS could not publish the SRI reports in a timely manner because of continued budget constraints, so the editing and publishing was done by the FS Regional Office.

By 1994, the 20 million acres on the 18 National Forests in California had either a completed Soil Resource Inventory or Soil Survey Report which met the National Cooperative Soil Survey Standards. In addition to SRI reports needed for Forest Service and SCS use, SRI reports were given to libraries local to the National Forests and all California universities.

Region 5 Soil Survey Program between 1994 and 2006.

Geographical Information System (GIS) computer technology was evolving during the 1980s and 90s. GIS created methods for efficiently utilizing mapped information. After the hardcopies of the SRI reports were completed and distributed, Scott Miles arranged for all the SRI maps to be digitized and linked to information in the SRI reports. Each National Forest SRI was on a separate CD and was distributed as before. The user could locate their area of interest on a map, click on the map unit number and all the linked information in the report, such as map unit descriptions, soil descriptions and other components that have unique properties and interpretations, would be immediately available. This project was completed by 1998.

In about 2000, the NRCS began compiling a state wide Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO). The last and final step in completing the National Cooperative Soil Survey between Region 5 of the Forest Service and California NRCS was to certify all of the National Forest’s Soil Resource Inventories (SRI) through the SSURGO certification process. This was to ensure that the geospatial data, Map Unit Descriptions, and Taxonomic Unit Descriptions matched across the survey boundaries of adjacent National Forests and with adjacent NRCS county surveys. A SSURGO data set consists of map data, attribute data and metadata. The majority of this work was completed from 2001 to 2005. Scott Miles was the RO contact with state NRCS for the SSURGO project. He was the budget curator and the chief advocate to the Forest Supervisors and Regional Office staff, and emphasized the importance of authorizing funds to complete this project. Jonna Cooper (DuShey) from the Forest Service did all the GIS work and coordinated with the NRCS technical staff in the

State Office. SSURGO map data can be viewed in the NRCS Web Soil Survey or downloaded in ESRI® Shapefile format. The coordinate systems are Geographic. Attribute data can be downloaded in text format that can be imported into a Microsoft® Access® database [NRCS 2015]. The end result is that Region 5 soil information is readily available to all interested parties.

Soil Management Services

The knowledge and understanding of soil characteristics provide information for land use and management decisions. Soil surveys, in addition to delineating the geographic distribution of soils, provide information about the soil’s influence on plant growth and physical limitations for use, such as road construction, stock-watering tanks, etc. During a soil survey, field measurements are taken of plant growth, and a laboratory analysis of the physical and chemical properties of the soils is made. This information is included in the survey report, in addition to the soil profile descriptions for identifying soils. The application of this knowledge is provided for forest and rangeland management through Soil Management Services (SMS). It is similar to the service that is provided to the farmers and ranchers by the soil conservation staff of the NRCS. Discussion of SMS is given in this paper because it is the primary workload of soils scientists in the Forest Service, during and after the SRI was completed. The majority of the Forest Supervisor Offices in Region 5 maintained at least one soil scientist on their watershed management staff after SRIs were completed. However, some Forests shared soil scientists and some of them transferred into other service and management positions. Over time the total number of soil scientists in the region has decreased from the highs of 1970-1994, during the active SRIs. The following is a brief description of some of the Soil Management Services provided by FS soil scientists:

Soil Erosion Control: Because of their different textures, permeability, and landscape position, soils have different runoff potential and susceptibility to erosion caused by precipitation. Vegetative cover provides protection from the effects of precipitation. Land use for harvesting forests, grazing rangelands, developing recreation sites, and road building all can result in removal of vegetative cover and soil disturbance. Loss of soil due to erosion can result in reduction of plant growth. Soil erosion that is carried off by stream flow becomes sediment that is a nonpoint source of water pollution. SMS are provided to prescribe land use techniques needed to control soil erosion caused by various land management activities. Burned Area Emergency Restoration (BAER): Wildfires remove plant cover and litter exposing soils to erosion. In addition, heat from wildfires causes a temporarily reduction in infiltration of rainfall, exacerbating the erosion effects of rainfall which results in increased soil loss and flooding. Watershed Management staff, which included soil scientists and

8 hydrologists, provided advice for controlling erosion and flooding related to wildfires. In the 1950s and 60s, Regional Office Watershed staff provided analysis of burned areas, recommended restoration measures, and requested emergency funding from the WO to implement erosion and flood control projects. Soil investigations of the burned areas, combined with hydrologic analysis for sediment and flood estimates, were the measures used to determine restoration projects needed to protect property and land resources. With watershed staff numbers increasing on each National Forest in the late 1970s, BAER analysis responsibility was shifted from the RO to the National Forests. The RO developed a BAER analysis handbook to standardize the procedures and methodologies used, and organized training throughout the Region. By the mid -1980s, BAER analysis evolved from purely a watershed function to interdisciplinary team analysis, involving multiple FS disciplines designing BAER projects. Because of the emergency nature of the needed restoration measures, standard environmental analysis report processes and contracting requirements were streamlined. This facilitated the rapid implementation of restoration projects to prevent erosion, flooding and resource damage after wildfires. The Washington Office adopted the Region 5 BAER protocol for nationwide application in the early 1990s. Soil Compaction: Timber harvest and grazing can compact the soil surface causing reduced infiltration resulting in less soil moisture for plant growth, increased runoff, erosion and sediment. Also, compaction reduces soil pore size that limits plant root growth. The RO led the standardization for measuring and monitoring soil compaction. Cooperating with the PSW for research studies, measures were developed for restoration and prevention which were applied to reduce soil compaction during timber harvesting.

Forest Soil Productivity: RO Watershed Management established a cooperative agreement with PSW Forest and Range Research Station to study of the effects of timber harvesting on long-term soil productivity. The FS established and maintained the field plots and PSW conducted the monitoring and publishing of results of the 10 year study [Powers 1989]. Forest and Project Planning: Soil scientists participate in interdisciplinary planning for Forest Plans and Environmental Analysis Reports for projects. SRI maps/information are used in forest land use plans and project plans, such as timber harvest projects, range improvements, and restoration of eroded and gullied lands and streams.

Conclusion

I believe this history and information completes the story of the Soil Survey Program in Region 5 of the Forest Service from 1955-2006. It shows the cooperative role of two USDA agencies, the Natural Resource Conservation Service and the Forest Service, to obtain creditable knowledge about the soil resources of our National Forests. The additional information about the Soil Management Services Program shows the role that soil science plays in the sustainable use and management of our National Forest lands.

Acronyms:

BAER: Burned Area Emergency Restoration

CD: Compact Disk FS: National Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture

GIS: Geographic Information System NF: National Forest, such as, Angeles NF

NRCS: Natural Resource Conservation Service, USDA

PSW: Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Research and Experiment Station in Berkeley

R5: Region 5, Pacific Southwest Region, National Forest Service, USDA

RO: Regional Office SCS: Soil Conservation Service, USDA, was renamed NRCS in 1994 SMS: Soil Management Services SRI: Soil Resource Inventory

SSURGO: Soil Survey Geographic Database USDA: United States Department of Agriculture USGS: United States Geographical Survey

References:

Garbourm 2007: Terrestrial Vegetation of California. 2007, 3rd edition, by Michael G. Garbourm, Todd Keeler-Wolf & Allan Schoenherr. University of California Press, page 11.

HED 2002: Profiles in the History of the U.S. Soil Survey. 2002. Edited by Douglas Helms, Anne B. w. Effland, and Patricia J. Durana. Iowa Press.

Leven 1967: Leven, Andrew A. & John A

NMSU: The Desert Project -An Analysis of Aridland Soil-Geomorphic Processes. 1967. New Mexico State University Bulletin 798. http://aces.nmsu.edu/pubs/research/weather_climate/BL798/welcome.html

NRCS 1999_1: Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. 1999 Second Edition. USDA NRCS Agri Handbook #436. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_051232.pdf NRCS 1999_2: Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. Chapter 2: Soil Taxonomy and Soil Classification. 1999 Second Edition. USDA NRCS Agri Handbook #436. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_054252

NRCS 1999_3: Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. Chapter 5- Application of Soil Taxonomy to Soil Survey. 1999 Second Edition. USDA NRCS Agri Handbook #436

NRCS 2015: Description of the Soil Survey Geographic Data Base, Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/survey/?cid=nrcs142p2_053627 Powers 1989: DO TIMBER MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS DEGRADE LONG TERM PRODUCTIVITY? A RESEARCH AND NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM COOPERATIVE STUDY. ROBERT F POWERS, PSW Forest &Range Experiment Station, USDA Forest Service, Redding, CA, pgs. 101-115. Proceeding of the National Silviculture Workshop, Silvicultural Challenges and Opportunities in the 1990’s. Petersburg, Alaska, July 10-13, 1989, USDA Forest Service Timber Management, Washington, DC.

PSW Colwell: Personal conversations with Bill Colwell, program director of Cooperative Soil-Veg Surveys, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Research and Experiment Station, during cooperative soil survey meetings, from 1974-1978.

USDA 1973: Soil Survey, San Diego Area, California. 1973. USDA This survey was made cooperatively by the Soil Conservation Service, Forest Service and California Agricultural Experiment Station. http://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/1453088

USDA 1974: Soil Survey, Tahoe Basin Area California and Nevada. March 1974. USDA Soil Conservation and Forest Service in cooperation with University of California Agricultural Experiment Station and the Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station. http://books.google.com/books?id=CBFAAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=soil+survey+l ake+tahoe+basin&source=bl&ots=4LHsnKcmeo&sig=zL9ZvVf84wfqf5EAWlnzDJP5ksI&hl= en&sa=X&ei=IvWVU4UEjPGgBK7- gYAM&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=soil%20survey%20lake%20tahoe%20basin&f =false

APPENDIX A – List of Soil Scientists in Region 5 (1955-2006)* National Forest Soil Scientists Angeles Tom Ryan, Joe Johnson, Jim O’Hare Cleveland Jerry Anderson San Bernardino Willie Brock, Barry Cohn Los Padres Jim O’Hare, KJ Silverman Sequoia Dick Hanes Inyo Dezie Zamuido, Juan Gallegos, Todd Elsworth, Lisa Bryant Sierra Gary Schmitt, Brent Roath, Ben Nakamura. Todd Elsworth Stanislaus Ron Griffith, Ben Smith, Alex Janacki, Carolyn Napper, Jim Retales Eldorado Jerry Anderson, Chuck Mitchel, Ann Denton, Annette Parsons, Sue Hoffman LTBMU Carrie Luckasic Mendocino Arnold James Tahoe Chuck Goudey, Roger Poff, Fred Sutter, Carol Kennedy, Chuck Mitchel Plumas Jim McLaughlin, Denny Churchill, Wayne Johannson, Mike Heath, Kimberly Johnson Lassen George Kliewer, Jim O’Hare Modoc Ken Luckow, Dezie Zamuido, Sue Goheen, Dick Hanes Klamath George Bush, John Munn, Earl Alexander, Tom Laurent, Greg Lang, Bob Graham, Berry Cohn, Chuck Swearinger, Cindy Foster, Ernest Genter Shasta-Trinity Jack Fischer, Scott Miles, Peter Vansusteren, Ken Lanspa, Ken Johnson, Bud Adamson, Gary Nakamura, Laura Kuh, Larry Bryant, Nancy Glines, Greta Bolley, Annette Parsons Six Rivers Ken Lanspa, Scott Miles, Chuck Rowe, Judy Wisse, Dave Geiger, Brent Roath, Fred Sutter, Annette Parsons Regional Office Ken Bradshaw, Art Sherrell, Andy Leven, Jerry Anderson, Gene Rockey, Chuck Goudey, Earl Alexander, KJ Silverman, Rob Griffith, Gary Schmitt, Scott Miles, Brent Roath, Jeff TenPas * This list may not be complete. It mainly covers personnel from 1970 to 2006 and some from earlier years. The Regional Office staff list includes personnel after 2006. It was compiled by Scott Miles, Chuck Goudey and Andy Leven in 2016. Duplicate names exist because individuals often transferred from one location to another throughout the Region.