Soil Data Join Recorrelation Initiative

• Overview and Background– Purpose, Issues, Objectives, Initiative

• Advisory Team / Technical Team• National Instruction Highlights• Reportable Measures• FY12 and Beyond

Overview and Background

• Chief’s decision memo regarding NASIS– Improve the database – Accelerate MLRA approach by re-correlating

data joins (harmonization)– Accelerate Phase 1 of MLRA update

– Goal is seamless soil survey data

Soil Data Join Recorrelation (SDJR)(a.k.a. Harmonization)

What is it?• Effort to provide seamless soil survey

information in a timely fashion• Correlation and data enhancement using legacy

soils data to provide seamless soils data• One data mapunit or consistent properties

correlated to geographically consistent map units

• Same named• Similar named• Uniquely named

SDJRWhy now?

• It has been a SSD Director priority for at least 2 years• With the completion of SSURGO many added value products

are being generated• We need to provide consistent data for USDA programs• If we don’t do this, others (non-soil scientists) will make

changes to make data consistent• We have enough data to make decisions for many instances• Many soil scientists that have key knowledge for making these

decisions will likely be retiring soon

National Soil Survey Database Harmonization Project

Why now?

• Allows for SSOs and MOs to do a thorough analysis of all their data

• Through this analysis long range and yearly plans, and projects can be developed and prioritized

• Using Benchmark Soils, we can harmonize/make consistent a large percentage of our data

Division Priority

• FY- 2012 Soils Division Priorities– Begin a multi-year initiative to complete Soil

Survey Data Join Re-correlation (often referred to as harmonization) so that soils information matches from county to county and state to state on 1 billion acres

Division Director Charge:

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

Advisory Team

Technical Team1. Thorson, Thor - NRCS, Portland, OR2. Tallyn, Ed - NRCS, Davis, CA 3. Fisher, John – NRCS, Reno, NV4. Mueller, Eva- NRCS, Bozeman, MT5. Wehmueller, William - NRCS, Salina, KS6. Hahn, Thomas - NRCS, Denver, CO 7. Ulmer, Mike - NRCS, Bismarck, ND 8. Glover, Leslie - NRCS, Phoenix, AZ9. Gordon, James - NRCS, Temple, TX10.Whited, Michael - NRCS, St. Paul, MN11.Endres, Tonie - NRCS, Indianapolis, IN12.Finn, Shawn - NRCS, Amherst, MA13.Dave Kingsbury - MOL, WV14.Anderson, Debbie - NRCS, Raleigh, NC15.Anderson, Scott - NRCS, Auburn, AL 16.Mersiovsky, Edgar - NRCS, Little Rock, AR 17.Mark Clark – MO Leader, AK18.David Gehring - NRCS, Lexington, KY

•Paul Finnell, NSSC•Ken Scheffe, NSSC•Cathy Seybold, NSSC•Steve Monteith, NSSC•Zamir Libohova, NSSC•Deb Harms, NSSC•Steve Peaslee, NSSC

•Sub-Committees•Database•Climate•GIS•Correlation•Interpretations•ESD•Lab Data

What are the issues?

What are the issues?

• K factors are one interpretation dependent on texture that are dependent on map unit concept

What are the issues?

• Same map unit name, different composition

What are the issues?

Lines join, interpretations differ

Issues: Statewide Interpretations

Bulk Density, 5-20 cm (Mg m-3)0.02

2.33

Issues: Nationwide Soil Property Data Users

Expectation of consistent interpretations:

Before

After

What are the issues?

MLRA 75-Crete sil, 0-1% Dwellings with Basements

Basic Objectives - SDJR

• Support the development of seamless soils data for use with CDSI, USDA Farm Bill Programs, and added value SSURGO products

• Process resulting in correlation of similar data map units taking into account existing legacy data, laboratory data, and expert knowledge

Basic Objectives - SDJR

• Dissolve the perceived data faults in interpretations visible in geospatial presentation of soil survey information

Often resulting from minor variation in data population, horizon depths, composition, and vintage of

guidance documents

Basic Objectives - SDJR

• Improve the database

• Reduces the number of DMU’s for same and similarly named soil map units

• Identify priority update needs

• Builds the foundation for next generation of soil survey – disaggregation

National Instruction

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

National Instruction Highlights

• Conducted through a review of existing data:

• Map Unit Concept and Composition

National Instruction Highlights• Focus on Same and Similarly named map units

• Integrating Uniquely Named Map Units– SRSS/SDQS additional ideas to utilize SDJR approach

National Instruction Highlights• Creating SDJR Projects in NASIS

National Instruction Highlights

• Harmonized Soil Data is:

National Instruction Highlights

• Lab data reviewed– The pedons will be reviewed and updated– Updating the correlated name and correlated classification for sampled

pedons

• OSD reviewed and updated; – Classification updated to current taxonomy if necessary – Other updates to the OSD will follow the standard operating procedures for

the MLRA regional office

National Instruction Highlights• Legacy Data Populated and Archived

– Published manuscript TUD’s– Pedon data

• ESD’s– Component productivity– Component ecological site– Work with ecological site inventory specialist and local rangeland management specialist

• Map unit certified by QA process through MO

National Instruction Highlights

• Identification of project needs that require future field work and analysis– Document in NASIS as a proposed project

• Brief description• Estimated extent

– Areas not joining spatially across political boundaries are identified as future projects and documented

– Capture ESD inventory and development needs

Reportable measure’s

• SDJR (Harmonization) projects– 20% of total map unit acreage– Report when QA milestone in project

has been completed.– Post to SDM when scheduled (annual)

• Initial soils mapping = 100%• MLRA field projects = 100%• High priority extensive revision = 100%

FY 2012 – SDJR

FY 13 and Beyond

National Bulletin

Summary

SDJR Process

Discussion

• Questions?