2509.18, 2
Page 1 of 22
FOREST SERVICE HANDBOOK
EASTERN REGION (R9)
MILWAUKEE, WI
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Interim Directive No.: R9RO 2509.18-2002-1
Effective Date: The Directive Manager completes this field.
Duration: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004
Approved: RANDY MOORE
Regional Forester
Date Approved: 12/20/2002
Posting Instructions: Interim directives are numbered consecutively by title and calendar
year. Post by document at the end of the chapter. Retain this transmittal as the first page(s) of
this document. This is the first interim directive to FSH 2509.18.
New Document
R9 RO 2509.18-2002-1
21 Pages
Superseded Document(s)
None
0 Pages
Digest: In order by code, summarize the main additions or revisions of direction in this interim
directive.
2.02 - Describes the objectives of the Regional Soil Program
2.04a - Outlines the roles and responsibilities of the Regional Soils Program Manager.
2.04b - Outlines the roles and responsibilities of the Forest Supervisor.
2.04c - Outlines the roles and responsibilities of the Forest Supervisor.
2.05 - Provides further definitions of commonly used terms in Soils Management.
2.2 - Provides the regional soil quality standards.
2.4 - provides guidance on the different soil quality monitoring methods.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 2 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
2.02 – OBJECTIVES
1. To meet direction in the National Forest Management Act of 1976, the National
Environmental Policy Act and other legal mandates.
2. To conserve soil and water resources and not allow significant or permanent
impairment of the land (36 CFR 219.27).
3. To promote ecological sustainability and diversity.
4. To support the mission and goals of the USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan (USDA
Forest Service 2000) and to apply the concepts described in the Forest Service
Framework for Inventory and Monitoring (Powell 2000).
5. To maintain the ability of a soil to function within a broad ecosystem, where function
includes producing plant biomass, storing carbon, bioremediating wastes, regulating
water quality and yield (Burger and Kelting 1999) and supporting below ground fauna
and flora.
6. To maintain or restore soil conditions that reflect inherent soil and related ecological
characteristics and processes to the degree practicable.
7. To establish threshold values for soil property changes that signal early warning of
long-term loss of soil, land productivity and/or ecological function.
8. To be responsive to the Montreal Process Criteria for the Conservation and Sustainable
Management of Temperate and Boreal Forests, specifically the “maintenance of forest
ecosystem health and vitality and conservation” and “maintenance of soil and water
resources”.
9. To facilitate the development of consistent site-specific soil quality standards and
criteria.
2.03 – POLICY
Adherence to soil quality standards provides assurance that long-term losses in inherent soil
productivity and function will be prevented or mitigated. Although they encourage restoration of
impaired areas a preventative approach is expected.
Proper application of these standards requires professional soil scientist oversight and expertise.
Soil quality standards are subject to revision in response to new scientific information and
monitoring results.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 3 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Soil quality effectiveness and validation monitoring will be coordinated on a sub-regional basis
to ensure appropriate and cost-effective extrapolation of monitoring results.
2.04 – RESPONSIBILITY
2.04a – Regional Forester
Soils program management, coordination and technical guidance are the responsibility of the
Regional Soils Program Manager.
The Regional Soils Program Manager shall:
1. Develop, and revise as necessary, Regional soil quality standards and monitoring
guidance.
2. Ensure soil quality monitoring strategies and business plans are technically adequate
and compatible with the Regional strategy.
3. Evaluate soil quality monitoring results for wider application and research
implications within the appropriate ecological scale, such as the Province level.
4. Ensure Forest standards and guides and manual/handbook supplements are compatible
with Regional standards and that they are appropriately consistent between Forests.
5. Collaborate with researchers to address soil quality validation monitoring needs
identified in the Region and to improve efficiency of effectiveness monitoring.
6. Coordinate with the Southern Region to improve monitoring efficiency and avoid
duplication of effort, particularly in the case of shared ecological provinces.
7. Support the mapping and characterization of ecological units required for baseline
data.
8. Ensure soil quality monitoring sampling protocols and analysis methods meet
Regional and National corporate standards.
9. Collaborate with, and incorporate the findings of, other efforts assessing soil quality
condition and trends. Such initiatives include Forest Inventory and Analysis Phase 3 soil
data collection and the Local Unit Criteria and Indicators Development (LUCID) process
being championed by the Forest Service Inventory and Monitoring Institute.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 4 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
2.04b – Forest Supervisors
1. Provide direction to adhere to soil quality standards in the Forest Plan and during its
implementation. Ensure that Desired Future Conditions are compatible with the
maintenance of inherent soil quality and function.
2. Monitor the effectiveness of soil conservation practices and management prescriptions
in meeting soil quality standards. Recommend changes as warranted by monitoring
results.
3. Propose revised standards as needed, based on ecological unit characteristics.
Coordinate with the Regional Office, Research and Development, other Forests and
partners within the sub-Region having similar ecological units to ensure consistency.
4. Provide training in the application of soil quality standards and monitoring results.
5. Conduct Forest Plan soil quality related monitoring within the context of an agreed to
sub-Regional strategy.
6. Assist District Rangers with soil quality monitoring design and quality assurance.
Project specific soil quality monitoring should be integrated with other related monitoring
efforts to the degree possible. It should be a component of overall Forest Plan monitoring
and evaluation effort where possible.
7. Compile forest-wide monitoring results.
8. Provide quality assurance to District monitoring efforts.
9. Map and characterize ecological landtype phases, ecological landtypes and landtype
associations required to establish soil quality monitoring baseline data.
2.04c – District Rangers
1. Ensure that proposed actions are compatible with soil quality standards. Specify the
appropriate measures, such as soil conservation practices, required to satisfy soil quality
standards in environmental analysis and implementation documents.
2. Monitor and document the implementation of soil conservation practices incorporated
into the project design to ensure compliance with the soil quality standards. Where
results are not satisfactory, consult with a soil scientist. Determine appropriate
restoration measures and any management adjustments needed to prevent future
problems.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 5 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
2.05 - DEFINITIONS
1. Soil conservation practices are site specific actions prescribed to maintain or restore
soil quality and function. They may be soil and water conservation practices formally
adopted by the Forest Service or measures developed for a specific project.
2. Soil quality refers to the inherent capacity of a specific soil, as determined by its
inherent physical, chemical and biological characteristics, to perform its biologic,
hydrologic, and ecological functions.
3. Ecological provinces are ecoregion scale ecological units that correspond to broad
vegetation regions, which conform to climatic sub zones controlled primarily by
continental weather patterns (Cleland et al, 1997).
4. Ecological units delimit areas of different biological and physical potentials at
multiple scales as described in the National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units
(Cleland et al 1997).
5. Reduced soil quality results from activities/events that diminish the soils capacity to
perform its biologic, hydrologic, and/or other ecological functions.
6. Impaired areas are activity areas (or distinct components of activity areas) that are so
severely and extensively disturbed that the soil’s ability to perform its biologic,
hydrologic, and other ecological functions is harmed. The soil cannot fully recover its
inherent capacity or functionality within the planning horizon, or within the approximate
time period required to establish the potential natural community, on the site without
restoration efforts. Impairment is assumed to be highly probable when soil disturbance is
severe and extensive enough that the soil quality standards discussed in 2.2 are not
satisfied, unless mitigation or restoration is successfully implemented.
7. Soil quality indicators are physical, chemical and biological properties and processes
that can be measured to monitor changes in the soil’s inherent capacity or functionality.
For example, a 15 percent change in soil productivity is a value judged to be the smallest
change detectable statistically at operational levels of monitoring (Powers et al, 1998).
8. Wetland and hydrologic function are referenced in this document as an aspect of soil
function. It is dependent on the inherent capability of an ecological unit to maintain
water movement, storage and quality.
2.2 – SOIL QUALITY STANDARDS
Soil quality standards are intended for application at the landscape and land unit scales.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 6 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
1. Land Unit Scale: At the land unit scale soil quality standards apply to activity areas
such as vegetation treatment units (for example, individual timber sale harvest units and
prescribed burn units) where management prescriptions are being implemented. They do
not apply to areas with dedicated uses such as administrative sites, system roads and
trails, campgrounds and special use areas.
2. Landscape Level: At the landscape level they apply to detected or projected changes
or trends associated with specific landtype associations and or watersheds that may affect
soil quality and function. Such cumulative impacts may result from a combination of
effects related to vegetation management, acid precipitation, roads and trails, grazing,
dispersed recreation and other management or background soil disturbances. These
landscape level soil quality effects and trends should be evaluated and addressed within
the context of mid-scale ecosystem analyses, such as Ecosystem Analysis at the
Watershed (or Landscape) Scale. Regional assessments are needed to support these midscale analyses, especially in relation to issues such as air pollution effects on soil quality.
It is important to recognize that soil disturbance occurs naturally in response to fires, wind,
biological activity, water and wind erosion, etc. and is an important ecological process in
wildland ecosystems. The effects of soil disturbances vary depending on their nature, severity,
extent and distribution and the ecological units affected.
Estimates of dominant natural (pre-European) conditions, patterns and processes are important
considerations when defining a realistic range of desired soil conditions. The sustainability of
soil conditions outside these parameters may not be achievable over broad spatial and temporal
scales or may require substantial investments to maintain. Changes in baseline conditions, such
as calcium depletion and nutrient imbalances resulting from acid precipitation should also be
recognized and considered in alternative development.
Activity areas that fail to meet the Regional standards are considered impaired. Such areas
should be restored, if feasible, to an acceptable condition as funding and management priorities
permit.
If effects analysis indicates that the soil quality standards will not be satisfied or a result of
implementation of a specific management proposal, the alternative in question must be redesigned, mitigated or dropped from further consideration.
The Regional Soil Quality Standards are as follows:
1. Integrate the maintenance or restoration of inherent soil quality and function into
desired future conditions.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 7 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
2. Management prescriptions must not result in cumulative net losses of soil organic
matter, or severe disruptions or alterations of nutrient cycling processes, leading to
significant long-term impacts on landscape and watershed functions, including land
productivity.
a. A soil scientist should assess the direct, indirect and cumulative effects associated
with the different management alternatives for the particular watersheds or landscapes
involved.
3. Manage soil disturbances associated with silvicultural and fuel abatement treatments
such that they are compatible with the long-term maintenance or restoration of inherent
soil quality and function.
a. Prevent or minimize detrimental soil conditions. Maintain at least 85 percent of a
land unit scale activity area in a non-detrimentally disturbed condition. Detrimental
soil conditions may include areas affected by detrimental compaction, displacement,
puddling, burned soil and accelerated erosion. They are defined in Exhibit 01. If
there are major soil/slope differences within an activity area, the affected areas should
be evaluated separately. System road and trails, and other administrative facilities
within or adjacent to the activity area, are not considered detrimentally disturbed
conditions for the purposes of this assessment.
b. Severe rutting, an extreme form of detrimental puddling, should be prevented and
should be confined to less than 1 percent of an activity area.
c. The Forests and the Grassland may retain or impose more restrictive parameters
than those defined here as appropriate.
4. Prevent or eliminate accelerated erosion due to management activities to the degree
feasible by limiting mineral soil exposure, appropriately dispersing excess water and
ensuring sufficient effective groundcover protection against accelerated erosion.
5. Maintain or restore sufficient ground cover to prevent or control surface soil erosion
following management activities. Native plant species are desired, although appropriate
non-natives can provide temporary erosion protection and, in some cases, serve as a nurse
crop. The use of mulch and amendments, such as fertilizer and lime, may be appropriate.
Forests should develop erosion control revegetation guidelines specific to their ecological
units and soils as needed.
6. Prevent or minimize initiation or acceleration of mass soil movement (slumps, debris
flows, etc.) due to management activities.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 8 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
7. Maintain or restore inherent soil characteristics and dynamics to the degree feasible, in
order to sustain wetland, riparian and hydrologic functions.
a. Develop site-specific soil quality management objectives and standards for
riparian and wetland systems that consider their existing state, inherent range of
characteristics and processes (including flood dynamics), relative resiliency, and
desired conditions.
b. Detrimental soil disturbances in wetlands and riparian areas due to mechanical
equipment operations should be avoided.
c. Manage grazing disturbance in riparian areas at levels that encourage movement
toward desired conditions and recovery or maintenance of inherent soil quality and
function.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 9 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
2.2 - Exhibit 01
DETRIMENTAL SOIL CONDITIONS
The following guidance applies to the specific categories of detrimental soil conditions. For the
more broadly distributed categories of ecological units and their associated soils, detrimental
condition indicators, measures and measurement standards may be refined and tested subRegionally. The affected administrative units may choose to refine indicators, measures and
measurement standards for important soils and ecological units of limited distribution. The
“measurement standards” listed below for the various detrimental soil conditions apply to the
individual sample units within the activity area in question (the standard one foot linear
increments and any secondary plot, subplot or point data collected) and not to the soil condition
of the activity area as a whole.
Detrimental Compaction. Increased soil density (weight per unit volume) and strength that
hampers root growth, reduces soil aeration and inhibits soil water movement. Measurements
pertain to the critical surface layers that typically contain a high proportion of the soil’s organic
matter and nutrients and or strongly affect water retention and movement in the soil, which can
vary for different categories of landtypes and landtype phases.
Indicator
Measure
Measurement Standard
Reliability
Soil
structure
change
Calibrated ocular
examination of
soil layers
Evidence of change to platy structure or lack
of structure (massive) from granular, blocky
or sub-angular blocky structure
Moderate – can be described
but not quantified observations should be
calibrated with bulk density
readings
Soil strength
Calibrated shovel
penetration
resistance
Shovel penetration is difficult relative to
pre-activity undisturbed conditions
Moderate – difficult to quantify
except indirectly by
calibration with bulk density
and or penetrometer readings;
can be combined easily with
ocular exam for induced platy
structure
Soil strength
Calibrated
penetrometer
readings
A relative reading increase over the range of
pre-activity undisturbed levels that
correlates to the measurement standards for
soil structure change, shovel penetration
resistance and or bulk density increase.
This value must be adjusted for soil
moisture conditions at the time of sampling.
High – consistent quantitative
measurements in relatively
rock free soils
Bulk density
Soil samples –
sampling methods
vary by soil
characteristics
A 15% relative increase in the range of bulk
density readings over the pre-activity
undisturbed soil bulk density readings or
High – consistent quantitative
measurements; can also be
correlated with soil strength
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 10 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Absolute root limiting values based on soil
texture classes. These threshold values
need to be field validated relative to their
impact on soil structure and water
movement as well as productivity. An
example includes those adopted by the
Rocky Mountain Region USFS:
1.25 g/cc: silt, clay
1.30 g/cc: silty clay, silty clay loam
1.40 g/cc: loam, clay loam
1.50 g/cc: sandy loam, sandy clay loam,
sandy clay
1.6 g/cc: sand, loamy sand
Detrimental Displacement. Excessive mechanical relocation or removal of the surface mineral
and or organic soil layers sufficient to reduce long-term productivity and biodiversity of soil
dependent flora and fauna. Mixing of mineral and organic soil materials is not considered
detrimental displacement. However, its effects must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
Indicator
Measure
Measurement Standard
Soil surface
mineral and
or organic
layer
movement
Calibrated
ocular exam
The standard is removal of the upper 25% of the organic
matter rich soil mineral surface layer (not to exceed one
inch) and, in poorly developed soils lacking such a mineral
surface layer, removal of the O (organic) surface layer.
These criteria can be modified for representative groups of
ecological units within an ecological province based on
criteria such as the distribution of organic matter and
nutrients in the soil profile and the relative resiliency of the
ecological unit. Size is not a qualifier for a detrimentally
disturbed condition Regionally, but can be designated as
appropriate on a Province or other ecological unit basis.
The aerial extent monitoring will measure the cumulative
area with detrimentally displaced conditions.
Reliability
Moderate –
calibrated
ocular
assessment
Detrimental Puddling. This results from in alteration of soil structure severe enough to reduce
the permeability and infiltration rate of the soil. Vehicle tracks are molded and typically have
well defined berms. Puddling can be caused by foot, hoof and vehicle traffic.
Indicator
Ruts and
depressions
Measure
Measurement Standard
Ocular assessment
Ruts that fail to meet the severe rutting
standards described below
Reliability
High - easily
detectable
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 11 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Severe Rutting. This is a more extreme form of detrimental puddling. Soils with low bearing
strength (such as clays and organic soils) and those with high water tables are particularly
susceptible. The ruts are molded and typically have well defined berms. They severely disrupt
soil structure and porosity, can adversely alter local groundwater hydrology and wetland
function, and provide conduits for runoff.
Indicator Measure
Measurement Standard
Reliability
Deep ruts
Relatively continuous tracks dominantly in excess of 4
inches deep and 6 feet long
High - easily
detectable
Ocular
assessment
Detrimentally burned soil. Undesirable soil physical, chemical and biological changes can result
from longer duration intense fire exposure. Such disturbances often afflict areas where coarse
woody fuel concentrations with ground contact burn.
Indicator
Measure
Measurement Standard
Reliability
Surface soil
changes
Ocular
assessment
Reddish color; fine roots/organic matter charred in upper
25 percent of the organic matter rich mineral soil surface
layer (not to exceed one inch) and, in poorly developed
soils that lack such a mineral surface soil, oxidation of
organic surface layer (O horizon); hydrophobic conditions
Moderate – error tends
to be on conservative
side but somewhat
subjective
Accelerated surface soil erosion. Rills, gullies, pedestals and soil deposition are indicators of
accelerated surface soil erosion. Accelerated erosion related to management activities can be
prevented or minimized by controlling the amount, location and duration of mineral soil
exposure, avoiding concentrations of runoff, and ensuring adequate revegetation. The distinction
between a gully and a rill is one of depth. A gully is a consequence of water that cuts down into
the soil along the line of flow. It is an obstacle to wheeled vehicles and is too deep to be
obliterated by ordinary tillage. Rill erosion is the removal of soil through the cutting of many
small, but conspicuous, channels where runoff concentrates. Rills are shallow enough that they
are easily obliterated by tillage. Sheet erosion is subtler but can result in pedestals and obvious
soil deposition when it is more severe. It is characterized by the more or less uniform removal of
soil from an area without the development of conspicuous water channels (USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service 1996).
Where surface soil erosion is a concern forests may choose to develop surface soil loss tolerance
parameters to aid in effects analysis and monitoring. The standards however emphasize the use
of soil conservation practices to manage the quantity, extent, nature and distribution of surface
soil disturbance and ensure adequate dispersal of runoff.
Indicator
Measure Measurement Standard
Reliability
Rills, gullies, pedestals, soil
deposition
Ocular
High – features easily
detectable
Presence of these erosion
features
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 13 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Insufficient effective ground cover
Lack of adequate effective ground cover is a possible precursor to accelerated surface erosion.
Effective ground cover can include low growing vegetation, rock, litter and duff, and lichens and
mosses. The amount of effective ground cover needed to prevent erosion varies by precipitation
regime, slope and soil texture. The numeric standards will be defined by a consensus of
scientists within each ecological province.
Indicator
Measure Measurement Standard
Reliability
Lack of effective ground cover
to prevent erosion
Ocular
High – features easily
detectable
Numeric standards defined on an
ecological province basis
Accelerated or induced soil mass movement. Soil mass movement (slumps, debris flows, etc.)
accelerated above natural background levels or initiated by management activities.
Indicator
Measure Measurement Standard
Reliability
Mass soil
movement
Ocular
High – readily
observable
Evidence of preventable acceleration of existing mass
movement or activation of new mass movement by
management activities
Long term net loss of organic matter and impaired nutrient cycling. Determinations must rely on
applicable scientific evidence for support. Soil factors to consider include historic evidence of
soil organic matter, mineral weathering rates, base saturation, nutrient imbalances and aluminum
mobilization. Forest functions to consider include biomass accumulation, indicators of forest
health and changes in forest composition. Other indicators may include changes in stream water
chemistry. Trigger mechanisms may include atmospheric deposition, forest harvesting, changes
in soil organic matter decomposition rates and forest biomass accumulation.
Indicator Measure
Measurement Standard Reliability
Coarse and
fine debris
retention
Ocular or quantative assessment of size class and
spatial distribution
Specification must be
determined for representative
ecological units within the
ecological provinces
Moderate –
calibrated
ocular;
High –
quantitative
measurements
Reduction
in soil
nutrient
store or
long term
disruption
of nutrient
cycling
processes
Soil and foliar analysis of limiting elements aimed
at determining their relative abundance and
availability as well as their relationships to soil
chemical, physical and biological characteristics;
lab measured anaerobically mineralized nitrogen
could serve as an index of soil quality that
integrates many nutritional factors and field
observation of soil invertebrate macro shredders
may be an effective indicator of soil biology trends.
Operational field procedures are under
development to monitor the nutrient and biological
changes in soils. (Powers et al. 1998).
Standards must be determined
for representative ecological
units with assistance from
research and other qualified
scientists
Moderate to
high –
depending on
ease of
interpretation
of data
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 14 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
2.3 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING PROJECTS AND PLANS
Multi-year sub-Regional soil quality monitoring strategies will be developed for the various
ecological provinces within the Region and will be incorporated into the Regional Inventory and
Monitoring Program Plan. These strategies should identify the priority issues related to soil
quality and function. They should define sub-Regional monitoring goals and objectives,
including integration opportunities, additional sampling, data analysis and interpretation needs,
funding and reporting mechanisms, and the role of involved partners and contractors.
Operational soil quality monitoring will be appropriately integrated with those monitoring efforts
associated with air and water quality, vegetation management, and other related areas. The
forests should place emphasis on documenting the implementation and effectiveness of soil
conservation practices and management prescriptions, in meeting soil quality standards and
desired future conditions.
2.4 – MONITORING METHODS
1. Implementation monitoring: This consists of appropriate documentation of the onthe-ground application of management practices designed to maintain and restore soil
quality and function. Contract administrators can often accomplish such monitoring
during project implementation with soil scientist input as needed.
2. Effectiveness monitoring: A major objective of soil quality monitoring is to ensure
that soil conservation practices and management prescriptions designed to achieve or
maintain soil quality standards are effective. Did they maintain the soil in an acceptable
condition or achieve restoration objectives? Effectiveness monitoring can be qualitative
or quantitative or both.
a. Qualitative Assessments (mostly ocular): Are made by or under the direction of
experienced soil scientists. A qualitative assessment is made of the activity area (or
portion thereof, where applicable) focusing on observable evidence of disturbance. The
intent is to ascertain whether the soil conservation practices and or management
prescription employed produced the acceptable results anticipated during the
environment analysis. Scenarios that appear to be in conflict with the Regional soil
quality standards should be fully documented and recommendations made to mitigate
adverse impacts. More quantitative data collection (see below) may be required to
properly evaluate effectiveness. The effectiveness of soil conservation practices and
management prescriptions should be evaluated for a suitable range of representative
landtypes or landtype phases within the ecological provinces.
b. Quantitative Monitoring: Will focus on the high-risk scenarios identified through the
qualitative assessment process above. The percentage of an activity area impacted by the
detrimental soil conditions will be measured. Minimum accuracy and precision standards
should be agreed to on a sub-regional basis. They can be increased as needed to meet
specific monitoring objectives. It may be desirable in some cases to track nondetrimental moderate disturbance conditions to address site-specific cumulative effects
concerns, such as anticipated future management entries affecting the same ground.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 15 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
The following methods should be considered based on the quantity and quality of data
desired.
(1) Statistical Point Sampling Method: See P.5-6 in Howes et a. (1983). Sampling
intensity should be 5 20-point transects per 10 acres, all random. This is an average of 10
data points per acre.
(2) Random Points: A minimum of 2 random data points per acre, with a minimum of 30
data points per analysis area.
(3) Transects: A minimum of 1 transect across a representative section of an analysis
area. Continuously observe surface soil conditions, recording the number of paces in
each soil disturbance class. If there are different conditions in different parts of the
analysis area, a transect should be made through each area, with an estimate of the
percent of the analysis area represented by the transect. There are usually several
hundred data points per transect. This is not a statistical sample.
The resulting quantitative soil disturbance data will serve to calibrate less rigorous rapid
ocular field assessments adopted sub-regionally. It can be used to validate and refine
operational soil disturbance monitoring categories.
Exhibit 02 shows an example of a protocol that effectively utilizes both qualitative and
quantitative data. It assesses the existing condition of soils in areas where proposed or
current management activities, particularly mechanical treatments, have the potential to
affect the soil resource. This process is adapted from a interim procedure developed by
the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest in the Pacific Northwest Region (USDA Forest
Service 2001).
The resulting data will be analyzed and interpreted several ways. A series of compatible
activity area data sets within an ecological province are to be analyzed simultaneously to
determine if the Regional soil quality standards are being satisfied on a consistent basis.
If the standards are not being met, or a forest imposed more restrictive standards that are
not being met, then Forest Plan procedures must be followed to make the appropriate
management adjustments. The activity area data sets should be examined individually
also. Even though the practices or prescriptions have proven generally successful based
on the evaluation of a number of sample areas within the Forest and ecological province,
an occasional activity area may demonstrate unfavorable results. This is a project level
issue that requires site-specific restoration measures and the development of contingency
measures to ensure future success.
Monitoring of soil disturbances should be conducted immediately after treatment or use.
Pre-sampling may be required, in some cases, to assess the impact of previous site
impacts or to establish a sufficient measure of “natural” baseline variation. Correct
interpretation of soil disturbance data requires an adequate understanding of the inherent
variability of physical, chemical and biological soil properties of the affected ecological
units.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 16 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Where accelerated surface soil erosion is a concern, the success of effective ground cover
requirements should be evaluated on representative activity areas, usually about one year
following treatment. Photo points are recommended to document site recovery and
response.
Ecological reference sites (ERS) should be established within the various ecological
provinces to measure and assess soil and related trends. ERS sampling protocols should
be developed in coordination with Forest Service Research and Development and other
partners. An example might be to monitor air quality effects on soil quality in
conjunction with the integrated Forest Health Monitoring (Forest Inventory and Analysis
Phase 3) plots, either as they exist or an expanded sample.
3. Validation monitoring: This type of monitoring quantifies short and long term effects
associated with soil disturbances. It tests the assumptions behind the operational soil
quality standards. The Long Term Site Productivity plots within the Eastern Region
provide critical validation monitoring. Integrative and practicable physical, chemical and
biological soil quality indices (Powers et al. 1998) may be included in ecological
province strategic monitoring plans when they are judged operational. Validation
monitoring needs and approaches will be developed in collaboration with Forest Service
Research and Development and other research partners.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 17 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
2.4 - Exhibit 02
SOIL QUALITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL (adapted from Interim
Protocol for Assessment and Management of Soil Quality Conditions, Wallowa-Whitman
National Forest, September 2001)
The following is a suggested approach. It should be calibrated on a sub-regional basis to ensure
appropriate application.
Step 1: Initial Assessment
Complete an ocular assessment of the activity area during project design, focusing on past
management activities and current conditions of the soil surface. Classify the relative
proportions of each unit in terms of soil disturbance classes. Complete the “Level I Soil
Disturbance Data Form,” which summarizes the degree, extent, and distribution of soil
disturbance by activity unit. A non-soil scientist may complete this step provided they have
received the appropriate training from a professional soil scientist.
Level I: Surface Soil Disturbance Class Definitions – General Examples
Class O: Undisturbed Natural State
 No evidence of past equipment operation.
 No depressions or old wheel tracks evident.
 Litter and duff layers present and intact.
 No Soil displacement evident.
Class 1: Low Soil Disturbance
 Faint wheel tracks or slight depressions evident.
 Litter and duff layers present and intact.
 Surface soil has not been displaced and shows
minimal mixing with subsoil.
 Some evidence of burning impacts including a
mosaic of charred and intact duff layer to
partially consumed duff layer with blackened
surface soil. Root crowns and surface roots of
grasses are not consumed.
Class 2: Moderate Soil Disturbance
 Wheel tracks or depressions are evident but are
not deep.
 Litter and duff layers are partially intact or
missing.
 Surface soil is partially intact and may be
mixed with subsoil.
 Burning consumed duff layer, root crowns, and
surface roots of grasses. Surface soil s
blackened.

Class 3: High Soil Disturbance
 Wheel tracks or depressions highly evident and
deep.
 Litter and duff layers are missing.
 Evidence of topsoil removal, gouging and
piling.
 Soil displacement has removed the majority of
the surface soil. Surface soil may be mixed
with subsoil. Subsoil or totally exposed.
 Burning consumed duff layer, root crowns and
surface roots of grasses. Evidence of severely
burned soils (mineral surface soil red in color)
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 18 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Level I Soil Disturbance Data Form Example
Unit
17
21
1
Degree of
Soil
Disturbance
0
1
2
3
0
Estimated
Percentage
of Unit
15
50
35
0
90
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
10
0
0
Comments
Level of
Concern1
Transect(s)
Recommended?
Most of the soil disturbance is
located in SW corner of unit on
a landing.
Moderate
Yes
Little evidence of past
equipment operation
Low
No
Based on the probability of the activity unit having >15% detrimental soil conditions.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 19 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Step 2: Potential Impact Assessment
Assess the potential for soils impacts based on soil type and proposed management activities.
Assess the potential for proposed management activities to affect soil resources in all activity
units. If site specific prescriptions for activity units are not known at the time of initial
assessment, use ecological unit inventory information and information from Step 1 to evaluate
the potential for impacts given a range of management activities. An interdisciplinary team,
including a professional soil scientist, should complete this step.
Step 3: Unit Prioritization
Sampling of all activity units may not be necessary or possible. Prioritize units using the
conceptual model shown in Figure 1. Priority will be given to those units where soil quality
standards may be in question and/or proposed activities have the potential to exceed soil quality
standards. Determine which units to sample based on priority level. An interdisciplinary team,
including a soil scientist, should complete this step.
Figure 1. Unit prioritization model
Level of Concern Related to
Existing Conditions(1)
Medium
High
Low
Priority for Level II
Sampling Transects
Medium
Low
High
Potential for Soil Impacts (2)
Low
(1) Judgement call based on Level I Inventory.
(2) Judgement call based on the potential for soil impacts.
Medium
High
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 20 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Step 3: Unit Sampling
Once all the units have been prioritized, identify units to sample based on priority level and
available resources. Sample the appropriate units and categorize the soil conditions using the
“Level II Soil Survey Data Form.” A soil scientist or an individual with proper training can
complete the Level II survey. A soil scientist should determine the sampling method and provide
quality assurance. When calculating the percentage of an activity unit that contains detrimental
soil conditions, use the percentage of points designated as Class 2 and Class 3.
Level II: Surface Soil Disturbance Class Definitions – General Examples
Class O: Undisturbed Natural State
Class 1: Low Soil Disturbance
Soil Surface:
 No evidence of past equipment operation.
 No depressions or old wheel tracks evident.
 Litter and duff layers present and intact.
 No Soil displacement evident.
Soil Surface:
 Faint wheel tracks or slight depressions evident and less
than 2 inches deep.
 Litter and duff layers present and intact.
 Surface soil has not been displaced and shows minimal
mixing with subsoil.
 Some evidence of burning impacts including a mosaic of
charred and intact duff layer to partially consumed duff
layer with blackened surface soil. Root crowns and
surface roots of grasses are not consumed.
Soil resistance to penetration with tile spade or probe:
 Resistance of surface soils may be slightly greater than
observed under natural conditions. Concentrated in top
0-4 inch depth
Observations of soil physical conditions:
 Slight to moderate alteration of soil structure from crumb
or granular structure, restricted to the surface 0-4 inches.
Class 2: Moderate Soil Disturbance
Class 3: High Soil Disturbance
Soil surface:
 Wheel tracks or depressions are evident but are not
deep. (i.e. 2 to 6 inches deep)
 Litter and duff layers are partially intact or missing.
 Surface soil is partially intact and may be mixed with
subsoil.
 Burning consumed duff layer, root crowns, and surface
roots of grasses. Surface soil is blackened.
Soil resistance to penetration with tile spade or probe:
 Increased resistance is present throughout including the
top 4-12 inches of soil.
Observations of soil physical conditions:
 Change in soil structure from crumb or granular
structure to massive or platy structure.
 Platy structure is somewhat continuous.
 Large roots may penetrate the platy structure, but fine
medium roots may not.
Soil surface:
 Wheel tracks or depressions highly evident and deep. (>
6 inches deep)
 Litter and duff layers are missing.
 Evidence of topsoil removal, gouging and piling.
 Soil displacement has removed the majority of the
surface soil. Surface soil may be mixed with subsoil.
Subsoil partially or totally exposed.
 Burning consumed duff layer, root crowns and surface
roots of grasses. Evidence of severely burned soils
(mineral surface soil red in color)
Soil resistance to penetration with tile spade or probe:
 Increased resistance is deep into the soil profile (>12
inches deep)
Observations of soil physical conditions:
 Change in soil structure from crumb or granular structure
to massive or platy structure.
 Platy structure is continuous.
 Roots do not penetrate the platy structure.
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 21 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
Level II Soil Survey Data Form (example)
Landform:______________________
Project _________________ Unit _____________ Observers ______________ Date ________________
Obs #
Sheet
Total
Class
0
Class
1
Class
2
Class
3
Comments
(note type of soil impact, erosion, water courses, biological crusts,
wood, aerial extent of disturbance, transect line, etc)
R9 RO INTERIM DIRECTIVE
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/20/2002
DURATION: This interim directive expires on 06/20/2004.
2509.18, 2
Page 22 of 22
FSH 2509.18 – SOIL MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 2 – SOIL QUALITY MONITORING
REFERENCES:
Burger, J.A. and D.L. Kelting. 1999. Using soil quality indicators to assess forest stand
management. Forest Ecology and Management. 122:167-185.
Clayton, J.L., G. Kellogg and N. Forester. 1987. Soil disturbance- tree growth relations in
central Idaho clear-cut. Research Note INT-372. Ogden, Utah: United States Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 6 p.
Cleland, D. T., P. E. Avers, H. McNab, M. E. Jensen, R. G. Bailey, T. King and W. E.
Russell. 1997. National Hierarchy of Ecological Units. Pages 181-200 in M. S. Boyce and A.
Haney, editors. Ecosystem management: applications for sustainable forest and wildlife
resources. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Howes, S., J. Hazard and J.M. Geist. 1983. Guidelines for sampling some physical conditions
of surface soils. Region 6-RWM-146-1983. Portland, Oregon: United States Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 34 p.
Powell, D.S. 2000. Forest Service framework for inventory and monitoring. United States
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 32 p.
Powers, R., A. Tiarks and J. Boyle. 1998. Assessing soil quality: practicable standards for
sustainable forest productivity in the United States. SSSA Special Publication No. 53. 28p.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1996. National Soil Survey handbook, title
430-VI. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Stone, D.M. and J.D. Elioff. 2000. Soil disturbance and aspen regeneration on clay soils: three
case histories. Forestry Chronicle 76(5):747-752.
USDA Forest Service. 2000. USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 Revision). United
States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 84 p.
USDA Forest Service. 2001. Interim Protocol for Assessment and Management of Soil Quality
Conditions. Version 3.3. Wallowa-Whitman National Forest.