Johann Lanz
Soil Scientist (Pri.Sci.Nat.)
Cell: 082 927 9018
Tel: 021 866 1518
e-mail: [email protected]
PO Box 6209
Uniedal
7612
Stellenbosch
South Africa
Report on soil investigation of Doornrivier Farm, Herold, near George
Report by
Johann Lanz
January 2016
Table of Contents
Doornrivier Soil Map - Northern section
Doornrivier Soil Map - Southern section
Doornrivier Ameliorant Block Map - Northern section
Doornrivier Ameliorant Block Map - Southern section
1.Introduction.........................................................................................................................1
2.General discussion on the evaluation of soils for crop suitability.......................................1
3.Description of soil conditions and division into soil map units............................................3
4.Soil suitability for crop production.......................................................................................4
5.Soil chemistry and amelioration..........................................................................................5
6.Soil preparation...................................................................................................................5
Appendix 1: Explanation of identified soil forms in the SA soil classification system............6
Appendix 2: Characteristics of the different soil horizons......................................................8
Appendix 3: Structure of soil code and explanation of symbols............................................9
Appendix 4: Table of soil profile data...................................................................................11
Appendix 5: Bemlab analysis...............................................................................................14
Appendix 6: Soil sample identification.................................................................................15
Appendix 7: Recommended quantities of chemical ameliorants.........................................16
Doornrivier Soil Map
Northern section
Map unit hectares
1.3
6.14
1.5
1.41
1.6
0.53 + 1.49
2.1
0.48
2.2
5.34
2.3
6.38
3.1
3.60 + 4.64
3.2
1.10 + 5.55
4
0.30
Total
36.96
Soil Map Units (numbers indicated in light brown on map)
Soil
suitability
rating
Soil mapping by Johann Lanz
January 2016
1
Deep (>120cm) to fairly deep (70-120cm), darker coloured soils
1.1
Deep, fairly dark coloured, loamy-sand, podzol soils with minor drainage limitations. Witfontein soil form.
1.2
Deep, loamy-sand, podzol soils with bleaching in E horizon and no drainage limitations. Concordia and Witfontein soil forms.
1.3
Deep, dark coloured, sandy, silty soils with moderate drainage limitations. Dundee soil form.
1.4
Fairly deep, yellow-brown, loamy-sand, podzol soils on underlying weathered rock with high stone content and minor to moderate drainage
limitations. Groenkop soil form.
1.5
Fairly deep, brown, loamy soils on underlying dense clay with moderate to significant drainage limitations. Tukulu soil form.
1.6
Fairly deep, yellow, sandy soil with no to minor drainage limitations. High gravel content in subsoil. Clovelly and Glencoe soil forms.
2
Deep to fairly deep, bleached, light coloured, sandy soils with drainage limitations.
2.1
Deep with moderate drainage limitations. Dundee soil form.
2.2
Fairly deep with podzol characteristics and significant drainage limitations. Mostly with gravel in the subsoil at 50-100cm depth. Longlands
and Lamotte soil forms.
2.3
Fairly deep with significant drainage limitations. Kroonstad and Longlands soil forms.
3
Soils with limited depth (40-70cm) due to underlying dense clay in the subsoil (duplex soils) and with bleached E horizons.
Significant drainage limitations. Predominantly Kroonstad and Estcourt soil forms.
3.1
Loamy-sands
3.2
Sands
4
Shallow (<40cm) sandy soils on underlying hard rock. Mispah and Glenrosa soils.
Note on soil suitability: Soils are rated for suitability for perennial crops out of 10. Suitability is a function of root development potential (soil depth and friability); water holding capacity and supply; drainage; and organic
matter content. Soils rated >5.0 are recommended. Soils rated 4.0 - 4.9 are conditionally recommended and can be utilised but higher management inputs are likely to be required and production is likely to be
compromised. Soils rated <4.0 are not recommended.
Doornrivier Soil Map
Southern section
Map unit hectares
1.1
0.47 + 3.38
1.2
2.81
1.4
0.16 + 4.96
2.2
8.69
3.1
0.69 + 1.49
4
0.72
Total
23.37
Soil Map Units (numbers indicated in light brown on map)
Soil
suitability
rating
1
Deep (>120cm) to fairly deep (70-120cm), darker coloured soils
1.1
Deep, fairly dark coloured, loamy-sand, podzol soils with minor drainage limitations.
Witfontein soil form.
1.2
Deep, loamy-sand, podzol soils with bleaching in E horizon and no drainage limitations.
Concordia and Witfontein soil forms.
1.3
Deep, dark coloured, sandy, silty soils with moderate drainage limitations. Dundee soil
form.
1.4
Fairly deep, yellow-brown, loamy-sand, podzol soils on underlying weathered rock with
high stone content and minor to moderate drainage limitations. Groenkop soil form.
1.5
Fairly deep, brown, loamy soils on underlying dense clay with moderate to significant
drainage limitations. Tukulu soil form.
1.6
Fairly deep, yellow, sandy soil with no to minor drainage limitations. High gravel content in
subsoil. Clovelly and Glencoe soil forms.
2
Deep to fairly deep, bleached, light coloured, sandy soils with drainage limitations.
2.1 Deep with moderate drainage limitations. Dundee soil form.
2.2
Fairly deep with podzol characteristics and significant drainage limitations. Mostly with
gravel in the subsoil at 50-100cm depth. Longlands and Lamotte soil forms.
2.3 Fairly deep with significant drainage limitations. Kroonstad and Longlands soil forms.
3
Soil mapping by Johann Lanz
January 2016
Soils with limited depth (40-70cm) due to underlying dense clay in the subsoil
(duplex soils) and with bleached E horizons. Significant drainage limitations.
Predominantly Kroonstad and Estcourt soil forms.
3.1 Loamy-sands
3.2 Sands
4
Shallow (<40cm) sandy soils on underlying hard rock. Mispah and Glenrosa soils.
Note on soil suitability: Soils are rated for suitability for perennial crops out of 10. Suitability is a function of root development potential (soil depth and friability); water holding capacity and supply; drainage; and organic
matter content. Soils rated >5.0 are recommended. Soils rated 4.0 - 4.9 are conditionally recommended and can be utilised but higher management inputs are likely to be required and production is likely to be
compromised. Soils rated <4.0 are not recommended.
Doornrivier Ameliorant Block Map
Northern section
Ameliorant block hectares
Soil mapping by Johann Lanz
January 2016
DR1
6.76
DR2
3.41
DR3
0.63
DR4
7.24
DR5
5.11
DR6
8.90
Total
32.05
Doornrivier Ameliorant Block Map
Southern section
Ameliorant block hectares
Soil mapping by Johann Lanz
January 2016
DR7
4.58
DR8
3.44
DR9
3.30
DR10
9.42
DR11
1.46
Total
22.20
1.
Introduction
Johann Lanz was contracted by the Unit of Technical Assistance to do a soil potential
scoping investigation of Doornrivier Farm in Herold near George. The general aim of the
soil investigation was to identify the most suitable portions of the farm for crop
establishment, and more specifically to:
1. classify and map soils on a 100 x 100 metre grid
2. assess the suitability of the different soils for crop production and for irrigation
3. sample and analyse representative samples of the different soil map units and
provide soil ameliorant recommendations with an ameliorant map
A total of 67 test pits were investigated across potentially arable areas of the farm in
December 2015 by Johann Lanz. During the investigation, soils were classified according
to the South African soil classification system and the soil description code was recorded
for each investigated profile. A brief explanation of the soil classification system and the
description code (including all soil forms identified in this investigation) is given in
Appendices 1 to 3 and all the soil codes of investigated test pits are listed in Appendix 4.
These codes were used to draw up the soil map. The report serves as a supporting
document to the map and is important in that it indicates the thinking on which the soil map
is based and contains additional information on the soils. It should be read in conjunction
with the included soil map.
Because pure soil classification can be very confusing and meaningless to non-soil
scientists, the soil map in this report strives to make interpreted and descriptive
information, that is important to the user, accessible. The focus of this investigation and
report is on soil variation as it affects crop performance and management, rather than on
pure soil classification. Soils are divided into map units based on predicted crop reaction
and vigour potential, and not necessarily on differences in the soil classification system
per se.
2.
General discussion on the evaluation of soils for crop suitability
Soil vigour potential is related to the buffer capacity of the soil, which is the capacity to
store plant available water and nutrients within a suitable root environment. This is
influenced by the soil’s inherent storage capacity and the size (largely depth) of the
1
suitable root environment. Buffer capacity in a soil protects crops from excessive water
stress and nutrient deficiencies. Generally the higher the buffer capacity, the higher is the
soil vigour potential, and therefore the suitability of the soil for crop production.
In considering what soil factors are likely to play a role in crop vigour, it is useful to look at
all the soil factors that can influence growth, in the absence of soil chemical deficiencies or
toxicities. These are listed below. The focus is on the root zone ie. that part of the soil
profile that is suitable and accessible to root growth. As these soil properties, described
below, increase, so the buffer capacity and vigour potential of the soil increases. These
properties were used to evaluate the vigour potential and suitability of soils in this report.
They are:
1. Root development potential. This depends on the soil volume (depth) that is
available for root development as well as the potential for root branching and for
fine root development within that soil volume. Root development is most affected by
soil structure (soil strength and bulk density), which is important in terms of a
physical barrier to root development as well as for the creation of porosity, which
ensures oxygen availability to roots and micro-organisms. Without oxygen, roots
cannot grow and dense clay horizons or water tables therefore prevent deeper root
development into or below these. The deeper and more friable (low soil strength
and low bulk density) a soil is, the better the root development potential and the
potential plant vigour.
2. Total water holding capacity, drainage and water supply. Water supply to the
crop through the season is an important determinant of vigour. Both the volume and
duration of water supply and the suction force at which it is supplied are important.
A suitable soil must also be able to rapidly get rid of excessive water through
drainage. The water holding capacity is dependent on soil depth and structure, and
clay, stone and organic matter content. Readily available water holding capacity
increases from sandy soils, which have a low water holding capacity, to a maximum
at a clay content of around 20% and then decreases with increasing clay content
thereafter. This is because, although higher clay content soil has a higher total
water holding capacity, the water is held at a high suction force and is not easily
available to plants.
3. Nutrient holding capacity. Fertile soils must be able to store and supply nutrients
to crops. As discussed above, there is a correlation between buffer capacity, water
holding capacity and nutrient holding capacity. As the buffer capacity increases, so
2
the vigour potential of the soil increases. Sandy soils have a low nutrient holding
capacity.
4. Soil organic matter content. The organic matter content of soil has a large
influence on plant vigour, through nitrogen and other nutrient supply as well as
other effects of beneficial biological activity. The higher the organic matter content
(normally the darker the soil is), the more vigour there is
Soils are rated for potential by making an overall assessment of each soil, taking all of the
four factors listed above into account. A value between 0 and 10 is assigned. This
suitability rating is used by soil scientists in the Western Cape.
3.
Description of soil conditions and division into soil map units
All the investigated soils on Doornrivier have formed predominantly from parent material
derived from Table Mountain sandstone. Sandy material has been transported colluvially
or alluvially from up slope and deposited in the valleys. These sandy deposits overly, in
places, older in situ weathering that has resulted in clay formation. Soil formation has
taken place within these sandy deposits and has been influenced by the presence or
absence of underlying clay.
For soil mapping purposes and as an indication of soil variation, the soils were divided into
four different soil categories, which were further subdivided into a total of 12 soil map units.
These were divided largely according to the presence or absence of different soil
limitations which impact on crop performance and are related to the factors discussed in
section 2. The soil map units do not therefore always correspond to differences in
classification into soil form. Soils within one soil map unit can be considered uniform in
terms of crop performance and management requirements.
The four defining characteristics used to distinguish soil map units, with their applicable
subdivisions are:
1. depth
1. deep
2. fairly deep
3. limited depth
4. shallow
>120cm
70-120cm
40-70cm
<40cm
3
2. colour
1. dark
2. yellow-brown or brown (including podzols)
3. bleached, light coloured
3. texture (of the potential root zone)
1. loam
<15% clay
2. loamy-sand
<10% clay
3. sand
<5% clay
4. drainage limitations
1. none
2. minor
will not require drain installation for most crops
3. moderate
may require some drain installation (crop dependent)
4. significant
is very likely to require drain installation for most crops
Descriptions of the characteristics and the suitability rating of each of the soil map units
are given in the legend on the map.
4.
Soil suitability for crop production
A suitability rating is given on the map for each investigated soil test pit. The rating is done
in terms of a system out of 10 that is used by soil scientists in the Western Cape. These
are general crop suitability ratings for permanent crops. Suitability ratings may vary for
certain, specific crops. Suitability is a function of the factors discussed in section 2. Soils
rated >5.0 are recommended. Soils rated 4.0 - 4.9 are conditionally recommended and
can be utilised but higher management inputs are likely to be required and production is
likely to be compromised. Soils rated <4.0 are not recommended for general crop
production.
The suitability ratings also apply to the soil suitability for irrigation, with the same
recommendation categories as above.
It should be noted that soil suitability ratings in this report are made independently of
terrain. Terrain will also affect the suitability of the different areas on Doornrivier for crop
production, and will impact the suitability of different farming practices. There are
significant differences between areas in terms of slope steepness and ruggedness of
terrain. For example, test pits 40 - 45 are in rugged, rocky terrain with steep slopes. Crop
establishment on less suitable terrain will require higher management inputs.
4
5.
Soil chemistry and amelioration
Composite samples from different areas were taken for soil chemical analysis. The
analysis results are given in Appendix 5. The hole numbers included in each composite
sample are given in Appendix 6. Recommended chemical ameliorants for application
immediately prior to soil preparation are given in Appendix 7.
Most of the pH levels from the Doornrivier samples are low, particularly in the subsoil and
particularly in areas that have not been recently cultivated. This is to be expected, given
that natural soil conditions are likely to be low pH. Magnesium levels are generally high
and so only calcitic lime is recommended. Salinity is low, and sodium levels are
adequately low. Both phosphorus and potassium levels are very high in some samples,
which would be as a result of past fertilisation. They are low in others, probably where
fertilisation has never been applied or has not been applied for a long time.
6.
Soil preparation
Correct and effective soil preparation is critical for optimum crop establishment. Mixing of
soil layers and of applied ameliorants in the potential root zone is the main aim of soil
preparation on these soils, with loosening as a secondary aim. The most effective mixing
is obtained through delve ploughing. Delve ploughing should not however be done in soil
map unit 1.4 because of the high rock content. Delve ploughing will bring excessive rock to
the surface. It should also not be done in soil map unit 3 where it will bring the underlying
clay to the surface. Ripping only should be done on these map units. On soil map unit 3
the moisture content of the soil during preparation is very important. Preparation should be
done when the soil is as dry as possible and the underlying clay can crumble rather than
smear. Soil map unit 4 is too shallow on a hard rock subsoil for soil preparation.
Drainage is a limitation to crop performance on certain soil map units. All map units
identified as having moderate drainage limitations may require some drain installation
depending on the crop sensitivity. All map units identified as having significant drainage
limitations are very likely to require drain installation for most crops.
5
Appendix 1: Explanation of identified soil forms in the SA soil classification
system
Soil forms are the first level of division in the South African soil classification system. Soil forms are further
divided into different families. All soil forms are given a South African place name. Families are given a four
digit number. Soils are divided into forms based on the sequence of diagnostic soil horizons in the soil
profile. All the identified soil forms and transitional soil forms, with the sequence of horizons of each form, are
given in Table A1. An explanation of the characteristics of the different diagnostic soil horizons is given in
Appendix 2.
In Appendix 4, the soil form is given within the soil code for each investigated profile hole. The form is
indicated with a two-letter abbreviation (capital letter followed by lower case) of the form name. This
abbreviation is also given in Table A1 for each identified soil form.
Table A1. Explanation of identified soil forms (including transitional ones). Soil forms are listed
alphabetically by the form abbreviation.
Soil form
Abbreviation
Soil form
name
Cc
Concordia
Cv
Clovelly
Du
Dundee
Es
Estcourt
Gc
Glencoe
Gk
Groenkop
Kd
Kroonstad
Km
Klapmuts
Lo
Longlands
Lt
Lamotte
Ms
Mispah
Sequence from top to bottom of diagnostic horizons
A horizon
E horizon
Podzol B
Unconsolidated material without signs of wetness
A horizon
Yellow brown Apedal B
Unspecified
A horizon
Stratified Alluvium
A horizon
E horizon
Prismacutanic B
A horizon
Yellow brown Apedal B
Hard plinthic B
A horizon
Podzol B
Saprolite
A horizon
E horizon
G horizon
A horizon
E horizon
Pedocutanic B
A horizon
E horizon
Soft Plinthic B
A horizon
E horizon
Podzol B
Unconsolidated material with signs of wetness
A horizon
Hard rock
6
Soil form
Abbreviation
Soil form
name
Pg
Pinegrove
Pn
Pinedene
Tu
Tukulu
Wf
Witfontein
Sequence from top to bottom of diagnostic horizons
A horizon
Podzol B
Unconsolidated material without signs of wetness
A horizon
Yellow brown Apedal B
Unspecified material with signs of wetness
A horizon
Neocutanic B
Unspecified material with signs of wetness
A horizon
Podzol B
Unconsolidated material with signs of wetness
7
Appendix 2: Characteristics of the different soil horizons
A horizon
Topsoil with which humified organic matter has been mixed. It is
generally darker coloured than underlying soil, although it may in
some cases be low in organic matter content.
E horizon
A light-coloured, structureless horizon in which removal of colloidal
matter has taken place (a leached horizon). In non-podzolic soils it
results from the build up of a periodic water table above a less
permeable horizon. Imposes a wetness limitation to root growth
due to periodic saturation in the root zone. Requires cut-off
drainage depending on the degree of wetness.
Yellow-brown
apedal B horizon
A yellowish, structureless and non-calcareous horizon. It is an
indication of well drained oxidising conditions and forms no
physical limitation to root development. Can be an indication of
highly weathered conditions or of parent material such as Table
Mountain Sandstone with a low content of weatherable minerals.
Soft
plinthic
horizon
B A mottled and concretionary horizon that has resulted from the
dissolution and precipitation of iron and manganese oxides in a
fluctuating water table. It is an indication of periodic saturation and
requires drainage.
Hard plinthic
horizon
Neocutanic B
B The hard, cemented equivalent of the soft plinthic B horizon.
Pedocutanic B
Prismacutanic B
A horizon showing little signs of pedogenesis. It has weakly
developed structure and forms no physical limitation to root
growth.
A horizon with strong, blocky structure (normally dense clay) and
clearly expressed cutans.
A horizon with strong, prismatic or columnar structure (normally
dense clay) and an abrupt transition from the overlying horizon.
Podzol B
A horizon developed in sandy parent material in which there is an
accumulation of iron, aluminium and humic oxides. It normally has
a characteristic dark, chocolate colour.
G horizon
A horizon with greyish colours which is saturated for long periods
and has a firm consistence and an abrupt transition from the
overlying horizon.
Saprolite
Partially weathered bed rock which still has distinct affinities with
the parent rock.
Stratified alluvium
Unconsolidated material containing stratifications caused by
alluvial deposition.
8
Appendix 3: Structure of soil code and explanation of symbols
The code used indicates the soil classification as well as other characteristics of the soil.
Soil forms are the first level of division in the South African soil classification system. Soil
forms are further divided into different families. All soil forms are given a South African
place name. Families are given a four digit number. Soils are divided into forms based on
the sequence of diagnostic soil horizons in the soil profile.
This is not a comprehensive explanation of the code but explains the most important
points:
Column 2 Numbers indicate the depth of the transition between horizons in order of
increasing depth and according to the categories given below. Following all the horizons,
the depth of a stone content is given if applicable.
Number in code
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
Depth below surface
(cm)
0 - 15
15 - 25
25 - 35
35 - 45
45 - 55
55 - 75
75 - 95
95 - 115
115 - 135
135 - 155
Column 3 Two letter abbreviation of soil form name followed by four digit indication of soil
family.
Column 4 Where a profile is a transition between 2 different soil forms - two letter
abbreviation of the transition soil form name.
Columns 5 - 7 Lower case letters indicating the occurrence of additional horizons
underlying the diagnostic horizons, if applicable.
Column 8 Combined letter and number code indicating course fraction content and stone
size of subsoil horizons, if applicable. f = fine gravel, g = course gravel, k = stones, r =
rocks. The number for each class is the volume fraction out of 10. The sum of the numbers
gives the total course fraction content.
Column 9 Course fraction content of topsoil horizon indicated in the same way as above.
9
Column 10 Sand grade f = fine and me = medium and co = course and clay content of
topsoil horizons according to the following categories:
number
1
2
3
4
5
Clay
percentage
0-5
5 - 10
10 - 15
15 - 20
20 - 35
Column 11 A number between 1 and 9 indicating wetness class based on the depth at
which saturation occurs in the profile and the length of time for which the soil remains
saturated. All wetness classes of 6 and higher may require drainage. A 0 indicates that no
wetness is present in the profile.
Column 12 The rating out of 10 of the vineyard vigour potential, using the rating system
that is used by Western Cape soil scientists.
Column 13 The soil map unit into which the soil profile has been categorised.
10
Appendix 4: Table of soil profile data
Profile
number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Depth
codes
Family
3673 Es2100
363 Kd2000
363 Kd2000
3 Du1210
3 Du1210
3 Du1210
3 Du1210
3 Du1210
3 Du1210
3 Du1210
4848 Tu1110
373 Tu1110
565 Km2120
36 Es1100
373 Tu2110
353 Kd2000
353 Kd2000
47 Kd1000
353 Kd2000
57 Kd2000
57 Kd1/2000
3 Lo1000
Soil description code
Subsoil properties
Transition
family
Lt
lo
Wb
bl
bl/hu
hu
bl/hu
bl/hu
bl/hu
bl/hu
gl
gc
gc
Tu
Tu
CF
f2/3
f3
f3
U5
U1
U1
U1
U1
U1
U1
f2
f3
f4
f4g2
f2
f2
f4
Tu
11
Topsoil
properties
CF
texture
f5g1
fi2/3
f6g1
fi2/3
f6g1
fi2/3
co1/2
fi2
me1/2
fi1/2
fi1/2
fi1/2
fi1/2
f7
co2
co2
f1/2
fi2/3
co1
f3
co3
f2
co3
f2
co3
co2
f2
co3
co2
co2
co1
Drain
Suitability
rating
Map
unit
6
6
6
3/6
3/6
3/6
3/6
3/6
3/6
3/6
6
3/6
3/6
6
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5.8
5.4
5.5
5.0
5.6
6.0
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.8
6.3
6.3
5.4
4.6
5.9
4.8
4.8
4.4
4.8
5.2
4.7
4.5
3.1
3.1
3.1
2.1
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.5
3.1
3.2
1.5
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
2.3
Profile
number
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
47
48
49
Depth
codes
363
272
47
466
3
474
366
488
4688
37
399
37
24
36
49
36
35
383
383
383
383
3
383
383
36
3563
Family
Gs2211
Cv2100
Kd1000
Lt2100
Lo1000
Lt2100
Lo1000
Lo1000
Gc1100
Kd1/2000
Lo1000
Kd1/2000
Kd1/2000
Es1200
Es1200
Es1200
Es1200
Pn2100
Gk2200
Gk2200
Gk2200
Ms2100
Gk2200
Gk2200
Es11/200
Es2100
Transition
family
Soil description code
Subsoil properties
so
R
R
CF
f3g4
f8
Cf
gs
f3g4
gs
f3g4
f7
f7
f4g2
gs
hp2
f4g3
Wf
Gk
lw
sw
sw
sw
R
sw
lw
f4g3
f5g2
f5g2
f5g2
f5g2
f5g2
f3g3k1
lw
f5g2
Kd
12
Topsoil
properties
CF
texture
f5g1
co1
f4
co1/2
co1
co1
co1
co1
co1
co1
co1
co1
co1
co1
co2
co1
co1
co1
co1
f1g1k2
co2/3
f3g2
co2
f3g1k1
co2
f3g1k1
co2
f3g1k1
co1
f3g1k1
co2
co2
co2
fi3
Drain
Suitability
rating
Map
unit
3
0
6
6
6
6
3/6
6
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
2
4
4
4
3
4
3/6
6
6
4.2
5.8
4.7
5.1
4.7
5.0
5.2
4.9
5.5
4.8
4.7
4.8
3.5
4.2
4.7
4.2
3.5
5.5
6.0
5.5
5.5
4.0
5.5
5.5
4.1
4.0
4
1.6
2.3
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.6
2.3
2.2
2.3
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
4
1.4
1.4
3.1
3.1
Profile
number
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Depth
codes
Family
368 Lo1000
49 Pg1000
38 Cc1000
38 Cc1000
366 Lt1200
37 Lo1/2000
36 Wf1100
488 Lo2000
4808 Lo1000
3686 Lo1000
3797 Lo1000
48 Lt1100
488 Wf1100
49 Wf1100
4 Wf1100
49 Wf1100
37 Wf1100
388 Lo2000
353 Es1100
Transition
family
Soil description code
Subsoil properties
CF
gc
Cv
f3g4
Lo
Lt
f3g2k1
lw
Wf
Lt
Lt
gc/lw
gc
gc
f3g3k1
f4g3
f3g3k1
f2g1
Lo
sp
sp
Cc
Sr
Lt
f3g3k1
sp
sp
f3g3
f3
13
Topsoil
properties
CF
texture
fi2
co1/2
co2
co2
co2
co2
co2
me2
me2
fi2/3
fi2
me2
me2/3
me2/3
me2
me2
me2
me2
f5g2
fi3
Drain
Suitability
rating
Map
unit
6
0
0
0
6
6
3
3/6
6
3/6
6
3/6
3
3
2
3
3/6
6
6/7
5.2
8.0
6.2
6.2
5.4
5.1
6.0
5.5
5.0
5.1
4.9
5.1
7.6
7.8
7.8
8.3
7.6
5.4
4.1
2.2
1.1
1.2
1.2
2.2
2.2
1.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
2.2
3.1
Appendix 5: Bemlab analysis
Report No.: GR39943
Date received: 07/12/2015 Date tested: 14/12/2015
No.
Lab.
Depth
Soil
pH
No.
(cm)
(KCl)
Resist.
H+
Stone
P Bray II
(Ohm)
(cmol/kg)
(Vol %)
K
Exchangeable cations (cmol(+)/kg)
mg/kg
Na
K
Ca
Mg
C
Soluble S
%
mg/kg
DR 1
39944
30
Sand
5.1
3190
0.75
1
50
91
0.12
0.23
3.01
0.93
1.10
14.66
DR 1
39943
80
Sand
4.9
6080
0.66
1
8
31
0.14
0.08
1.35
0.47
0.57
13.79
DR 2
39945
30
Loam
4.9
1710
0.92
23
14
56
0.26
0.14
3.10
1.55
1.59
16.79
DR 2
39946
60
Loam
4.6
1440
1.27
35
13
62
0.38
0.16
2.44
2.07
1.38
24.45
DR 3
39947
30
Sand
6.5
1390
5
160
79
0.18
0.20
2.50
1.33
0.83
16.91
DR 3
39948
60
Sand
6.4
4320
1
32
31
0.07
0.08
0.58
0.41
0.41
12.45
DR 4
39949
30
Sand
5.8
1630
0.39
1
62
43
0.19
0.11
2.52
0.98
1.03
14.59
DR 4
39950
70
Sand
5.7
2320
0.00
31
24
26
0.17
0.07
1.52
0.72
0.46
14.62
DR 5
39951
30
Sand
4.9
2640
0.29
1
17
31
0.18
0.08
1.47
0.65
1.01
12.52
DR 5
39952
60
Sand
5.4
2680
0.55
17
14
21
0.18
0.05
1.49
0.65
0.67
13.18
DR 6
39953
30
Sand
5.4
4000
0.38
1
79
52
0.07
0.13
1.85
0.66
0.65
13.06
DR 6
39954
80
Sand
5.0
6510
0.40
16
25
37
0.07
0.09
0.70
0.39
0.36
12.14
DR 7
39955
30
Sand
3.9
2360
0.29
1
6
31
0.20
0.08
1.20
1.00
1.95
17.15
DR 7
39956
80
Loam
4.5
3470
2.62
27
6
24
0.30
0.06
0.69
1.20
1.43
22.37
DR 8
39957
30
Sand
5.2
2270
1.84
7
26
45
0.15
0.11
3.52
0.94
1.27
12.90
DR 8
39958
80
Sand
4.5
1970
0.60
11
5
27
0.17
0.07
1.05
0.83
0.75
13.29
DR 9
39959
30
Loam
5.2
3650
0.95
1
9
18
0.15
0.05
3.37
1.11
1.41
12.86
DR 9
39960
80
Loam
4.6
4790
1.27
1
4
16
0.15
0.04
1.41
1.28
0.89
13.61
DR 10
39961
30
Sand
5.3
3080
0.56
17
30
61
0.12
0.15
2.81
0.92
1.34
14.37
DR 10
39962
80
Sand
4.6
4020
0.70
23
13
26
0.12
0.07
1.27
0.60
0.69
14.46
DR 11
39963
30
Loam
5.5
2240
0.43
30
28
58
0.22
0.15
4.14
1.29
1.45
14.57
DR 11
39964
60
Loam
5.2
1080
0.68
47
8
87
0.74
0.22
5.84
3.48
1.51
20.36
14
Appendix 6: Soil sample identification
Bemlab Soil sample
number
DR1
DR2
DR3
DR4
DR5
DR6
DR7
DR8
DR9
DR10
DR11
Test pit numbers
Soil map unit
5-10
1-4
14
16-22, 25
35-39
26-34
40-43, 45
51-53, 56
62-66
50, 54, 55, 57-61
49, 68
1.3
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.2
2.3 / 2.2
1.4
1.2
1.1
2.2
3.1
15
Appendix 7: Recommended quantities of chemical ameliorants
Ameliorant block
number as per
map
Size
(hectares)
Calcitic lime
Phosphate
fertiliser (20%P)
Tons per hectare
KCl
Kilograms per hectare
DR1
6.76
6
0
0
DR2
3.41
4
350
100
DR3
0.63
0
0
0
DR4
7.24
0
0
200
DR5
5.11
2
400
100
DR6
8.90
2
0
0
DR7
4.58
8
500
100
DR8
3.44
12
350
300
DR9
3.30
14
600
500
DR10
9.42
4
200
100
DR11
1.46
0
100
200
Tons per block
Kilograms per block
DR1
6.76
40.6
0
0
DR2
3.41
13.6
1194
341
DR3
0.63
0.0
0
0
DR4
7.24
0.0
0
1448
DR5
5.11
10.2
2044
511
DR6
8.90
17.8
0
0
DR7
4.58
36.6
2290
458
DR8
3.44
41.3
1204
1032
DR9
3.30
46.2
1980
1650
DR10
9.42
37.7
1884
942
DR11
1.46
0.0
146
292
Total
54.25
244.0
10742
6674
16