floodplain mapping models. discussion & objectives floodplains can be difficult and frustrating...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Floodplain Mapping Models
![Page 2: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Discussion & Objectives• Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in
“traditional” soil survey.– Why?– Do you agree?
• Without an underlying geomorphic model, floodplain mapping may be dependent on the mapper.– What does this mean?– Do you agree?
• Objectives– Discuss some fluvial mapping models in the lower Missouri
river valley• SSURGO• LiDAR (detailed mapping)
![Page 3: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Consider a mapping project in a river valley…. or a benchmark soil update project….
• How do you start to organize your mental models?
• What will you use to establish testable mapping hypotheses?
• What tools/techniques will you use?• Considerations/questions about the system?
Etc.• Discussion….
![Page 4: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Fred’s response(let’s see how well I did)
• What is the nature of the fluvial system?– Sediment sources
• Loess-covered uplands vs glacial uplands vs cherty limestone residuum vs soft cacareous cretaceous sediments…. or mixtures.
– River system• Braided vs meandering; bedrock controls; faulting; etc.• Post-settlement modifications (levees, drainage, leveling, channelization)
• Possible tools to discern geomorphic surfaces– LiDAR (NED DEMs probably inadequate)– Aerial photography/imagery– Go out and look (clean windshield)
• Hole mapping?– Last resort
![Page 5: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Case Study:
Examine the mapping model in the Missouri R valley of NW MO
![Page 6: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
What were the characteristics of the pre-settlement lower Missouri River?
![Page 7: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Missouri River
Missouri River
Examine mapping model in the Missouri R valley of NW Missouri (and SE NE)
![Page 8: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
SSURGO soils in the Mo R valley
![Page 9: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Consider a “classic” model of floodplains: - Sand, silts, clay - Similar to mid-20th century mapping in the Mo R bottoms
How well does the mapping fit the meander belt model of the lower Mississippi?
![Page 10: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Consider the early 19th century location of the Missouri River.
How closely is the alluvial stratigraphy related to the current riverbed?
![Page 11: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Many soils are “two-tiered”, split families.
Complex depositional history.
![Page 12: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
“Prominent” scarp noted in Atchison county mapping - 1 to 3 meters high - windshield technique
(Low) floodplain soils - carbonates to surface
(High) floodplain step soils - carbs below about 50cm
How well does this model work?
![Page 13: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
County boundaries added to the floodplain surfaces model.
How can this model be used in update activities for MLRA 107B?
![Page 14: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Early 19th century River superimposed on the floodplain surfaces SSURGO model.
Pretty good match! (except in NE)
![Page 15: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Low floodplain; calcareous to surface
High floodplain; calcareous at >24”
Natural levee
co-si calcareous
backswamp
Wet, clayeyFootslope; cumulic Hapludoll, co-si
Note: existing soil lines only partially follow landforms shown here
Missouri River floodplain, NW MO
N
![Page 16: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Consider the confluence of the Chariton R and the Missouri R.
![Page 17: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Missouri –Chariton confluence, with LiDAR backdrop
Chari
ton R
1m LiDAR, resampled to 5m
Missouri R
Is this the source of the pre-settlement Chariton R sediments?
![Page 18: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Soils of the Chariton R floodplain (& other local upland sources)
Mo R
![Page 19: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
High floodplain of the Missouri R (as defined by soil survey)
![Page 20: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Low floodplain of the Missouri R (as defined by soil survey)
Mo R
![Page 21: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Surfaces as derived from soil survey
MO River floodplai
n
MO River Floodplain-
stepChariton R floodplain
![Page 22: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Can elevation (absolute) be used to separate surfaces? 190m class break
Works well here
Natural levee (high)
Sloughs (low)
![Page 23: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
High, loess-covered terrace at Malta Bend on the Missouri River, central
Missouri
10m DEM
Some of Missouri’s most productive agricultural soils are on this surface
Joy series: fi-si Aquic Hapludolls
Missouri R.
N
![Page 24: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Location of Cora Island mapping area
Missouri River floodplain, St. Charles county (near St. Louis)
Detailed (Order 1) floodplain mapping
![Page 25: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
![Page 26: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Low-relief terrain; difficult to see the soil-landscape relationships
![Page 27: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
10m NED DEM – not much help
![Page 28: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
LiDAR – wow!Testable hypotheses about soil variability are now apparent.
![Page 29: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
MUSYM MUNAME Series TaxClass1 1 - Lowmo Blake fi-si Aquic Udifluvents2 2 - Peers Blencoe c/l Aquertic Hapludolls3 3 - Blencoe Grable co-si/s Mollic Udifluvents4 4 - Sansdessein occass flooded Haynie co-si Millic Udifluvents5 5 - Grable Lowmo co-si Fluventic Hapludolls6 6 - Parkville Moville co-si/c Aquic Udifluvents7 7 - Haynie Parkville c/l Fluvaquentic Hapludolls8 8 - Moville Peers fi-si Fluvaquentic Hapludolls9 9 - Treloar - Haynie complex Sansdessein f Fluvaquentic Vertic Endoaquolls
10 10 - Blencoe - Grable complex Treloar s/l Oxyaquic Udifluvents11 11 - Sansdessein freq flooded12 12 - Haynie - Blake - Treloar complex13 13 - Water
Mapping closely follows landscape patterns
![Page 30: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
EMI patterns reflect the LiDAR and soils patterns, with lower, wetter areas of finer textured soils having high readings.
![Page 31: Floodplain Mapping Models. Discussion & Objectives Floodplains can be difficult and frustrating to map in “traditional” soil survey. – Why? – Do you agree?](https://reader031.vdocuments.net/reader031/viewer/2022012922/56649c9b5503460f949597d2/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Discussion (if we have time)
• Other experiences with fluvial systems mapping?
• How can you avoid “hole mapping”?• Techniques for creating a soil - geomorphic
surface model for soil survey?