Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: left Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 10 Font Family: Tahoma Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: The Order of a soil survey indicates the level of detail and relative intensity of field observation under which the map unit was developed. The order of a survey is commonly reflected in the scale of mapping, but not determined by it. Rather, the order of a survey is determined by the field procedures used to identify soil components and place map unit boundaries, the minimum permissible size of map unit delineation, and the kind of map unit to which soil components are aggregated.
Order 1 - Very intensive. The soils in each delineation are identified by transecting or traversing or even grid mapping. Soil boundaries are observed throughout their length. Remotely sensed data are used as an aid in boundary delineation. Order 1 surveys are made if very detailed information about soils, generally in small areas, is needed for very intensive land uses.
Order 2 - Intensive. The soils in each delineation are identified by field observations and by remotely sensed data. Boundaries are verified at closely spaced intervals. Order 2 surveys are made if detailed information about soil resources is needed to make predictions of soil suitability and treatment needs for intensive land uses. The information can be used in planning for general agriculture, construction, urban development, and similar uses that require precise knowledge of the soils and their variability.
Order 3 - Extensive. Soil boundaries are plotted by observation and interpretation of remotely sensed data. They are verified by traversing representative areas and by some transects. Order 3 surveys are made where land uses do not require precise knowledge of small areas or detailed soil information. The survey areas are commonly dominated by a single land use and have few subordinate uses. The soil information can be used in planning for range, forest, and recreational areas and in community planning.
Order 4 - Extensive. Soil boundaries are plotted by interpretation of remotely sensed data. They are verified by traversing representative areas and by some transects. Order 4 surveys are made if general soil information is needed about the potential and general management of land for extensive uses. The information can be used in locating, comparing, and selecting suitable areas for major kinds of land use, in regional land use planning, and in selecting areas for more intensive study and investigation.
Order 5 - Very extensive. The soil patterns and composition of map units are determined by mapping representative ideas and like areas by interpretation of remotely sensed data. Soils are verified by some onsite investigation or by traversing. Order 5 surveys are made to collect soil information in very large areas at a level of detail suitable for planning regional land use and interpreting information at a high level of generalization. The primary use of this information is selection of areas for more intensive study.
Some soil survey areas have two or more orders of mapping because they have distinct parts with different needs. For example, one part may be mapped to make predictions related to irrigation and the other may be mapped to make predictions related to range management. For the irrigated part, areas are mapped at the intensity required for an order 2 soil survey. For the rangeland part, areas are mapped as an order 3 survey. Reference:
Soil Science Division Staff. 2017. Soil survey manual. Chapter 4. C. Ditzler, K. Scheffe, and H.C. Monger (eds.). USDA Handbook 18. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Aggregation Method: No Aggregation Necessary; Tiebreak rule: Higher
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_OrderSsa
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Order_of_Soil_Survey.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-08-24 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Description: This dataset is a digital soil survey and generally is the most detailed level of soil geographic data developed by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The information was prepared by digitizing maps, by compiling information onto a planimetric correct base and digitizing, or by revising digitized maps using remotely sensed and other information.This dataset consists of georeferenced digital map data and computerized attribute data. The map data are in a state-wide extent format and include a detailed, field verified inventory of soils and miscellaneous areas that normally occur in a repeatable pattern on the landscape and that can be cartographically shown at the scale mapped. The soil map units are linked to attributes in the National Soil Information System relational database, which gives the proportionate extent of the component soils and their properties.
Copyright Text: Soil Survey Staff. Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database for Arizona. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available online at http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/. 20190917 (FY2020 official release).
Description: This interpretation rates each soil for its inherent ability to recover from degradation, which is often referred to as soil resilience. The ability to recover from degradation means the ability to restore functional and structural integrity after a disturbance. Both the rate and degree of recovery need to be considered. Soil functions that are important include sustaining biological activity, diversity and productivity; capture, storage and release of water; storing and cycling nutrients and other elements; filtering, buffering, degrading, immobilizing and detoxifying contaminants; providing support for plant and animal life; and protection for archeological sites. Restoration goals may include re-establishment of a preferred natural plant assemblage of the ecological site that existed prior to decline to a degraded state.
Soil resilience is dependent upon adequate stores of organic matter, good soil structure, low salt and sodium levels, adequate nutrient levels, microbial biomass and diversity, adequate precipitation for recovery, and other soil properties. Dynamic soil properties, such as microbial biomass and diversity or carbon nitrogen ratio, are not used for this rating since they are not contained within the soil database.
This rating should be used to help prioritize areas for restoration projects, such as prescribed burning, chaining, or herbicide application, that depend upon natural vegetation recovery. On-site investigation is recommended before undertaking any restoration project.
The ratings are both verbal and numerical. Rating class terms indicate the extent to which the soils are made suitable by all of the soil features that affect the soil's ability to recover. "High potential" indicates that the soil has features that are very favorable for recovery. Good performance can be expected. "Moderate potential" indicates that the soil has features that are generally favorable for recovery. Fair performance can be expected. "Low potential" indicates that the soil has one or more features that are unfavorable for recovery. Poor performance can be expected.
The overall rating class for each soil is assigned based on the product of the numerical ratings of the individual soil properties considered in the interpretation, some of which may not be displayed.
Numerical ratings indicate the level of for the soil to recover from degradation. The ratings are shown in decimal fractions ranging from 1.00 to 0.01. They indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest positive impact on recovery (1.00), and the point at which the soil feature has the greatest negative impact (0.00).
The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the Aggregation Report in Soil Data Viewer are determined by the aggregation method chosen. An aggregated rating class is shown for each map unit. The components listed for each map unit are only those that have the same rating class as listed for the map unit. The percent composition of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better understand the percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented. Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit. The ratings for all components, regardless of the map unit aggregated rating, can be viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil Survey or from the Soil Data Mart site. Onsite investigation may be needed to validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Lower
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_SoiRestPot_DCD
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Soil_Restoration_Potential_DCD.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-06-09 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Description: Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water. Factor K is one of six factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) to predict the average annual rate of soil loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year. The estimates are based primarily on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter and on soil structure and saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat). Values of K range from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors being equal, the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water.
"Erosion factor Kw (whole soil)" indicates the erodibility of the whole soil. The estimates are modified by the presence of rock fragments.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Higher
Top horizon depth: 0; Bottom horizon depth: 1
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_KfactWS_DCD_0to1
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\K_Factor_Whole_Soil_DCD_0_to_1cm.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-08-24 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Description: The T factor is an estimate of the maximum average annual rate of soil erosion by wind and/or water that can occur without affecting crop productivity over a sustained period. The rate is in tons per acre per year.
Units of Measure: tons per acre per year
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Lower
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
Using representative values (tfact) from component table
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_Tfactor_DCD
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\T_Factor_DCD.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-08-24 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Description: The ratings in this interpretation indicate the hazard of soil loss from off-road and off-trail areas after disturbance activities that expose the soil surface. The ratings are based on slope and soil erosion factor K. The soil loss is caused by sheet or rill erosion in off-road or off-trail areas where 50 to 75 percent of the surface has been exposed by logging, grazing, mining, or other kinds of disturbance.
The ratings are both verbal and numerical. The hazard is described as "slight," "moderate," "severe," or "very severe." A rating of "slight" indicates that erosion is unlikely under ordinary climatic conditions; "moderate" indicates that some erosion is likely and that erosion-control measures may be needed; "severe" indicates that erosion is very likely and that erosion-control measures, including revegetation of bare areas, are advised; and "very severe" indicates that significant erosion is expected, loss of soil productivity and off-site damage are likely, and erosion-control measures are costly and generally impractical.
Numerical ratings indicate the severity of individual limitations. The ratings are shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative impact on the specified aspect of forestland management (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation (0.00).
The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the Aggregation Report in Soil Data Viewer are determined by the aggregation method chosen. An aggregated rating class is shown for each map unit. The components listed for each map unit are only those that have the same rating class as listed for the map unit. The percent composition of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better understand the percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented. Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit. The ratings for all components, regardless of the map unit aggregated rating, can be viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil Survey or from the Soil Data Mart site. Onsite investigation may be needed to validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Higher
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_EroHzdORT_DCD
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Erosion_Hazard_(Off-Road_Off-Trail)_DCD.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-06-09 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMap.py
Description: The ratings in this interpretation indicate the hazard of soil loss from unsurfaced roads and trails. The ratings are based on soil erosion factor K, slope, and content of rock fragments.
The ratings are both verbal and numerical. The hazard is described as "slight," "moderate," or "severe." A rating of "slight" indicates that little or no erosion is likely; "moderate" indicates that some erosion is likely, that the roads or trails may require occasional maintenance, and that simple erosion-control measures are needed; and "severe" indicates that significant erosion is expected, that the roads or trails require frequent maintenance, and that costly erosion-control measures are needed.
Numerical ratings indicate the severity of individual limitations. The ratings are shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative impact on the specified aspect of forestland management (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation (0.00).
The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the Aggregation Report in Soil Data Viewer are determined by the aggregation method chosen. An aggregated rating class is shown for each map unit. The components listed for each map unit are only those that have the same rating class as listed for the map unit. The percent composition of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better understand the percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented. Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit. The ratings for all components, regardless of the map unit aggregated rating, can be viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil Survey or from the Soil Data Mart site. Onsite investigation may be needed to validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Higher
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_EroHzdRT_DCD
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Erosion_Hazard_(Road_Trail)_DCD.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-06-09 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMap.py
Description: Soil texture, or how the soil looks and feels, is determined by the size and proportion of the particles (clay, silt, and sand) that make up the mineral fraction. There are 12 USDA textural classes (e.g., sandy loam, silty clay). Significance:
The textural class of a soil is its most fundamental inherent characteristic that changes little over time (van Es et al., 2016). Its role in soil health studies is to inform the interpretation of most of the soil health indicators. Numerous soil properties are influenced by texture, including drainage, water-holding capacity, water movement through soil, infiltration, susceptibility to erosion, organic matter content, cation-exchange capacity, pH buffering capacity, and aeration. Soil texture also influences soil fertility, root growth, and plant vigor.
Factors Affecting Soil Surface Texture:
Inherent factors.—The nature and composition of the soil parent material greatly influences the particle-size distribution, or texture. Weathering of rocks and soil materials also affect the soil texture. Clays typically form over long periods of time through gradual chemical weathering. Freeze-thaw action can break apart rocks and gradually reduce the particle size of soil materials over time. Translocation of soil particles (e.g., clay) within the profile and between layers can alter the soil texture. Additions of particles by wind or water also affect the soil texture.
Dynamic factors.—Soil texture is altered little by management practices if the soil remains in place. Accelerated erosion by wind or water can remove the topsoil, exposing a subsoil with a different texture. Deposition of eroded materials can alter the texture of the surface soil. Deposition can be natural or anthropogenic (due to human activity). Land leveling and alteration (e.g., terracing) can change the soil texture.
Measurement:
The feel method is a crude method by which one can broadly judge the classes of soil texture. The lab methods involve removal of organic matter from a soil sample, the dispersion of the soil sample into single particles, and then the separation of sand through sieving. Clay is determined through sedimentation based on Stoke’s law. The full procedure is described in the Kellogg Soil Survey Laboratory Methods Manual (Soil Survey Staff, 2014).
References:
Soil Survey Staff. 2014. Kellogg Soil Survey Laboratory methods manual. Soil Survey Investigations Report No. 42, Version 5.0. R. Burt and Soil Survey Staff (eds.). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
van Es, H., R. Schindelbeck, A. Ristow, K. Kurtz, and L. Fennell. 2016. Soil texture. Soil Health Manual Series. Fact Sheet No. 16-04. School of Integrative Plant Sciences, Cornell University, NY.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Lower
Top horizon depth: 0; Bottom horizon depth: 1
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_TexSurf_DCD_0to1
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Soil_Health_-_Surface_Texture_DCD_0_to_1cm.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-08-24 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Value: Stratified very gravelly loamy sand to very gravelly sandy loam to gravelly loam Label: Stratified very gravelly loamy sand to very gravelly sandy loam to gravelly loam Description: N/A Symbol:
Description: Linear extensibility refers to the change in length of an unconfined clod as moisture content is decreased from a moist to a dry state. It is an expression of the volume change between the water content of the clod at 1/3- or 1/10-bar tension (33kPa or 10kPa tension) and oven dryness. The volume change is reported as percent change for the whole soil. The amount and type of clay minerals in the soil influence volume change.
For each soil layer, this attribute is actually recorded as three separate values in the database. A low value and a high value indicate the range of this attribute for the soil component. A "representative" value indicates the expected value of this attribute for the component. For this soil property, only the representative value is used.
Units of Measure: percent
Aggregation Method: Dominant Component; Tiebreak rule: Higher
Top horizon depth: 0; Bottom horizon depth: 10
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
Using representative values (lep_r) from chorizon table
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_LEP_DCP_0to10
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Linear_Extensibility_DCP_0_to_10cm.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-08-24 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Description: This displays the representative texture class and modifier of the surface horizon.
Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand. If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate modifier is added, for example, "gravelly."
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Lower
Top horizon depth: 0; Bottom horizon depth: 1
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_SurfText_DCD_0to1
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Surface_Texture_DCD_0_to_1cm.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-08-24 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Description: Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Higher
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_HydrolGrp_DCD
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\AACD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Hydrologic_Soil_Group_DCD.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-08-24 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMaps.py
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>The State Geologic Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States (https://doi.org/10.5066/F7WH2N65) represents a seamless, spatial database of 48 State geologic maps that range from 1:50,000 to 1:1,000,000 scale. A national digital geologic map database is essential in interpreting other datasets that support numerous types of national-scale studies and assessments, such as those that provide geochemistry, remote sensing, or geophysical data. The SGMC is a compilation of the individual U.S. Geological Survey releases of the Preliminary Integrated Geologic Map Databases for the United States. The SGMC geodatabase also contains updated data for seven States and seven entirely new State geologic maps that have been added since the preliminary databases were published. Numerous errors have been corrected and enhancements added to the preliminary datasets using thorough quality assurance/quality control procedures. The SGMC is not a truly integrated geologic map database because geologic units have not been reconciled across State boundaries. However, the geologic data contained in each State geologic map have been standardized to allow spatial analyses of lithology, age, and stratigraphy at a national scale. A full discussion of the procedures and methodology used to create this dataset is available in the accompanying report: Horton, J.D., San Juan, C.A., and Stoeser, D.B, 2017, The State Geologic Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States (ver. 1.1, August 2017): U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1052, 46 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1052.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: The State Geologic Map Compilation of the Conterminous United States was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program (MRP). The project owes its success to numerous MRP staff who compiled the Preliminary Integrated Geologic Map Databases for the United States (PIGMD) as well as the foundational geologic mapping work completed by U.S. State Geologic Surveys and academia.
Value: (KJs;0) Cretaceous to Late Jurassic sedimentary rocks with minor volcanic rocks Label: (KJs;0) Cretaceous to Late Jurassic sedimentary rocks with minor volcanic rocks Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (Kmd;0) Intertongued Mancos Shale and Dakota Sandstone of west-central New Mexico Label: (Kmd;0) Intertongued Mancos Shale and Dakota Sandstone of west-central New Mexico Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (Kmv;0) Sedimentary rocks of the Late Cretaceous Mesaverde Group Label: (Kmv;0) Sedimentary rocks of the Late Cretaceous Mesaverde Group Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (QTs;0) Early Pleistocene to late Miocene basin deposits Label: (QTs;0) Early Pleistocene to late Miocene basin deposits Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (TKg;0) Early Tertiary to Late Cretaceous granitic rocks Label: (TKg;0) Early Tertiary to Late Cretaceous granitic rocks Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (TKgm;0) Early Tertiary to Late Cretaceous muscovite-bearing granitic rocks Label: (TKgm;0) Early Tertiary to Late Cretaceous muscovite-bearing granitic rocks Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (TR2;8) Chinle Formation and Shinarump Conglomerate Member Label: (TR2;8) Chinle Formation and Shinarump Conglomerate Member Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (Tual;0) Lower-upper middle Tertiary basaltic andesites and andesites of the Mogollon Group Label: (Tual;0) Lower-upper middle Tertiary basaltic andesites and andesites of the Mogollon Group Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: (Tuau;0) Upper middle Tertiary basaltic andesites and andesites of the Mogollon Group Label: (Tuau;0) Upper middle Tertiary basaltic andesites and andesites of the Mogollon Group Description: N/A Symbol:
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>The State Geologic Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States (https://doi.org/10.5066/F7WH2N65) represents a seamless, spatial database of 48 State geologic maps that range from 1:50,000 to 1:1,000,000 scale. A national digital geologic map database is essential in interpreting other datasets that support numerous types of national-scale studies and assessments, such as those that provide geochemistry, remote sensing, or geophysical data. The SGMC is a compilation of the individual U.S. Geological Survey releases of the Preliminary Integrated Geologic Map Databases for the United States. The SGMC geodatabase also contains updated data for seven States and seven entirely new State geologic maps that have been added since the preliminary databases were published. Numerous errors have been corrected and enhancements added to the preliminary datasets using thorough quality assurance/quality control procedures. The SGMC is not a truly integrated geologic map database because geologic units have not been reconciled across State boundaries. However, the geologic data contained in each State geologic map have been standardized to allow spatial analyses of lithology, age, and stratigraphy at a national scale. A full discussion of the procedures and methodology used to create this dataset is available in the accompanying report: Horton, J.D., San Juan, C.A., and Stoeser, D.B, 2017, The State Geologic Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States (ver. 1.1, August 2017): U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1052, 46 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1052.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: The State Geologic Map Compilation of the Conterminous United States was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program (MRP). The project owes its success to numerous MRP staff who compiled the Preliminary Integrated Geologic Map Databases for the United States (PIGMD) as well as the foundational geologic mapping work completed by U.S. State Geologic Surveys and academia.
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>The State Geologic Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States (https://doi.org/10.5066/F7WH2N65) represents a seamless, spatial database of 48 State geologic maps that range from 1:50,000 to 1:1,000,000 scale. A national digital geologic map database is essential in interpreting other datasets that support numerous types of national-scale studies and assessments, such as those that provide geochemistry, remote sensing, or geophysical data. The SGMC is a compilation of the individual U.S. Geological Survey releases of the Preliminary Integrated Geologic Map Databases for the United States. The SGMC geodatabase also contains updated data for seven States and seven entirely new State geologic maps that have been added since the preliminary databases were published. Numerous errors have been corrected and enhancements added to the preliminary datasets using thorough quality assurance/quality control procedures. The SGMC is not a truly integrated geologic map database because geologic units have not been reconciled across State boundaries. However, the geologic data contained in each State geologic map have been standardized to allow spatial analyses of lithology, age, and stratigraphy at a national scale. A full discussion of the procedures and methodology used to create this dataset is available in the accompanying report: Horton, J.D., San Juan, C.A., and Stoeser, D.B, 2017, The State Geologic Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States (ver. 1.1, August 2017): U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1052, 46 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1052.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: The State Geologic Map Compilation of the Conterminous United States was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program (MRP). The project owes its success to numerous MRP staff who compiled the Preliminary Integrated Geologic Map Databases for the United States (PIGMD) as well as the foundational geologic mapping work completed by U.S. State Geologic Surveys and academia.
Description: This dataset is a digital soil survey and generally is the most detailed level of soil geographic data developed by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The information was prepared by digitizing maps, by compiling information onto a planimetric correct base and digitizing, or by revising digitized maps using remotely sensed and other information.This dataset consists of georeferenced digital map data and computerized attribute data. The map data are in a state-wide extent format and include a detailed, field verified inventory of soils and miscellaneous areas that normally occur in a repeatable pattern on the landscape and that can be cartographically shown at the scale mapped. The soil map units are linked to attributes in the National Soil Information System relational database, which gives the proportionate extent of the component soils and their properties.
Copyright Text: Soil Survey Staff. Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database for Arizona. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available online at http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/. 20190917 (FY2020 official release).
Description: Farmland classification identifies map units as prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, farmland of local importance, or unique farmland. It identifies the location and extent of the soils that are best suited to food, feed, fiber, forage, and oilseed crops. NRCS policy and procedures on prime and unique farmlands are published in the "Federal Register," Vol. 43, No. 21, January 31, 1978.
Aggregation Method: No Aggregation Necessary; Tiebreak rule: Lower
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_FrmlndCls
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Farmland_Classification.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-05-21 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMap.py
Value: Prime farmland if irrigated and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season Label: Prime farmland if irrigated and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season Description: N/A Symbol:
Value: Prime farmland if irrigated and reclaimed of excess salts and sodium Label: Prime farmland if irrigated and reclaimed of excess salts and sodium Description: N/A Symbol:
Description: Land capability classification shows, in a general way, the suitability of soils for most kinds of field crops. Crops that require special management are excluded. The soils are grouped according to their limitations for field crops, the risk of damage if they are used for crops, and the way they respond to management. The criteria used in grouping the soils do not include major and generally expensive landforming that would change slope, depth, or other characteristics of the soils, nor do they include possible but unlikely major reclamation projects. Capability classification is not a substitute for interpretations that show suitability and limitations of groups of soils for rangeland, for woodland, or for engineering purposes.
In the capability system, soils are generally grouped at three levels-capability class, subclass, and unit. Only class and subclass are included in this data set.
Capability classes, the broadest groups, are designated by the numbers 1 through 8. The numbers indicate progressively greater limitations and narrower choices for practical use. The classes are defined as follows:
Class 1 soils have few limitations that restrict their use.
Class 2 soils have moderate limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require moderate conservation practices.
Class 3 soils have severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require special conservation practices, or both.
Class 4 soils have very severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require very careful management, or both.
Class 5 soils are subject to little or no erosion but have other limitations, impractical to remove, that restrict their use mainly to pasture, rangeland, forestland, or wildlife habitat.
Class 6 soils have severe limitations that make them generally unsuitable for cultivation and that restrict their use mainly to pasture, rangeland, forestland, or wildlife habitat.
Class 7 soils have very severe limitations that make them unsuitable for cultivation and that restrict their use mainly to grazing, forestland, or wildlife habitat.
Class 8 soils and miscellaneous areas have limitations that preclude commercial plant production and that restrict their use to recreational purposes, wildlife habitat, watershed, or esthetic purposes.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Higher
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_IrrCpCls_DCD
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Irrigated_Capability_Class_DCD.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-06-09 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMap.py
Description: Land capability classification shows, in a general way, the suitability of soils for most kinds of field crops. Crops that require special management are excluded. The soils are grouped according to their limitations for field crops, the risk of damage if they are used for crops, and the way they respond to management. The criteria used in grouping the soils do not include major and generally expensive landforming that would change slope, depth, or other characteristics of the soils, nor do they include possible but unlikely major reclamation projects. Capability classification is not a substitute for interpretations that show suitability and limitations of groups of soils for rangeland, for woodland, or for engineering purposes.
In the capability system, soils are generally grouped at three levels-capability class, subclass, and unit. Only class and subclass are included in this data set.
Capability subclasses are soil groups within one capability class. They are designated by adding a small letter, "e," "w," "s," or "c," to the class numeral, for example, 2e. The letter "e" shows that the main hazard is the risk of erosion unless close-growing plant cover is maintained; "w" shows that water in or on the soil interferes with plant growth or cultivation (in some soils the wetness can be partly corrected by artificial drainage); "s" shows that the soil is limited mainly because it is shallow, droughty, or stony; and "c," used in only some parts of the United States, shows that the chief limitation is climate that is very cold or very dry.
In class 1 there are no subclasses because the soils of this class have few limitations. Class 5 contains only the subclasses indicated by "w," "s," or "c" because the soils in class 5 are subject to little or no erosion. They have other limitations that restrict their use to pasture, rangeland, forestland, or wildlife habitat.
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition; Tiebreak rule: Lower
Component Percent Cutoff: 0%
GeoDatabase: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\gSSURGO_AZ.gdb
Featurelayer: MUPOLYGON
Rating Table: SDV_IrrCpScls_DCD
Layer File: C:\Users\nina.mauney\Desktop\ACCD\BigSandy_NRCD\Data\soils_GSSURGO_az_3816689_01\soils\gssurgo_g_az\Irrigated_Capability_Subclass_DCD.lyr
Copyright Text: Created by Nina Mauney on 2020-06-09 using script gSSURGO_CreateSoilMap.py
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: left Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 10 Font Family: Tahoma Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: left Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 18 Font Family: Tahoma Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: This dataset is a digital soil survey and generally is the most detailed level of soil geographic data developed by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The information was prepared by digitizing maps, by compiling information onto a planimetric correct base and digitizing, or by revising digitized maps using remotely sensed and other information.This dataset consists of georeferenced digital map data and computerized attribute data. The map data are in a state-wide extent format and include a detailed, field verified inventory of soils and miscellaneous areas that normally occur in a repeatable pattern on the landscape and that can be cartographically shown at the scale mapped. The soil map units are linked to attributes in the National Soil Information System relational database, which gives the proportionate extent of the component soils and their properties.
Copyright Text: Soil Survey Staff. Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database for Arizona. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available online at http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/. 20190917 (FY2020 official release).
Description: This dataset is a digital soil survey and generally is the most detailed level of soil geographic data developed by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The information was prepared by digitizing maps, by compiling information onto a planimetric correct base and digitizing, or by revising digitized maps using remotely sensed and other information.This dataset consists of georeferenced digital map data and computerized attribute data. The map data are in a state-wide extent format and include a detailed, field verified inventory of soils and miscellaneous areas that normally occur in a repeatable pattern on the landscape and that can be cartographically shown at the scale mapped. The soil map units are linked to attributes in the National Soil Information System relational database, which gives the proportionate extent of the component soils and their properties.
Copyright Text: Soil Survey Staff. Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database for Arizona. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available online at http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/. 20190917 (FY2020 official release).
Description: The Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) is a comprehensive aggregated collection of hydrologic unit data consistent with the national criteria for delineation and resolution. It defines the areal extent of surface water drainage to a point except in coastal or lake front areas where there could be multiple outlets as stated by the "Federal Standards and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD)" “Standard” (http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/11/a3/). Watershed boundaries are determined solely upon science-based hydrologic principles, not favoring any administrative boundaries or special projects, nor particular program or agency. This dataset represents the hydrologic unit boundaries to the 12-digit (6th level) for the entire United States. Some areas may also include additional subdivisions representing the 14- and 16-digit hydrologic unit (HU). At a minimum, the HUs are delineated at 1:24,000-scale in the conterminous United States, 1:25,000-scale in Hawaii, Pacific basin and the Caribbean, and 1:63,360-scale in Alaska, meeting the National Map Accuracy Standards (NMAS). Higher resolution boundaries are being developed where partners and data exist and will be incorporated back into the WBD. WBD data are delivered as a dataset of polygons and corresponding lines that define the boundary of the polygon. WBD polygon attributes include hydrologic unit codes (HUC), size (in the form of acres and square kilometers), name, downstream hydrologic unit code, type of watershed, non-contributing areas, and flow modifications. The HUC describes where the unit is in the country and the level of the unit. WBD line attributes contain the highest level of hydrologic unit for each boundary, line source information and flow modifications.
Copyright Text: Funding for the Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) was provided by the USDA-NRCS, USGS and EPA along with other federal, state and local agenciesies. Representatives from many agencies contributed a substantial amount of time and salary towards quality review and updating of the dataset in order to meet the WBD Standards. Acknowledgment of the originating agencies would be appreciated in products derived from these data. See dataset specific metadata for further information
Description: The Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) is a comprehensive aggregated collection of hydrologic unit data consistent with the national criteria for delineation and resolution. It defines the areal extent of surface water drainage to a point except in coastal or lake front areas where there could be multiple outlets as stated by the "Federal Standards and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD)" “Standard” (http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/11/a3/). Watershed boundaries are determined solely upon science-based hydrologic principles, not favoring any administrative boundaries or special projects, nor particular program or agency. This dataset represents the hydrologic unit boundaries to the 12-digit (6th level) for the entire United States. Some areas may also include additional subdivisions representing the 14- and 16-digit hydrologic unit (HU). At a minimum, the HUs are delineated at 1:24,000-scale in the conterminous United States, 1:25,000-scale in Hawaii, Pacific basin and the Caribbean, and 1:63,360-scale in Alaska, meeting the National Map Accuracy Standards (NMAS). Higher resolution boundaries are being developed where partners and data exist and will be incorporated back into the WBD. WBD data are delivered as a dataset of polygons and corresponding lines that define the boundary of the polygon. WBD polygon attributes include hydrologic unit codes (HUC), size (in the form of acres and square kilometers), name, downstream hydrologic unit code, type of watershed, non-contributing areas, and flow modifications. The HUC describes where the unit is in the country and the level of the unit. WBD line attributes contain the highest level of hydrologic unit for each boundary, line source information and flow modifications.
Copyright Text: Funding for the Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) was provided by the USDA-NRCS, USGS and EPA along with other federal, state and local agenciesies. Representatives from many agencies contributed a substantial amount of time and salary towards quality review and updating of the dataset in order to meet the WBD Standards. Acknowledgment of the originating agencies would be appreciated in products derived from these data. See dataset specific metadata for further information
Description: The Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) is a comprehensive aggregated collection of hydrologic unit data consistent with the national criteria for delineation and resolution. It defines the areal extent of surface water drainage to a point except in coastal or lake front areas where there could be multiple outlets as stated by the "Federal Standards and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD)" “Standard” (http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/11/a3/). Watershed boundaries are determined solely upon science-based hydrologic principles, not favoring any administrative boundaries or special projects, nor particular program or agency. This dataset represents the hydrologic unit boundaries to the 12-digit (6th level) for the entire United States. Some areas may also include additional subdivisions representing the 14- and 16-digit hydrologic unit (HU). At a minimum, the HUs are delineated at 1:24,000-scale in the conterminous United States, 1:25,000-scale in Hawaii, Pacific basin and the Caribbean, and 1:63,360-scale in Alaska, meeting the National Map Accuracy Standards (NMAS). Higher resolution boundaries are being developed where partners and data exist and will be incorporated back into the WBD. WBD data are delivered as a dataset of polygons and corresponding lines that define the boundary of the polygon. WBD polygon attributes include hydrologic unit codes (HUC), size (in the form of acres and square kilometers), name, downstream hydrologic unit code, type of watershed, non-contributing areas, and flow modifications. The HUC describes where the unit is in the country and the level of the unit. WBD line attributes contain the highest level of hydrologic unit for each boundary, line source information and flow modifications.
Copyright Text: Funding for the Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) was provided by the USDA-NRCS, USGS and EPA along with other federal, state and local agenciesies. Representatives from many agencies contributed a substantial amount of time and salary towards quality review and updating of the dataset in order to meet the WBD Standards. Acknowledgment of the originating agencies would be appreciated in products derived from these data. See dataset specific metadata for further information
Color: [197, 0, 255, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: left Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 14 Font Family: Tahoma Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Background: ADWR has three groundwater well data sets for the state of Arizona. The first is the entire database, the 'Wells 55 Registry', which contains all wells registered in the state. The database was created in 1980 to store registration information submitted by well owners and drillers. It contains 200604 well records. The second data set is the Groundwater Well Site Inventory (GWSI), which is a statewide database that contains well locations, construction, and water level measurements for wells that have actually been located and sampled in the field originally by the USGS and since 1990 by ADWR. The GWSI database contains 44239 well records. Of those, 23150 have a 'Wells 55 Registry ID'. The third data set is the 'Wells 35 Registry', which has not been maintained since 1980, when the Wells 55 Registry was created.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Arizona Department of Water Resources
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: -25 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none