Erosion Hazard (Off-Road, Off-Trail)

Similar documents
Potential for Seedling Mortality

Surface Texture. Layer Option: Surface Layer Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Tie-break Rule: Lower

Drainage Class. Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition Tie-break Rule: Higher. Ontario County, New York Survey Area Version and Date: 13-09/24/2016

Percent Silt. Ontario County, New York Survey Area Version and Date: 13-09/24/2016

Depth to a Selected Soil Restrictive Layer

Linear Extensibility

Depth to Any Soil Restrictive Layer

K Factor, Whole Soil

Cation-Exchange Capacity (CEC-7)

Liquid Limit. Ontario County, New York Survey Area Version and Date: 13-09/24/2016

Range Production (Unfavorable Year)

Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity (Ksat), Standard Classes

Farmland Classification

Electrical Conductivity (EC)

Effective Cation-Exchange Capacity (ECEC)

Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)

Hydrologic Soil Group

Percent Clay. Ontario County, New York Survey Area Version and Date: 13-09/24/2016

Soil Taxonomy Classification

Oneida County Soil Survey ID Number Name Slope/Descriptor 55A Adams Loamy Sand 0-3% slopes 55B Adams Loamy Sand 3-8% slopes 55C Adams Loamy Sand

Any County, New York. Custom Soil Resource Report for. Homer Vegetable Research Farm. United States Department of Agriculture

Custom Soil Resource Report for Tompkins County, New York

This section describes the geologic, soil, and topographic conditions of the Nation s four properties and immediately surrounding area.

Custom Soil Resource Report for Ulster County, New York


Custom Soil Resource Report for Columbia County, New York

Custom Soil Resource Report for State of Connecticut

SOIL DATA: Avondale. in Allen, TX. This information was taken from NRCS web soil survey of Collin County, Texas.

Soil types of lake county

Custom Soil Resource Report for State of Connecticut

Section 1. Judging the soil pit (questions 1-4)

Area 3 Envirothon Soils Questions Key

NRCS Soils Report. Grand River Gathering LLC K28E Compressor Station. OA Project No

Custom Soil Resource Report for Craighead County, Arkansas

2016 Area 3 Envirothon Muskingum County Soils Test ANSWER KEY

Custom Soil Resource Report for Orange County, New York, and Sussex County, New Jersey

Custom Soil Resource Report for Orange County, Virginia

September 20, 2016 Soils Investigation for Agricultural Designation Windemere Place, Missoula County, Montana

APPENDIX A SOIL RESOURCES REPORTS

Appendix E Soils Information

NRCS Soils Report. Encana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc. C19 Injection Well. OA Project No

Custom Soil Resource Report for Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin

BENNING ROAD & BRIDGES TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS NRCS SOIL RESOURCE REPORT DRAFT MAY 2016

~ NRCS. Custom Soil Resource Report for Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties. USDA United States ~ Department of Agriculture

Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map

STATEMENT OF PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND AGRICULTURAL LAND CLASSIFICATION WITTON PARK, COUNTY DURHAM PROPOSED QUARRY EXTENSION DECEMBER 1992

Custom Soil Resource Report for Southampton County, Virginia

Custom Soil Resource Report for Pope County, Illinois

DO YOU KNOW YOUR SOILS? (Rev. 10/11)

Custom Soil Resource Report for Gallia County, Ohio

Geology, Soils, and Topography October 13, ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, MITIGATION. 3.1 Geology, Soils, and Topography

Custom Soil Resource Report for Centre County, Pennsylvania

2011 Wisconsin Envirothon Soils and Land Use Exam

Topoclimate Southland Soil Technical Data Sheet No Waiau

SOIL SCIENTIST REPORT FOR THE CONNECTICUT PORTION OF THE CONNECTICUT EXPANSION PROJECT. Prepared for:

Lane County Land Management Division

Team number Page 1 of Canon Envirothon Soils Station Test. Soils and Climate Change

~ NRCS. Custom Soil Resource Report for Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties. USDA United States ~ Department of Agriculture

Custom Soil Resource Report for Yamhill Area, Oregon

~ NRCS. Custom Soil Resource Report for Rifle Area, Colorado, Parts of Garfield and Mesa Counties. Encana Upper Gate Communication Tower

Custom Soil Resource Report for Kane County, Illinois

Custom Soil Resource Report for Daviess County, Missouri

Urban Soils Career Development Event

Land Capability Classifications

Custom Soil Resource Report for Pope County, Illinois

Custom Soil Resource Report for Hancock County Area, Maine

Custom Soil Resource Report for Alsea Area, Oregon, and Lincoln County Area, Oregon

Soil testing Page 1. Contrary to what is widely believed, the colour of the soil reveals very little about its fertility.

Custom Soil Resource Report for Cibola Area, New Mexico, Parts of Cibola, McKinley, and Valencia Counties

Custom Soil Resource Report for Franklin County, Washington

1. Position (2 pts.) 2. Parent Material (2 pts.) 3. Slope Characteristics (2 pts.) 4. Surface Stoniness or Rockiness (2 pts.)

STATE TAX COMMISSION OF MISSOURI ASSESSOR MANUAL

Custom Soil Resource Report for Polk County, Oregon

URBAN SOILS & SEATTLE EXAMPLES

Soils and Land Use Test

TOWN OF BRIGHTON OPEN SPACE INDEX UPDATE ( ) SITE NAME: Gonsenhauser/Groos Tract

Custom Soil Resource Report for Hinds County, Mississippi

Custom Soil Resource Report for Clearfield County, Pennsylvania

An Analysis of Soil Features and. Their Suitability for Recreational Uses. Using the U.S.D.A. s Web Soil Survey

ASCE - Philadelphia. Soils & Stormwater Management. Matthew C. Hostrander, CPSS, SEO Soil Scientist. Gilmore & Associates, Inc.

Custom Soil Resource Report for Lane County Area, Oregon

VALLEY LATERAL PROJECT. DRAFT RESOURCE REPORT 7 Soils. FERC Docket No. PF

Submittal Document II.I. USDA NRCS Soil Resources Report

SOILS IN URBAN / SUBURBAN LANDSCAPES. Lisa Krall Soil Scientist CT USDA NRCS Tolland, CT

TP73 4PTP101 TP45 TP9 TP74 TP46 TP47 TP115 TP48 TP32 TP5 TP31 TP22 TP49 V58 TP57 4F TP50 TP51 3PD 3PD TP80 TP28 TP55

Custom Soil Resource Report for Clark County, Missouri

Farmland Classification Centre County, Pennsylvania (Student Farm Site) Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Soils and their Relationship with Agriculture

Custom Soil Resource Report for Kent County, Maryland

ONSITE EFFLUENT DISPOSAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN.

2012 FINAL SOILS AREA 2 Envirothon Questions Answer KEY

Custom Soil Resource Report for Payne County, Oklahoma

TOWN OF BRIGHTON OPEN SPACE INDEX UPDATE ( ) SITE NO. 6 SITE NAME: Heberle Estate

Custom Soil Resource Report for Choctaw County, Oklahoma, and McCurtain County, Oklahoma

RaC. RaD GlG. GlF. RaD GlE. CeA. RaE. RcD. GoF. GoF SkC. SkD. CfA. AdA. GoF. GoF. GoF. RcD. GgD. GoF. RaE GlE. RaE DbF. GoF. DbE. RaC.

Sam Houston Ranger District West/Central WUI Fuels Reduction Project Soil and Water Resources

PHYSICAL CHAtlACTERISTICS REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED SAND AND GRAVEL SITE AT MANOR FARM, UFFINGTON

2.1.4 Roof Downspout Rain Gardens

SOIL SEPARATES. Soil Evaluator Day 2, Presentation 3-3/27/2018. Soil Texture, Page 1 TITLE 5 SOIL EVALUATOR CERTIFICATION TRAINING SOIL TEXTURE

LANDPKS TEACHING MANUAL

Transcription:

1A Fluvaquents-Udifluvents complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded reasons Slight Fluvaquents, frequently flooded 45% Udifluvents, frequently flooded 40% Wayland 10% Naples Creek 5% 2A Geneseo silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Geneseo 90% Naples Creek 10% 3A Hemlock silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Hemlock 90% Naples Creek 10% 4A Naples Creek silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Naples Creek 90% Hemlock 5% Wayland 5% 5A Wayland soils complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slight Wayland 60% Wayland, very poorly drained 30% Wakeville 10% 12D Rockrift channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Rockrift 85% Mongaup, very stony 10% Willdin 5% 13F Rock outcrop-arnot complex, 25 to 70 percent slopes Not rated Rock outcrop 55% 14D Cadosia channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Cadosia 85% Lordstown, very stony 10% Mardin 5% 15A 15B Guyanoga channery silt loam, fan, 0 to 3 percent slopes Guyanoga channery silt loam, fan, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Guyanoga, fan 90% Chenango, fan 5% Hemlock 5% Slight Guyanoga, fan 90% Chenango, fan 5% Hemlock 5% 16A Almond channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Almond 80% Ontusia 10% Norchip 5% Gretor 5% 16B Almond channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Almond 80% Ontusia 10% Norchip 5% Gretor 5% 16C Almond channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Almond 80% Ontusia 10% Gretor 5% Norchip 5% 18A Homer fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Homer 90% Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic Typic Argiaquolls 5% Phelps 5% 19A Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic, Typic Argiaquolls, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic Typic Argiaquolls 80% Homer 8% Atherton 7% Palms, undrained 5% Page 1 of 16

20A Atherton and Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic, Typic Argiaquolls, 0 to 3 percent slopes reasons Slight Atherton 40% Fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic Typic Argiaquolls 40% Homer 8% Canandaigua 7% Castile 5% 24A Howard gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Howard 80% Palmyra 10% Phelps 5% 24B Howard gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Howard 80% Palmyra 10% Phelps 5% 24C Howard gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Howard 80% Palmyra 10% Phelps 5% 24D Howard soils, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Howard 65% Palmyra 20% Arkport 13% 25A Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Chenango 90% Castile 8% Valois 2% 25B Chenango gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Chenango 90% Castile 5% Valois 5% 25C Chenango gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Chenango 90% Castile 5% Valois 5% 25D Chenango gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Chenango 90% Valois 2% 25E Chenango gravelly loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Chenango 90% Valois 10% 26B Chenango channery loam, fan, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Chenango, fan 85% Guyanoga, fan 5% Hemlock 5% Castile 5% 27B Castile gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Castile 85% Homer 5% Chenango 5% Phelps 5% 31A Collamer silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Collamer 85% Niagara 10% Schoharie 5% 31B Collamer silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Collamer 85% Niagara 10% Schoharie 5% 31C Collamer silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate Collamer 85% Schoharie 5% Page 2 of 16

31D Collamer silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Collamer 90% Niagara 5% Schoharie 5% 32A Dunkirk fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Dunkirk 90% Arkport 4% Niagara 3% Schoharie 3% 32B Dunkirk fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Dunkirk 90% Arkport 4% Schoharie 3% Niagara 3% 33A Dunkirk silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Dunkirk 90% Arkport 4% Niagara 3% Schoharie 3% 33B Dunkirk silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Dunkirk 90% Arkport 4% Schoharie 3% Niagara 3% 33C Dunkirk silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate Dunkirk 90% Schoharie 3% 33D Dunkirk silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Dunkirk 90% Schoharie 5% 33E Dunkirk silt loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Severe Dunkirk 90% Schoharie 5% 34A Lakemont silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Lakemont 85% Odessa 5% Fonda 4% Canandaigua 4% Barre 2% 35A Odessa silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Odessa 85% Lakemont 5% Schoharie 5% Churchville 3% Rhinebeck 2% 35B Odessa silty clay loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Odessa 85% Schoharie 6% Lakemont 4% Churchville 3% Rhinebeck 2% 36A Schoharie silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Schoharie 90% Dunkirk 5% 36B Schoharie silty clay loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Schoharie 90% Dunkirk 5% reasons Page 3 of 16

reasons 36C Schoharie silty clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate Schoharie 90% Dunkirk 5% 36D Schoharie silty clay loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Schoharie 90% Dunkirk 5% 36E Schoharie silty clay loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes Severe Schoharie 90% Dunkirk 5% 37A Schoharie silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Schoharie 90% Dunkirk 5% Odessa 5% 37B Schoharie silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Schoharie 90% Odessa 5% Dunkirk 5% 38A Niagara silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Niagara 85% Canandaigua 5% Collamer 5% Rhinebeck 5% 38B Niagara silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Niagara 85% Canandaigua 5% Rhinebeck 5% Collamer 5% 39A Rhinebeck silty clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Rhinebeck 90% Niagara 5% Lakemont 5% 41A Aeric Epiaquepts, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Aeric Epiaquepts 50% Aeric Epiaquepts 45% Elnora 5% 43A Canandaigua silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Canandaigua 90% Canandaigua 4% Niagara 3% Lakemont 3% 44A Canandaigua mucky silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Canandaigua 90% Canandaigua 5% Lakemont 3% Palms, undrained 2% 45A Fonda mucky silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Fonda 95% Canandaigua 3% Palms, undrained 2% 46A Galen fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Galen 90% Aeric Epiaquepts 5% Kendaia 5% 46B Galen fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Galen 90% Aeric Epiaquepts 5% Kendaia 5% 48A Arkport fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Arkport 95% Dunkirk 3% Galen 2% 48B Arkport fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Arkport 95% Dunkirk 3% Galen 2% Page 4 of 16

48C Arkport fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Arkport 95% Dunkirk 3% Galen 2% 48D Arkport fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Arkport 90% Dunkirk 8% Palmyra 2% 49B Arkport loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Arkport 95% Dunkirk 3% Galen 2% 49D Arkport loamy fine sand, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Arkport 95% Dunkirk 3% Palmyra 2% 49E Arkport loamy fine sand, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Arkport 90% Dunkirk 8% Palmyra 2% 49F Arkport loamy fine sand, 35 to 55 percent slopes Severe Arkport 90% Dunkirk 8% Palmyra 2% 50B Dunkirk-Arkport complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Dunkirk 50% Arkport 45% Collamer 5% 50C Dunkirk-Arkport complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate Dunkirk 60% Collamer 5% 50D Dunkirk-Arkport complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Dunkirk 60% Arkport 35% Collamer 5% 53A Lamson fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Lamson 90% Lamson 5% Canandaigua 3% Galen 2% 54A Lamson mucky fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Lamson 90% Canandaigua 5% Lamson 5% reasons 56A Elnora loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Elnora 90% Aeric Epiaquepts 10% 58B Colonie loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Colonie 95% Elnora 5% 58C Colonie loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Colonie 95% Elnora 5% Page 5 of 16

reasons 62B Mardin channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Mardin 85% Bath 5% Lordstown 5% Volusia 5% 62C Mardin channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Mardin 88% Volusia 5% 62D Mardin channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Mardin 85% Bath 5% Lordstown 5% 62E Mardin channery silt loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Mardin 80% Bath 8% Volusia 5% 63B Langford channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Langford 90% Erie 10% 63C Langford channery silt loam, 8 to 15 pecent slopes Slight Langford 90% Erie 10% 63D Langford channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Langford 90% Erie 10% 64B Langford-Erie channery silt loams, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Langford 55% Erie 45% 66A Lyons soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Lyons 75% Lyons, frequently ponded 15% Appleton 3% Canandaigua 3% Kendaia 2% Ilion 1% Palms 1% 68A Volusia channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Volusia 90% Mardin 5% Chippewa 5% 68B Volusia channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Volusia 90% Chippewa 5% Mardin 5% 68C Volusia channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Volusia 90% Chippewa 4% 68D Volusia channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Volusia 90% Mardin 7% 69A Erie channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Erie 95% Chippewa 5% 69B Erie channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Erie 95% Chippewa 5% 69C Erie channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Erie 95% Chippewa 5% 71A Darien silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Darien 95% Ilion 4% Angola 1% Page 6 of 16

reasons 71B Darien silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Darien 95% Ilion 4% Angola 1% 71C Darien silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Darien 95% Ilion 4% 72A Darien-Ilion silt loams, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Darien 68% Ilion 27% Angola 5% 72B Darien-Ilion silt loams, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Darien 68% Ilion 27% Angola 5% 73B Gretor silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Gretor 95% Gretor, poorly drained 5% 73C Gretor silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Gretor 95% Gretor, poorly drained 5% 73D Gretor channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Gretor 90% Mongaup, very stony 8% 76B Orpark silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Orpark 95% Orpark, poorly drained 5% 76C Orpark silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Orpark 95% Orpark, poorly drained 5% 76D Orpark channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Orpark 90% Lordstown, very stony 5% 77A Chippewa silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Chippewa 85% Chippewa, very poorly drained 10% Volusia 5% 77B Chippewa silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Chippewa 85% Volusia 10% Chippewa, very poorly drained 5% 82B Manlius channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Manlius 95% Gretor 5% 82C Manlius channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Manlius 95% Gretor 5% 82D Manlius channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Manlius 95% Arnot 4% Gretor 1% 91A Palms muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Palms, undrained 55% Palms, drained 40% Canandaigua 5% 92A Carlisle muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Carlisle, undrained 45% Carlisle, drained 40% Palms, undrained 10% Canandaigua 5% 93A Edwards muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Edwards, undrained 50% Edwards, drained 35% Martisco, undrained 10% Canandaigua 5% 94A Martisco muck, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Martisco, undrained 55% Martisco, drained 35% Canandaigua 5% Palms, drained 5% Page 7 of 16

reasons 95A Saprists, 0 to 3 percent slopes, inundated Slight Saprists, inundated 85% Carlisle, undrained 5% Fluvaquents, frequently flooded 5% Palms, undrained 5% 101A Honeoye loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Honeoye 85% Lansing 4% Kendaia 4% Wassaic 2% 101B Honeoye loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Honeoye 85% Lansing 4% Kendaia 4% Wassaic 2% 101C Honeoye loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate Honeoye 85% 101D Honeoye loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Honeoye 85% Lansing 4% Wassaic 2% 101E Honeoye loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Honeoye 85% Lansing 4% Wassaic 2% 104A 104B 104C Honeoye loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, lower clay surface Honeoye loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, lower clay surface Honeoye loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, lower clay surface Slight Honeoye, lower clay surface 85% Lansing 4% Kendaia 4% Wassaic 2% Slight Honeoye, lower clay surface 85% Lansing 4% Kendaia 4% Wassaic 2% Slight Honeoye, lower clay surface 85% Lansing 4% Kendaia 4% Wassaic 2% 106B Danley-Lansing complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Danley 50% Lansing 45% Conesus 2% Kendaia 1% Palatine 1% Appleton 1% 107B Conesus-Lansing complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Conesus 50% Lansing 45% Kendaia 2% Appleton 1% Danley 1% Palatine 1% Page 8 of 16

108C Lansing loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Lansing 85% Conesus 8% Kendaia 3% Appleton 2% Danley 1% Wassaic 1% 108D Lansing loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Lansing 85% Conesus 9% Wassaic 3% 108E Lansing loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Lansing 85% Cazenovia 10% Aurora 5% 112B Ontario fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Ontario 90% Lima 10% 112C Ontario fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Ontario 95% Palmyra 5% 112D Ontario fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Ontario 95% Palmyra 5% 112E Ontario fine sandy loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Ontario 93% Palmyra 5% Manlius 2% 114B Ontario gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Ontario 98% Lima 2% 114C Ontario gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Ontario 95% Palmyra 5% 114D Ontario gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Ontario 95% Palmyra 5% 116B Ontario loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Ontario 90% Kendaia 5% 116C Ontario loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Ontario 95% 116D Ontario loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Ontario 95% 118F Ontario, Honeoye, and Lansing soils, 35 to 55 percent slopes Severe Ontario 40% Honeoye 35% Lansing 20% Aurora 5% reasons Page 9 of 16

reasons 120E Palmyra and Howard soils, 25 to 45 percent slopes Moderate Palmyra 55% Howard 40% Colonie 5% 122A Palmyra cobbly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 95% Honeoye, lower clay surface 5% 122B Palmyra cobbly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 95% Honeoye, lower clay surface 5% 124A Palmyra fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 90% Howard 10% 124B Palmyra fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 90% Howard 10% 126A Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 95% 126B Palmyra gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 95% 126C Palmyra gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 90% Arkport 10% 126D Palmyra gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Palmyra 90% Arkport 10% 128A Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 90% Arkport 10% 128B Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 90% Arkport 10% 128C Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Palmyra 90% Arkport 10% 130A Farmington loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Farmington 90% Galoo 5% Nuhi 5% 130B Farmington loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Farmington 90% Galoo 5% Nuhi 5% 132A Galoo loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rocky Slight Galoo 95% Nuhi 4% 132B Galoo loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, rocky Slight Galoo 95% Nuhi 4% 134A Camillus silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Camillus 95% Angola 5% 134B Camillus silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Camillus 95% Angola 5% 151C Willdin-Norchip complex, 3 to 15 percent slopes Slight Willdin 60% Norchip 38% Palms, undrained 2% 152B Valois gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Valois 85% Cadosia 5% Volusia 5% Mardin 5% 152C Valois gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Valois 85% Volusia 5% Cadosia 5% Mardin 5% Page 10 of 16

reasons 152D Valois gravelly loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Valois 85% Cadosia 6% Mardin 6% Volusia 3% 152E Valois gravelly loam, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Valois 85% Cadosia 6% Mardin 6% Towerville, extremely stony 3% 153B Valois gravelly loam, cool, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Valois, cool 85% Ontusia 5% Rockrift 5% Willdin 5% 153C Valois gravelly loam, cool, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Valois, cool 85% Rockrift 5% Ontusia 5% Willdin 5% 153D Valois gravelly loam, cool, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Valois, cool 85% Willdin 6% Rockrift 6% Ontusia 3% 153E Valois gravelly loam, cool, 25 to 35 percent slopes Moderate Valois, cool 85% Willdin 6% Rockrift 6% Ischua 3% 162B Willdin channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Willdin 85% Ontusia 5% Middlebrook 5% Lewbath 5% 162C Willdin channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Willdin 85% Ontusia 6% Middlebrook 3% 162D Willdin channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Willdin 80% Lewbath 10% Mongaup 5% 168A Ontusia channery silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Ontusia 88% Norchip 5% Willdin 5% Gretor 2% Page 11 of 16

168B Ontusia channery silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Ontusia 90% Norchip 5% Willdin 5% 168C Ontusia channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Ontusia 90% Norchip 5% 168D Ontusia channery silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Ontusia 90% Willdin 7% 171C Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes 171D Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes, very stony 171E Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 25 to 35 percent slopes, extremely stony 171F Lordstown-Manlius-Towerville complex, 35 to 80 percent slopes, extremely stony reasons Slight Lordstown 40% Manlius 20% Towerville 20% Cadosia 10% Mardin 5% Arnot 5% Moderate Lordstown, very stony 40% Manlius, very stony 20% Towerville, very stony 20% Cadosia 10% Arnot 5% Mardin 5% Moderate Lordstown, extremely stony 40% Towerville, extremely stony 20% Manlius, extremely stony 20% Cadosia 10% Mardin 5% Arnot 5% Severe Lordstown, extremely stony 40% Manlius, extremely stony 20% Cadosia, extremely stony 10% 177A Norchip silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Norchip 85% Norchip, very poorly drained 10% Ontusia 5% 177B Norchip silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Norchip 85% Norchip, very poorly drained 10% Ontusia 5% 181B Mongaup-Ischua complex, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Mongaup 45% Ischua 40% Rockrift 10% Willdin 3% Gretor 2% Page 12 of 16

181C Mongaup-Ischua complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Mongaup 45% Ischua 40% Rockrift 10% Willdin 3% Gretor 2% 181D 181E Mongaup-Ischua complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes, very stony Mongaup-Ischua complex, 25 to 35 percent slopes, extremely stony reasons Moderate Mongaup, very stony 45% Ischua, very stony 40% Rockrift 10% Willdin 3% Gretor 2% Moderate Mongaup, extremely stony 45% Ischua, extremely stony 40% Rockrift 10% Willdin 3% Gretor 2% 182B Mongaup channery loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Mongaup 75% Rockrift 10% Willdin 8% Ischua 5% Gretor 2% 182C Mongaup channery loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Mongaup 75% Rockrift 10% Willdin 8% Ischua 5% Gretor 2% 201A Lima loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Lima 85% Honeoye 5% Appleton 3% Kendaia 3% Lyons 2% Cazenovia 2% 201B Lima loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Lima 85% Honeoye 6% Appleton 3% Kendaia 3% Cazenovia 2% Lyons 1% 201C Lima loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Lima 85% Honeoye 7% Kendaia 3% Appleton 3% Cazenovia 2% 204A Lima loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, lower clay surface Slight Lima 85% Honeoye 5% Appleton 3% Kendaia 3% Cazenovia 2% Lyons 2% Page 13 of 16

reasons 204B Lima loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, lower clay surface Slight Lima 85% Honeoye 6% Appleton 3% Kendaia 3% Cazenovia 2% Lyons 1% 210A Phelps gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Phelps 85% Galen 10% Homer 5% 210B Phelps gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Phelps 85% Galen 10% Homer 5% 212A Nuhi silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Nuhi 85% Farmington 10% Nuhi, poorly drained 5% 240B Aurora-Angola silt loams, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Aurora 60% Angola 30% Darien 5% Danley 5% 240C Aurora-Angola silt loams, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Aurora 60% Danley 5% Darien 5% 240D Aurora-Angola silt loams, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Aurora 60% Angola 30% Danley 5% Darien 5% 241B Aurora silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Aurora 85% Angola 10% Danley 5% 241C Aurora silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Aurora 85% Danley 7% 241D Aurora silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Aurora 85% Danley 10% Angola 5% 255B Cazenovia silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Cazenovia 85% Ovid 10% Cayuga 5% 255C Cazenovia silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate Cazenovia 85% Cayuga 8% 255D Cazenovia silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Cazenovia 85% Cayuga 10% 260B Cayuga silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Cayuga 85% Schoharie 10% Odessa 5% 260C Cayuga silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Cayuga 85% Schoharie 10% Odessa 5% Page 14 of 16

reasons 260D Cayuga silt loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Moderate Cayuga 85% Lansing 10% Schoharie 5% 304A Kendaia loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Kendaia 85% Lima 6% Lyons 5% Churchville 2% Ovid 2% 304B Kendaia loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Kendaia 85% Lima 7% Lyons 4% Churchville 2% Ovid 2% 342A Angola silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Angola 90% Ilion 5% Darien 5% 356A Ovid silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Ovid 85% Odessa 10% Lakemont 5% 356B Ovid silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Ovid 85% Odessa 10% Lakemont 5% 357B Ovid silty clay loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight Ovid 85% Odessa 10% Lakemont 5% 357C Ovid silty clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Slight Ovid 85% Odessa 10% Lakemont 5% 400A Udorthents, loamy, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight Udorthents, Loamy 80% Ontario 5% Palmyra 5% Howard 5% 401D Udorthents, refuse substratum. 0 to 25 percent Not rated Udorthents, refuse substratum 90% slopes PG Pits, gravel and sand Not rated Pits, gravel and sand 75% PQ Pits, quarry Not rated Pits, quarry 80% W Water Not rated Water 100% Page 15 of 16

Options Attribute Name: 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 is the process by which a set of component attribute values is reduced to a single value to represent the map unit as a whole. A map unit is typically composed of one or more "components". A component is either some type of soil or some nonsoil entity, e.g., rock outcrop. The components in the map unit name represent the major soils within a map unit delineation. Minor components make up the balance of the map unit. Great differences in soil properties can occur between map unit components and within short distances. Minor components may be very different from the major components. Such differences could significantly affect use and management of the map unit. Minor components may or may not be documented in the database. The results of aggregation do not reflect the presence or absence of limitations of the components which are not listed in the database. An on-site investigation is required to identify the location of individual map unit components. For each of a map unit's components, a corresponding percent composition is recorded. A percent composition of 60 indicates that the corresponding component typically makes up approximately 60% of the map unit. Percent composition is a critical factor in some, but not all, aggregation methods. For the attribute being aggregated, the first step of the aggregation process is to derive one attribute value for each of a map unit's components. From this set of component attributes, the next step of the aggregation process derives a single value that represents the map unit as a whole. Once a single value for each map unit is derived, a thematic map for soil map units can be generated. Aggregation must be done because, on any soil map, map units are delineated but components are not. The aggregation method "Dominant Condition" first groups like attribute values for the components in a map unit. For each group, percent composition is set to the sum of the percent composition of all components participating in that group. These groups now represent "conditions" rather than components. The attribute value associated with the group with the highest cumulative percent composition is returned. If more than one group shares the highest cumulative percent composition, the corresponding "tie-break" rule determines which value should be returned. The "tie-break" rule indicates whether the lower or higher group value should be returned in the case of a percent composition tie. The result returned by this aggregation method represents the dominant condition throughout the map unit only when no tie has occurred. The tie-break rule indicates which value should be selected from a set of multiple candidate values, or which value should be selected in the event of a percent composition tie. Page 16 of 16