A Review and Analysis of Rangeland and Wildland Soil Health

Abstract

Soil health is focused on intensively managed (IM) soils (often farmed soils), by-passing extensively managed (EM) soils (range lands, deserts, shrub lands, tundra). High economic value products are generated by IM systems. Many EM lands are of cultural, recreational, scenic, or scientific value. However, and despite the fact that they provide forage for domestic and wild animals, they are not always of high economic value. IM and EM soils are evaluated on the same health scales. The contention herein is all soils formed under soil state conditions under the absence of human interventions are inherently healthy. But a given soil has dynamic properties that determine its management as IM or EM. An EM sagebrush steppe soil may be deemed unhealthy as a result of low organic matter and short growing season. An IM grassland steppe soil is healthy as a result of high organic matter and a long growing season. The sagebrush soil, however, provides habitat for culturally important sage grouse. The grassland soil may provide, when plowed, habitat for economically important soybeans. Soil taxonomies can be used to establish inherent health of undisturbed soils. Determining a soil’s dynamic nature is a different construct. Here, four different sets of EM soils were evaluated to showcase their diversity, evaluate levels of health and display their often-unconventional dynamic characteristics. An argument is made that a soil’s health, an inherent condition, is not the same as its dynamic condition (potential to produce goods and services). Soil health changes are usually slowly driven by soil state factors but can be dramatically changed by humans. Otherwise, soil health can be viewed as a near constant ecosystem attribute. The dynamic nature of soils change according to needs placed by humans. EM soils may be healthy but lack attention since their dynamic nature is not traditional and often of low economic value. Evaluation of soil health and dynamic value on EM lands is often exacerbated by information absence. Strategies to circumvent this include sampling design, reference sites and standardized ways of EM soil health determination. A case is made that baselines of soil health can be taken from soil surveys, taxonomic names, and soil data from map units, where such information exists. Certified supplementary information is ambiguously available, but may be crucial. Outdoor living laboratories that feature inherent soil health and dynamic soil alternatives may help circumvent information voids.