Soil Change, Soil Survey, and Natural Resources Decision Making

caused by anthropogenic and non-anthropogenic factors to predict the effects of management on soil function, compare alternatives, and and land use planning (Durana and Helms, 2002), the make decisions. Current knowledge of how soils change is not well focus in the 20th century has been classification of relasynthesized and existing soil surveys include only limited information tively static soil properties to facilitate inventory, define on the dynamic nature of soils. Providing information about causes limitations, and provide soil property data for inputand attributes of soil change and the effects of soil change on soil based production system design. Since the passage of functionover thehuman timescale(centuries, decades,or less)should the National Environmental Protection Act in 1969, be a primary objective of 21st century soil survey. Soil change is tempo- standard soil survey information has required reinterral variation in soil across various time scales at a specific location. pretation to address questions of environmental quality Attributes of change include state variables (dynamic soil properties), and sustainability (Muhn, 2002). The increasing emphareversibility, drivers, trends, rates, and pathways and functional intersis on quantitative resource assessment and monitoring pretations include resistance, resilience, and early warning indicators. Iterative elements of the blueprint for action described in this article to meet legal mandates on both public and private land are: (i) identify user needs; (ii) conduct interdisciplinary research and (i.e., Resources Planning Act of 1974, Soil and Water long-term studies; (iii) develop an organizing framework that relates Resources Conservation Act of 1977, Public Rangeland data, processes, and soil function; (iv) select and prioritize soil change Improvement Act of 1978, Department of Interior and data and information requirements; (v) develop procedures for data Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2002), accountcollection and interpretation; and (vi) design an integrated soil– abilityintheadministrationofpubliclyfundedprograms ecosystem–managementinformationsystem.Selectionofdynamicsoil (e.g., Government Performance Results Act of 1993), properties, soil change attributes, and functional interpretations to and combating land degradation threats to soil producbe included in future soilsurveys should be based on analyses compar- tivity (Johnston and Crossley, 2002) and global food ing the benefits of meeting user needs to the costs of data acquisition security (Anecksamphant et al., 1999) will, however, and delivery. Implementation of the blueprint requires increased collaboration among National Cooperative Soil Survey partners and other require not just a reinterpretation of existing informaresearch disciplines. tion, but a new approach to gathering, analyzing, and interpreting soil information. Today’s land managers and policymakers require information about how soils change to compare alterna