Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. 3). Regarding the descrepancy bet:reen the P~esa County vs. the Grand Junction <br />Soil Surveys, the SCS explanation goes as follows: The Grand Junction <br />survey is an olde^, more detailed survey. It was designed to be used in <br />agricultural investigations. The Mesa County survey is a much more recent <br />and general survey. It rras designed to be used in large-scale, planning <br />and engineering investigations. Due to the diversified purposes, the <br />same soil may be described, named and classified differently. At the <br />suggestion of the SCS, the Grand Junction survey should be used for <br />all small-scale investigations despite the purpose of the study because <br />of the more detailed nature. <br />~:). In this gravel pit report, soil Class IIIe was used. The following is <br />the explanation of the soil classification according to the P~esa County <br />Soil Survey: <br />Classes run from I to VII. Class III is described as "soils that <br />have severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants and require <br />special conservation practices." <br />Subclasses are designated by the letters 'e' (erosional limitation), <br />'w' (excessive water limitation), 's' (shallow or stony soil limitation), <br />or 'c' (climate limitation). <br />Units describe the manageabilitr of the soils and are designated lrf <br />Arabic i7umerals '1, 2 and 3.' Soils of the same Unit require the <br />same management, similar productivity and suitability to the same <br />crops. <br />