Lead organisation & collaborators (if any):
Bass Coast Landcare Network
DSE ecoMarkets
South Gippsland Landcare Network
Westernport Catchments Landcare Network
DPI-Sustainable Landscapes
Report by Dr Timothy Cavagnaro and Ms Kimberley Damsma, Monash University
Contact:
Timothy Cavagnaro
Monash University
E: timothy.cavagnaro@monash.edu
Year of study: 2010-2011
Location: 40 farms and reference sites.
Project details
Objectives:
Assess the performance of the rapid soil health assessment tool developed by Bass Coast Landcare Network.
Hypotheses:
Soils from 40 farms and reference sites were analysed for a suite of physicochemical properties. These properties were assessed against BCLN’s soil health assessment tool to test its robustness.
Basis of Trial:
A rapid soil health assessment tool
Location Details:
1 Grantville | Bass (BoM) 818.6mm/a | Loam | ||
2 Grantville | Bass (BoM) 818.6mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
3 Kongwak | Outtrim (BoM) 1025.3mm/a | Loam | ||
4 Kongwak | Outtrim (BoM) 1025.3mm/a | Loam | ||
5 Surf Beach | Rhyll (BoM) 848.6mm/a | Loam | ||
6 Surf Beach | Rhyll (BoM) 848.6mm/a | Loam | ||
7 Nyora | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Loam | ||
8 Nyora | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Loam | ||
9 Nyora | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
10 Nyora | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
11 Jindivick | Jindivick (BoM) 1152.9mm/a | Loam | ||
12 Jindivick | Jindivick (BoM) 1152.9mm/a | Loam | ||
13 Labertouche | Labertouche (BoM) 955.8mm/a | Loam | ||
14 Labertouche | Labertouche (BoM) 955.8mm/a | Loam | ||
15 Labertouche | Labertouche (BoM) 955.8mm/a | Clay | ||
16 Tynong North | Pakenham (BoM) 954.4mm/a | Loam | ||
17 Tynong North | Pakenham (BoM) 954.4mm/a | Loam | ||
18 French Island | Rhyll (BoM) 848.6mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
19 French Island | Rhyll (BoM) 848.6mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
20 French Island | Rhyll (BoM) 848.6mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
21 Loch | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
22 Loch | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
23 Strzelecki | Korumburra (BoM) 1207.7mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
24 Strzelecki | Korumburra (BoM) 1207.7mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
25 Pakenham Upper | Pakenham (BoM) 954.4mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
26 Pakenham Upper | Pakenham (BoM) 954.4mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
27 Labertouche | Labertouche (BoM) 955.8mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
28 Labertouche | Labertouche (BoM) 955.8mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
29 Labertouche | Labertouche (BoM) 955.8mm/a | Clay | ||
30 Bunyip | Longwarry (BoM) 899.2mm/a | Clay | ||
31 Bunyip | Longwarry (BoM) 899.2mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
32 Longwarry North | Longwarry (BoM) 899.2mm/a | Clay | ||
33 Longwarry North | Longwarry (BoM) 899.2mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
34 Iona | Longwarry (BoM) 899.2mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
35 Iona | Longwarry (BoM) 899.2mm/a | Clay Loam | ||
36 Glen Alvie | Outtrim (BoM) 1025.3mm/a | Clay | ||
37 Glen Alvie | Outtrim (BoM) 1025.3mm/a | Clay | ||
38 Lang Lang | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Clay | ||
39 Lang Lang | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Clay | ||
40 Lang Lang | Nyora (BoM) 1008.5mm/a | Clay |
Pre-Trial Management History:
1 Grantville | Beef |
2 Grantville | Beef |
3 Kongwak | Beef |
4 Kongwak | Beef |
5 Surf Beach | Beef and Sheep |
6 Surf Beach | Beef and Sheep |
7 Nyora | Dairy |
8 Nyora | Dairy |
9 Nyora | |
10 Nyora | |
11 Jindivick | Dairy |
12 Jindivick | Dairy |
13 Labertouche | Beef |
14 Labertouche | |
15 Labertouche | |
16 Tynong North | Beef |
17 Tynong North | Beef |
18 French Island | Beef |
19 French Island | |
20 French Island | Beef |
21 Loch | Dairy |
22 Loch | Dairy |
23 Strzelecki | Beef |
24 Strzelecki | Beef |
25 Pakenham Upper | Beef |
26 Pakenham Upper | |
27 Labertouche | Beef |
28 Labertouche | Beef |
29 Labertouche | |
30 Bunyip | Beef |
31 Bunyip | Beef |
32 Longwarry North | Dairy |
33 Longwarry North | Dairy |
34 Iona | Dairy |
35 Iona | Dairy |
36 Glen Alvie | Dairy |
37 Glen Alvie | Dairy |
38 Lang Lang | Dairy |
39 Lang Lang | |
40 Lang Lang | Dairy |
Methods and Measures
Trial design/layout:
At each site a small soil pit (20cm wide x 20cm long x 40cm deep) was dug.
Soil sampling method:
At each site a 20m x 20m plot was established at the centre of the site, which was then divided into four 1-m x 10m plots. In each plot the soil properties were quantified to 10cm depth.
Six soil cores were taken at each 10m x 10m plot using a 10cm auger. Samples from each plot were mixed in the field to provide a composite sample, placed in air-tight bags and stored at 4C. Samples were tested at EAL.
Cores- split into two sub-samples. 1st sub sample was dried at 105C for 48 hours, the 2nd was wet-sieved.
Soil tests:
- Plant available P (Colwell test)
- CEC
- Total C (dry combustion method)
- Total N (dry combustion method)
- Carbon/Nitrogen ratio
- Labile C
- Nitrate
- Ammonium
- PMN (anaerobic incubation)
- Potassium (ammonium acetate test)
In addition, at each soil pit the following was noted:
- Depth of organic matter (visual)
- Leaf colour (visual)
- Root depth and development (visual)
- Macro-life (count)
- Earthworm count (count)
- Soil structure (visual)
- Aggregate stability (in field test)
- Soil compaction (in field measurement)
- Soil biology measurement (quantitative testing)
Treatment Results:
Carbon was measured across all sites. A summary is shown below (taken from the technical report)
Soil health score and soil properties were in a higher range for those sites which were less intensively managed sites.
The assessment tool itself was found to be an effective tool for measuring chemical, biological and physical soil properties. However it should be used with due consideration of the limitations of the method. The sampling effort and sampling time need to also be carefully considered.
How have the results been reported?
Technical report.
How can a copy of any relevant reports be obtains?
Bass coast Landcare.
Level of review of results:
Internal peer review
Best available science assessment:
Objectives |
Conceptual model |
Study design |
Soil analysis |
Production & financial |
Method reporting |
Data analysis |
Results reporting |
Publication |
4 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Next steps
Measuring soil health is challenging, but should be of high priority to landholders. A rapid soil health assessment tool is a useful and commendable practice.
A series of recommendations of soil health parameter measurement methods are supplied in the report. These relate to timing, considering alternative methods for measuring and measuring pH.