Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 18.1
International Committees Organized to Revise Soil Taxonomy
Year
Name of International Committee
Chairperson/s
1976
International Committee on Classification of Soils with Low Activity Clays
(ICOMLAC)
F.R. Moormann
Netherlands
1978
International Committee on Oxisols (ICOMOX)
S.W. Buol
N. Carolina
1978
International Committee on Soil Moisture Regimes (ICOMMORT)
Van Wambeke
New York
1980
International Committee on Andisols (ICOMAND)
M.L. Leamy
New Zealand
1980
International Committee on Aridisols (ICOMID)
Osman
Syria
1981
International Committee on Vertisols (ICOMERT)
J. Comerma
Venezuela
1982
International Committee on Classification of Soils with Aquic Soil Water
Regimes (ICOMAQ)
J. Bouma
Netherlands
1982
International Committee on Spodosols (ICOMOD)
R. Rourke
Maine
1987
International Committee on Soil Families (ICOMFAM)
Hajek
Alabama
(Table 18.1) and by the process developed by SMSS. Such activities were phased out beginning in
1990, and further changes to the system only resulted from
international meetings. The
process of consensus-seeking based on data and validation is critical for Soil Taxonomy to reduce
personal biases and to ensure that basic tenets of the system are not corrupted. Only an institution
can sustain such a process, and the continued success of Soil Taxonomy is because the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) nurtures it. In contrast, classiÝcation systems developed
by individuals become academic exercises after the demise of the author.
The 1999 edition of Soil Taxonomy made some important changes based largely on the U.S.
experience. Most of the changes are by any measure signiÝcant improvements to the system. There
are, however, a few that have not been validated by wide testing (as had happened in the past,
through the SMSS program), and gave rise to reasonable questions when applied to the tropical
context. One of the continuing shortcomings is the inability of soil scientists working in the tropics
to provide the kinds of documentation needed to support their case for changes in Soil Taxonomy.
As a result, many proposals from tropical countries are ignored, and consequently, although the
understanding of soils and their management has improved during the last decade, changes in Soil
Taxonomy have not accommodated these. At the beginning of the new millennium, there was a
general consensus that the system has improved considerably, thereby realizing the dream of Guy
Smith. But there were still areas for improvement. One such area is soils of the tropics.
ad hoc
PURPOSE AND PRINCIPLES OF SOIL TAXONOMY
The purpose and principles of Soil Taxonomy are well enunciated by Smith (1963; 1965) and
Soil Survey Staff (1999). These have been strictly adhered to in many of the changes to the system
that took place in the past. Recently, however, the process appears to be less stringent, perhaps
because of the haste to publish the second edition by the end of the century. As indicated earlier,
apart from the mandated areas of the ICOMs, there were few investigations and critical assessments
of the needs of soils of the tropics. Further, in the last decade, there have been minimal changes
to the system. As a result, there were few opportunities to address the many questions or inconsis-
tencies related to soils of the tropics. As there were few opportunities to initiate such discussions
in formal meetings, they have remained unanswered. Some of these are presented here, with our
opinion, to initiate discussion, research, and eventual changes to the system.
