Citation
Proceedings

Material Information

Title:
Proceedings
Abbreviated Title:
Proc. - Soil Sci. Soc. Fla.
Creator:
Soil Science Society of Florida -- Meeting
Soil Science Society of Florida -- Interim Meeting
Place of Publication:
Hollywood, Fla
Publisher:
The Society
Publication Date:
Frequency:
Annual
regular
Language:
English
Edition:
Volume 1, 1939
Physical Description:
15 volumes : illustrations, portraits ; 6 in x 9 in; 23 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Soil science -- Congresses ( lcsh )
Soil science ( fast )
Genre:
Conference papers and proceedings. ( fast )
serial ( sobekcm )
conference publication ( marcgt )

Notes

Dates or Sequential Designation:
Vol. 1 (1939) - v. 15 (1955).
General Note:
Volumes for 1942-1943 issued in two pts.: pt. A contains the proceedings of the "Interim Meeting ..." and pt. B contains the proceedings of the "Annual Meeting ..."
General Note:
Vol. 5, pt. B and v. 6 issued together.
Statement of Responsibility:
the Soil Science Society of Florida.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright, Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida. Permission granted to University of Florida to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
689345978 ( OCLC )
91659056 ( LCCN )
0096-8382 ( ISSN )
ocm01489570
020317108 ( Aleph )
Classification:
S590 .S65 ( lcc )
631.4062759 ( ddc )

Related Items

Succeeded by:
Proceedings

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
The Soil science society
OF
FLORIDA
PROCEEDINGS
VOLUME I
1939
FIRST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY
HOLLYWOOD
April 18, 1939


" There is an important place in
Florida Agriculture for a forum of this
type that can be used as a 'clearing
house' for the technical worker and the
grower, as well as others engaged in closely
related enterprises that find common
interest in the practical application of the
basic principles of Soil Science. The tech
nical worker may be able to assist the
grower from time to time with some of his
knotty problems, but no less will the grower
assist the technical worker by this oppor
tunity to bring in his problems and
experience for a good and thorough dis
cussion. I fear this latter angle of benefit
is too frequently overlooked.
Dr. Wilmon Newell,
Provost for Agriculture,
University of Florida.


The Soil Science Society
of
Florida
PROCEEDINGS
Volume 1
1939
FIRST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY
HOLLYWOOD
April 18, 1939
m
OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY
1939- 1940
R. V. Allison President
Gainesville
Michael Peech Vice-President
Lake Alfred
Henry C. Henricksen Member Executive Committee
Eustis
Richard A. Carrigan Secretary-Treasurer
Gainesville


Acknowledgments

The publication of this first volume of the Proceedings of the
Soil Science Society of Florida has been made possible largely through
the generous interest of and contributions by the following organiz
ations:
The U. S. Sugar Corporation
The Chemurgic Research Corporation
The Florida Power and Light Company
On behalf of all those attending the organization meeting of the
Society on April 1 8, 1 939, in Hollywood, and of the substantial mem
bership of more than three hundred and fifty persons that has develop
ed in the course of the first official year of the existence of the Society,
the Executive Committee wishes to take this opportunity to thank
the Florida State Horticultural Society for its generosity in sponsoring
our organization meeting in the fine manner that it did; also the
Hollywood Beach Hotel for the splendid hospitality and service pro
vided by its officers and staff throughout the meetings.
THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. Acknowledgments 2
2. Dedication to the Memory of Dr. Robert Marlin Barnette 4
3. Foreword 7
4. Preliminary Organization Meetings 9
5. Final Organization Meeting in Hollywood, April 18, 1939.
(a) Minutes of the Meeting 1 1
(b) Contributed Papers.
1. The Place of Soil Science in a Program of
Agricultural Research for Florida 1 3
Dr. T. S. Buie.
2. The Soils of Florida 1 5
J. R. Henderson.
3. Methods and Limitations of Soil Analysis 25
R. A. Carrigan.
4. The Soil and Water Conservation Problem
in the Everglades 35
Dr. R. V. Allison.
6. Joint Meeting with the Florida State Horticultural Society,
April 19, 1939. (Abstracts of Contributed Papers).
1. The Cycle of Organic Matter in Soils 59
Dr. F. B. Smith.
2. A Rapid Laboratory Method for the Determination
of Exchangeable Magnesium in the Soil 59
Dr. Michael Peech.
3. The Adaptability of Rapid Laboratory Methods to
the Study of Highly Organic Soils 59
Dr. W. T. Forsee.
4. Florida Citrus Malnutrition Leaves 60
G. M. Bahrt.
5. Question Box 60
R. S. Edsall.
7. Subject Matter Committees Duties and Personnel 61
8. Charter Membership 71
9. Constitution and By-Laws 77


Reprinted
From the Report of the Committee on Resolutions, American Society of
Agronomy, presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society,
Washington, D. C., November 17, 1938.
JJdbert dlarlttt Jaanicttc
I ^ OCTOR ROBERT MARLIN BARNETTE, Chemist at the Agricultural
Experiment Station of the University of Florida, was killed instantly on the
evening of October 31, 1938 while driving alone in his car a few miles north of
Gainesville. In the immediate family of his parents Dr. Barnette is survived by
three sisters and a brother, all living in South Carolina at the present time. Dr.
Barnette was born in Rock Hill, County of York, South Carolina, November 30,
1900. I n 1 920 he graduated from Clemson College and in 1 923 received the
Ph. D. degree from the University of New Jersey where he specialized in soil
chemistry.
Following his graduation from the New Jersey institution, Dr. Barnette spent
a year abroad in travel and study. His study was divided equally between the
Rijkslandbouwproefstation in Groningen, Holland, where he studied under Dr.
D. J. Hissink and at the Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule, in Zurich, Switz
erland, where he spent much of his time in the laboratories of the late Professor
George Wiegner.
Following his return to the United States, Dr. Barnette worked for two years
as Assistant Chemist at the Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station. In 1925
he was appointed Assistant Chemist at the Florida Agricultural Experiment
Station, became Associate Chemist in 1929 and Chemist in 1932. At the time of
his death he was in charge of the Land Use Division of the Department of Chemis
try and Soils.
As indicated by his published works, Dr. Barnette has largely interested him
self in the fundamental nutrition of plants especially as influenced by the physical
characteristics of the soil environment in which they grow. Having studied with
Wiegner and Hissink in Europe just at the time base exchange phenomena in the
soil were beginning to be understood and their importance appreciated, Dr. Bar
nette became a pioneer worker in this field in Florida and in the Southeast.
Throughout his work both organic and inorganic colloids were emphasized and the
importance of the role of organic matter in the soil in this and other connections
repeatedly pointed out.
In the death of Dr. Barnette the American Society of Agronomy and the
Soil Science Society of America have lost a keenly discerning and energetic
worker. To all who have had personal associations with him and especially to
those of us who have been privileged to live and work closely with him there
can not but come a deep feeling of loss in the passing of a staunch and ever
sympathetic friend.
R. V. Allison


In dedicating this First Proceedings of the Soil Science Society
of Florida to the memory of Doctor Barnette, the many scores of his
friends who are now members of this Society, established since the
time of his death, are fully conscious that there was little in this life
closer to Barneys heart than the advancement of Soil Science, es
pecially as it related to those conditions peculiar to Florida. For many
months prior to his death the development of such a Forum was con
stantly in his thoughts. In honoring him thus the Society and all that it
stands for in turn is honored by the vision and record of a life whose
passing preceded its birth.




Foreword
The Soil Science Society of Florida was organized particularly to
serve Florida Agriculture. Its forum is open to all who are sincerely
interested in discussing any of its multitudinous problems that have
a definite relationship with the soil. In the words of our Provost for
Agriculture, Doctor Wilmon Newell, There is an important place in
Florida Agriculture for a forum of this type that can be used as a
clearing house for the technical worker and the grower, as well as
others engaged in closely related enterprises that find common in
terest in the practical application of the basic principles of Soil Science.
The technical worker may be able to assist the grower from time to
time with some of his knotty problems, but no less will the grower
assist the technical worker by this opportunity to bring in his prob
lems and experience for a good and thorough discussion. I fear that
this latter angle of benefit is too frequently overlooked.
This service can be developed in two particular ways: (1) By
holding local or state-wide meetings that will be followed by published
or mimeographed proceedings and (2) By intensive study and dev
elopment of well-defined fields of subject matter through carefully
appointed committees as provided by Article IV of the Constitution.
The attendance upon and interest in our organization meeting
in Hollywood, of which the present Proceedings is a record, repre
sents a definite example of what can be accomplished by the first means.
Our growers are particularly interested in local problems or in group
problems that center around a particular crop or type of farming.
Others of our workers are interested in state-wide soils problems, a good
and thorough discussion and understanding of which will add to the
effectiveness of their service in many respects. Both groups can read
ily be reached by the forum of the Soil Science Society.
The committee phase of the work lends itself particularly to the
organization and development aspects of the Society and its program
as a whole. This is covered in detail in a proper section of this Pro
ceedings where the names and personnel of the committees appointed
to date are listed and their individual responsibilities outlined in a
general way. From certain standpoints this is one of the most import
ant activities of the Society, that is, if each committee will study its
assignment or assignments carefully, analyze its data clearly and report
upon it candidly.
That a similar interest exists in other states is indicated from the
fact that such a society as ours was organized in Indiana under the
genial leadership of Dr. George W. Scarseth on the evening of Decem
ber 1 0, 1 938, thus preceding ours here in Florida by four months.
It is our carefully considered opinion that there is a truly vital
place in the framework of the national organization (Soil Science


Society of America) for active state sections or societies of this nature
since a strong national unit then results merely by a careful piecing
together of the energies and enthusiasms of the local groups. The
national officers would thus be relieved, to a large extent, of the ted
ious routine of membership responsibilities and the maintenance of
general interest in the work. Likewise state forums of this nature can
take care of local problems and the national programs thus freed
of much material of this nature that falls definitely below the level
of national interest.
Such a plan of development would leave the national officers
more time for the consideration of programs and plans of work of
which the Science is so badly in need at the present time. We should
like to join Indiana in a friendly challenge to workers in still other
states where interest in all phases of soils work may incline them to the
development of a local or state forum for the intensive development
of this important branch of the Agricultural Sciences.


Preliminary Organization Meetings at Gainesville

A. January 12, 1939.
At the close of a general discussion of a number of soil problems
by a group of workers in Gainesville on the evening of January 1 2, the
oft-discussed question was again raised of organizing a definite Soil
Science Society of Florida. The chief advantages cited were:
1. The forum of such a society could entertain the discussion of
a wide variety of subjects in the field of Soil Science and
closely related sciences as they pertain to Florida Agriculture
with simultaneous advantages to the technical worker, the
commercial worker, the grower and any others who may be
interested in attending and taking part.
2. Such meetings and discussions would assist very materially
in maintaining state-wide interest and sustaining member
ship in our national society, simultaneously improving our
contributions to the national forum and leaving the national
officers greater freedom to work on other than routine matters.
This meeting was called largely for the discussion of methods
of analysis and was attended by twenty workers in the field of soils
and allied subjects, including representatives from the Everglades Ex
periment Station at Belle Glade and the Citrus Experiment Station at
Lake Alfred.
interest in the formation of such a society grew in a surprising
way in the course of the discussion and an organizing committee con
sisting of Dr. R. V. Allison (Chairman), Mr. R. A. Carrigan
(Secretary), Dr. F. B. Smith, Dr. Michael Peech and W. L. Tait was
set up.
By general agreement it was decided that steps should be taken
to set up a state-wide society or forum consisting of individuals or
organizations interested in the development and application of Soil
Science in Florida. It was proposed that the possibility of holding
an organization meeting in conjunction with the regular annual meet
ings of the Florida State Horticultural Society some time in April, be
explored. There was a general understanding, furthermore, that in the
event of its successful formation, the State Society might later under
take to establish some form of affiliation, as a State section, with the
Soil Science Society of America.
B. March 2 7, 1939.
A second meeting was called at Gainesville on March 27, 1939
for the purpose of furthering the plans for the formation of the State
Society. Essentially the same group was present as attended the ear
lier meeting. At this time a preliminary draft of a proposed Con
stitution and By-Laws was presented and thoroughly discussed. It
was accepted as provisional for presentation at the state-wide organ
ization meeting.
9


The Chairman placed before the meeting an invitation from Col.
B. F. Floyd, Secretary of the Florida State Horticultural Society to
hold the state-wide organization meeting of the Soil Science Society
of Florida in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Florida State
Horticultural Society in Hollywood, in April. This generous invitation
was accepted by unamimous vote and the organizing committee was
instructed to make plans accordingly.
10


Final Organization Meeting in Hollywood
April 18, 1939

A. Minutes of the First Annual Meeting of the Soil Science Society
of Florida, April 18, 1939.
The meeting was called to order at 2 :00 P. M. by the Chairman
of the Organizing Committee, Dr. R. V. Allison. The first order of
business was a call for the selection or election of an acting chairman
for the organization meeting. A motion was made, seconded and
carried that Dr. Allison serve in this capacity.
Copies of the proposed Constitution and By-Laws were distrib
uted to all present. It was then read Article by Article and Section
by Section. Following a suggestion of the chairman that informality
be observed in regard to eligibility for voting, a motion to accept the
proposed Constitution and By-Laws as written was passed by a un
animous vote.
Since the Constitution, as accepted, provided for the inclusion
of the immediate past president of the Society in the Executive Com
mittee, it was necessary that an election be held to select someone to
fill this post for the first year of the Societys existence. Accordingly,
a nominating committee was appointed by the chairman to select
nominees for this position as well as make nominations for the offices
of President and Vice-President. The nominating committee consisted
of Dr. J. R. Neller, Belle Glade, Dr. H. C. Flenricksen, Eustis and
Mr. R. L. Braddock, Belle Glade. Following brief deliberation, the
committee recommended the names of Dr. R. V. Allison, Gainesville,
for President and Dr. Michael Peech, Lake Alfred, for Vice-Preident
and suggested that nominations be made from the floor for the open
position on the Executive Committee. Motions were then made from
the floor that nominations for President and Vice-President cease.
The motions were seconded and favorably voted on.
Nominations for Member of the Executive Committee were
made for the following men: Mr. W. F. Therkildson, Miami, Dr. O. J.
Sieplein, Miami, Mr. R. P. Thornton, Tampa and Dr. FI. C. Henricksen,
Eustis. Dr. Henricksen was elected by a second ballot. Mr. R. A.
Carrigan was appointed Secretary-Treasurer by the President.
There was considerable discussion in the meeting relative to el
igibility for membership in the Society. The opinion of those present
was overwhelmingly in favor of throwing membership open to all who
might be interested in the objectives of the Society to the extent of
giving it their support. It was generally understood that eligibility
for membership would not be contingent upon technical or scientific
standing or professional occupation, but that one of the chief aims
of the Society would be to bring the technical man and the practical


grower together in a forum where an open discussion of the problems
and experiences of all would result in mutual advantages to members
of both groups.
Immediately after the business meeting a program of general
interest involving four papers or discussions as listed below, was pre
sented. Due to the enforced absence of Mr. Harold Mowry, who was
scheduled to read a paper on The Place of Soil Science in a Program
of Agricultural Research for Florida, Dr. T. S. Buie, Regional Con
servator of the Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, South Carolina,
kindly consented to speak extemporaneously on this subject. Mr.
Herman Gunter, State Geologist of the State Board of Conservation,
Tallahassee, Florida who was scheduled to speak on Problems of
Hydrology Related to Florida Agriculture, was also unfortunately
unable to attend the meeting. In his place Dr. Allison gave an im
promptu discussion of the soil and water conservation problem in the
Everglades.
B. Contributed Papers:
A program of contributed papers and discussions was rendered
as follows:
1. The Place of Soil Science in a Program of Agricultural Re
search for Florida.
Dr. T. S. Buie, Regional Conservator, U. S. Soil Conservation
Service, Spartanburg, South Carolina.
2. The Soils of Florida.
J. R. Henderson, Department of Chemistry and Soils, Florida
Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
3. Methods and Limitations of Soil Analysis,
Richard A. Carrigan, Department of Chemistry and Soils, Florida
Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
4. The Soil and Water Conservation Problem in the Everglades.
Dr. R. V. Allison, Head, Department of Chemistry and Soils,
Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
12


The Place of Soil Science in a Program of Agricultural
Research for Florida
Dr. T. S. Buie

Floridas sphere of agricultural influence radiates far beyond its
boundaries as a large percentage of its farm products, particularly
citrus fruits and vegetables, is sold outside of the State. Modern
merchandising methods have helped create a widespread consumer
demand, and thousands of persons outside of the State are engaged
in the distribution and marketing of these products. In addition to cit
rus fruits and vegetables, Florida also produces substantial quantities
of grain, tobacco, cotton, and sugar cane.
The demand for Florida agricultural products also has led to a
high degree of specialization in farming practices. Practices that insure
high yields, especially of crops for out-of-state markets, are employed.
Growers, too, have been quick to adopt the latest methods developed
by agricultural science that enable them to take greater advantage of
a variety of climate and soil conditions.
From the foregoing we can see that the interest in Floridas ag
riculture extends far beyond its citrus groves, large vegetable tracts,
and other farming areas. That means that a large part of the Nation
is directly concerned with the manner in which Florida handles its
soil resources. If these resources are misused and should the soils
productivity be so seriously affected that high yields are no longer
possible, Im sure that consumers farther north would quickly point
a condemning finger at Florida. They, too, would be affected.
Climatic conditions give Florida a decided advantage over other
States in the race to reach northern markets. But regardless of this
favorable condition, Florida will do well to make an inventory of its
soil resources as a basis for their proper management. Its hopes for
a balanced and permanent agriculture will fall short unless its land
is used wisely.
How to use the land better than we have is not a simple prob
lem. This objective can not be achieved without concerted planning
and action by farmers, aided by every Federal, State, and local agency
that has anything to contribute to better land-use practices.
The soil scientist makes a definite contribution to better land
use. He determines the physical, chemical, and biological nature of
the soil, which furnishes the scientific background for dealing with the
practical problems. His services should be of particular value in Flor
ida as the state has a large variety of soils. This makes the land-use
problem more complicated, and the services of the soil scientist all the
more necessary. All soils can be put to good use provided their capab
ilities are fully understood.
13


One of the major functions of soil research is to furnish a solid
foundation for land-use classification, which in turn develops into
proper land-use planning. Not until areas are at least classified rough
ly as suitable or not suitable for specific farming purposes will it be
possible for Florida to safeguard itself against the tragic mistakes of
land misuse so evident in many other sections of the country.
I am particularly glad to have had the opportunity to take part
in the inauguration of the Soil Science Society of Florida, and I feel
certain that its contributions will play no small part in the preservat
ion of Floridas most valuable heritage, its soil.
14


The Soils of Florida
m
J. R. Henderson

Soils are natural bodies. Like people, they are born, develop
gradually and become mature. Furthermore, the characteristics of
soils, like those of the human races, vary in response to the environment
under which they have developed. The features of a Swede are mark
edly different from those of a Mediterranean, and those of the Med
iterraneans are unlike those of an African. Similarly, the soils of warm
regions are unlike those of cold or temperate regions; those of humid
regions unlike those of arid regions; and those of poorly drained areas
unlike those in well drained areas. Thus, the soils of Florida should
be markedly different from those of Alaska, Ohio, or Utah, and those
in one part of the State, different from those in some other part; and
indeed they are. Let us examine, therefore, the features by which
soil differences are recognized.
If in any well drained, gently rolling area, a hole is dug from the
surface down to the unaltered geological formation, and the exposed
profile examined, several distinct layers will be noted. Further exam
ination will show that each of these layers differs from the others in
several important characteristics of which the most distinct are: (1)
color, (2) texture, (3) structure, (4) consistence, and (5) thickness.
Variations in the characteristics described above exhibited by diff
erent soils are due to variations in one or more of the following soil
forming factors: (1) parent material, (2) relief, (3) age, (4) climate,
and (5) vegetation.
The modern system of soil classification is based upon the diff
erences in soil characteristics which have developed under the
influence of the soil-forming factors in various combinations and de
grees of intensity.
In the field, soils are classified into three simple unitsthe series,
the type and the phase. The soil series is a group of soils alike in all
characteristics except the texture and in some cases the thickness of the
surface layers or A horizons. The series is named for some town,
county, river or other prominent landmark where these soils were first
recognized. For instance, the Norfolk series of soils were first given
official recognition at Norfolk, Va.
The soil type is a subdivision of the soil series which, wherever
it occurs, is uniform in all characteristics. The soil type is named by
adding a term denoting the texture of the surface layer to the soil
series name. Examples: Norfolk fine sand and Norfolk fine sandy
loam. Sometimes a soil type differs from the typical in some external
characteristic which is important from the standpoint of land use as
slope, erosion, or degree of stoniness. Such variations are called phases
and are designated by adding a descriptive term to the soil type name.
Example: Norfolk fine sand, flat phase.
15


These simple units of classification are used in ordinary soil
survey work but they are too numerous for use in gaining a comprehen
sive idea of the soils over wide areas. Consequently, the series are
grouped into families and these into great soil groups and these
into still larger groups and so on until all soils are grouped into three
orders. Logically, the numbers of features taken into consideration
decrease as the groups become more inclusive.
Of these larger units we are concerned here with only twothe
orders and the great soil groups. The three soil orders arezonal,
intrazonal and azonal.
The zonal soils have well developed profile characteristics which
reflect the dominating influence of the active soil forming factors,
climate and vegetation. The intrazonal soils have well developed
profile characteristics which reflect the dominating influence of relief
or parent material. The azonal soils have poorly developed profile
characteristics which reflect youthfulness, or extreme conditions of
parent material or relief.
Within these three orders there are 25 great soil groups. In
Florida, the three soil orders are represented by eight of the great soil
groups.
I AND II. THE RED AND YELLOW SOILS
The zonal order is represented by the Red and Yellow great soil
groups. These soils are characterized by brownish-gray, grayish-brown
or reddish-brown surface layers over yellow, brownish-yellow, yellow
ish-brown or brownish-red sub-surface layers over yellowish-red, red
or dark red subsoils. The subsoil rests upon gray, yellow and red
mottled parent material. The Yellow soils are characterized by light
gray, gray or dark gray surface layers over yellowish-gray, grayish-
yellow or yellow subsurface layers over yellow or yellowish-red sub
soils. The parent material beneath the subsoil is yellow, gray, and red
mottled. Both the Red and Yellow soils are acid or slightly acid
throughout the profile.
Since the Red and Yellow soils are very closely associated, the var
ious series can best be described in groups which include members
of both great soil groups.
1. Clay Lands of West Florida.
From Madison west across the northern half of the panhandle, the
soils consist of sandy loams which have developed from marine de
posits of sands and clays. The soils in this area may be divided into
three groups. The differences between the three groups find their
greatest expression in the texture and consistence of various layers of
the profile. Within each group the differences are mainly color
differences which are expressed most significantly in the subsoils,
(see Table I.)
16


2.Central Florida Hammock Areas.
In the high lime hammocks of Marion, Alachua, Citrus, Her
nando and Pasco Counties are found three soil series the parent mat
erials of which have been derived from or influenced by the underlying
limestones. The important characteristics of these soils are shown in
Table II.
3.Sandy Soils of West Florida.
From Madison County west a group of sandy soils lie between the
flatwoods to the south and the clay lands to the north. Three
soilsNorfolk, Ruston and Orangeburg sands are found in the area.
They differ from the sandy loams of the corresponding series (already
described) in that the colors of the sub-surface layers of the sands
are the same as those of the subsoils in the sandy loams and the sub
soils are found at greater depths.
4.The Central Ridge of the Peninsula.
Extending from Hamilton County south to near Lake Placid in
Highlands County is a ridge occupied mainly by five soil series which
are noted for their sandiness. (See Table III for general descriptions)
The most important of these are the Norfolk sands which occupy
75 per cent of the area and support more than three-fourths of Floridas
citrus industry. Outside of the citrus belt they are used mainly for special
crops such as watermelons, tobacco, peanuts and for forestry. The
Norfolk series is followed in order of decreasing importance by the
Blanton, Orlando, Eustis and Ft. Meade series.
The Blanton soils because of their low position are generally too
cold for citrus but in localized areas where protected against frost
damage they are quite as good as the Norfolk soils. The Orlando
soil is perhaps the best general purpose soil of the five, being used
for citrus and truck in the citrus section and for truck and general
farm crops in other parts of the area. The Ft. Meade series is about
as good as the Orlando as a general purpose soil but is less desirable
for citrus because of its high frost risks. The Eustis soil is used mainly
for citrus for which it is generally regarded as slightly more desirable
than the Norfolk.
17


Yellow
TABLE I
SOME IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE RED AND YELLOW SANDY LOAMS
OF NORTHWEST FLORIDA.
Consistence & Texlure of Subsoil
Color
Characteristics
Friable sandy
clay.
Heavy friable
sandy clay
Brittle or
heavy plastic
clay
Gray surface,
grayish-yellow
or yellow sub
surface, yellow
subsoil
Norfolk
Marlboro
Tifton
Susquehanna
Gilead
Brownish-gray
surface, yellow or
yellowish brown
subsurface, red
dish-yellow or
yellowish-red
subsoil
Ruston
Faceville
Cuthbert
Grayish-brown
surface, yellowish-
brown or brown
ish-yellow sub
surface, red sub
soil.
Orangeburg
Magnolia
Luverne
Reddish brown
surface, brownish'
red subsurface,
red or dark red
subsoil.
Red Bay
Greenville
Akron
Light > Heavy
18


TABLE 2
COLOR CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RED AND
YELLOW SOILS OF THE CENTRAL
FLORIDA HAMMOCK AREAS
Series
Surface
Subsurface
Subsoil
Fellowship
Dark Gray
Yellowish-gray
or brownish
gray
Gray, yellow,
brown & red
mottled
Hernando
Gray or gray
ish brown
Grayish yellow
to yellowish'
brown
Brownish'yel"
low or yellow
ish brown
Gainesville
Brownish'gray
or grayish
brown
Yellowish-red
or reddish
brown
Reddish brown
TABLE 3
COLOR CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RED AND
YELLOW SANDS OF FLORIDA
Soil Series
Surface
Subsurface
1
Orangeburg
grayish brown
red
Ruston
brownish-gray
yellowishred
Eustis
brownish-gray
yellowish'red
Norfolk
gray
yellow
Blanton
gray
gr. & yel. or pale yel.
Orlando
dark gray
yel."gr. or gr. yel.
Ft. Meade
1
dark gray
yel. gr. or br.-gr.
19


5. The Knolls of the Clay Flatwoods
There are two minor Yellow sandy loamsDunbar and Eulonia
which occupy slightly elevated areas within and adjacent to the clayey
flatwoods of North Florida and gentle slopes in the Red and Yellow
sandy loam area of Northwest Florida. They are similar to the Norfolk
sandy loams but differ from them in that drainage is not as well estab
lished in the former. The Eulonia has a heavy semi-plastic subsoil
while the Dunbar has a friable subsoil like that of the Norfolk sandy
loams.
The intrazonal soils of Florida are represented by the Ground
Water Podzols, Half-Bog and Bog soils.
III. THE GROUND WATER PODZOLS
The Ground Water Podzols occur in the flatwoods where they are
intimately associated with the slightly lower Half-Bog soils. They have
developed on marine deposits of sands and clays.
The Ground Water Podzols, commonly known as hardpan soils
are characterized by light gray, gray or dark gray surface layers over
light gray or white subsurface layers over black or dark brown sub
soils. The subsoils grade below into white sandy parent material.
These soils are acid to strongly acid throughout the profile. This great
soil group which includes more than half of the flatwoods, is repre
sented by only two soil seriesLeon and St. Johnsand these by
only the sands. The two series are distinguished by the color of the
surface layers. In the Leon soil the surface layer is light gray or gray
while in the St. Johns it is dark gray.
IV. THE HALF-BOG SOILS
The Half-Bog soils occupy an intermediate position in the poorly
drained flatwoods where they are associated with the slightly higher
Ground Water Podzols on the one hand and the slightly lower Bog
soils on the other. Most of the soils in this great soil group have devel
oped on marine deposits of sands and clays but some of them have
been derived from or influenced by marls.
The Half-Bog soils are characterized by gray, dark gray or black
surface layers over light gray, yellowish-gray or grayish-yellow sub
surface layers over yellow and gray mottled or bluish gray subsoils.
With the exception of some of the marl soils they are acid to strongly
acid.
1. The Clayey Flatwoods
In the upper reaches of the St. Johns valley and in smaller areas
elsewhere, are found three poorly drained sandy loams which have
heavy plastic clay sub-soils. These three soils may be easily distinguished
from each other. The Bladen soil has a gray surface while the Bayboro
soil has a dark gray or black surface. The Coxville soil has a gray
20


surface like that of the Bladen but differs from it and the others in hav
ing red mottling in the subsoil.
Another group of three sandy loams occurs in small areas widely
scattered throughout the flatwoods. They have friable or slightly
sticky sandy clay subsoils. The three members are distinguished by the
color of the surface and subsurface layers. The Portsmouth soil has
a dark gray or black surface while Plummer has a light gray or gray
surface. The subsurface layers of both Plummer and Portsmouth
are light gray. The Scranton soil differs from the Portsmouth in hav
ing a yellowish-gray or grayish-yellow subsurface.
2. The Sandy Flatwoods
By far the greatest part of the Half-Bog soils are sandy. These
sandy soils may be placed in four series. The Portsmouth soil has a
dark gray or black surface over a light gray subsurface. The other
three are similar to the Portsmouth but may be easily distinguished by
comparison. The Hyde soil differs in that the dark surface extends
to a depth of 1 8 inches to 2 feet. The Plummer soil differs in that
the surface is light gray or gray. The Scranton soil has a yellowish-
gray or grayish-yellow subsurface.
3. The Marl Hammocks
Near either coast and along some of the streams in the penin
sular section of the State are narrow strips of what are known as Marl
Hammocks. The soils in these areas have been derived from or in
fluenced by the marl formations which occur at depths usually within
four feet of the surface. Up to the present time only one soil series
Parkwoodhas been established to represent this condition. How
ever, it seems that at least three well-distinguished soils may be found
in the area. One of them has a heavy black surface which extends
downward to a depth of two or three feet.i Another has a gray or dark
gray surface over a light gray subsurface which passes into a dark
brown or yellow, gray, and brown mottled clay. The clay layer is
2 to 1 8 inches thick and rests upon marl. The third soil has a gray
or dark gray surface which passes directly into marl at depths of from
8 to 1 2 inches.
V. THE BOG SOILS
The Bog soils occur in the Everglades, Istokpoga Marshes, St.
Johns Marshes, and in numerous other marshy and swampy areas
throughout the peninsula. They consist of plant remains in various
stages of decomposition, commonly mixed with small amounts of
mineral material. These soils are usually acid to strongly acid when
developed out of immediate contact with lime in some form, but most
of those in the Everglades are only slightly acid or even neutral, due
to the prevailing marl or limestone upon which the organic deposit
has been formed. These soils have not been definitely classified
into series. They are called muck, peaty muck or peat depending
21


upon the stage of decomposition. Muck is well decomposed, usually
black. Peat is only partially decomposed and is usually brown. Peaty
muck is an inseparable mixture of peat and muck.
The Azonal soils are represented in Florida by the Dry Sands,
Lithosols, and Alluvial soils.
VI.THE DRY SANDS
The Dry Sands occupy the excessively drained sandy ridges of
the peninsula and dunes along the beaches. They consist of almost
pure sands.
There are four soil series in the area. The St. Lucie has a thin
light gray surface over a white subsurface which extends to depths
of four or more feet without change. The Lakewood differs from the
St. Lucie in that the subsurface is yellow at depths below 12 to 24
inches. The Dade differs from the St. Lucie in that the subsurface
layer rests upon limestone at depths of 12 to 36 inches. The Palm
Beach soil consists of gray and brown sands mixed with fragments
of small sea shells.
VII.THE LITHOSOLS
The Lithosols are confined to comparatively small areas near the
southern tip of the peninsula and the Keys. They consist of what is
commonly known as rock land or pine land and marl.
The Rockdale series consists of limestone with numerous small
surface cavities filled with red to reddish-brown sandy loams and silt
loams or gray to grayish-brown sands. This soil is neutral to slightly
alkaline.
The Perrine series consists of light gray, very finely divided marl
(calcium carbonate) mixed with variable amounts of sand and organic
matter. Possibly several new soil series will be established on the basis
of organic matter or sand content when these areas are surveyed in
detail.
VIII.THE ALLUVIAL SOILS
The Alluvial soils occupy stream bottoms which are subject to
overflow. Since these soils are of little importance in Florida, they will
not be discussed here.
The foregoing discussion of Florida soils has been based on in
formation gained from detailed surveys conducted by the Soil Survey
Division of the United States Department of Agriculture and from
22


reconnaissance surveys by the College of Agriculture of the Univ
ersity of Florida. Only about one-fourth of the State has been covered
by detailed surveys, however, and most of these are now obsolete
due to marked improvement that has been made during the past few
years in the techniques required in this work. In any event, the re
ports and maps are now out of print for the most part and no longer
available at any price.
Some of the most notable aspects of the modern development
of the soil survey are the use of highly accurate aerial photographs
as base maps, insistent emphasis on the utility of the survey which
has encouraged the grouping of minor separations and the inclusion
of such highly pratical information as slope (from the standpoint
of cold drainage as well as water drainage and related soil erosion
implications), land cover and degree of erosion where this is a factor.
This means that we are woefully lacking in information on the
distribution of our soils with the exception of Lake and Polk counties
where the surveys are sufficiently modern (1923 and 1927 respect
ively) to serve present purposes. Even these two reports already
are practically out of print. In view of the basic value of the soil
survey for all types of agricultural research and planning and for many
other purposes such as equitable tax assessment, road planning and
construction and rural zoning and in view of the limited cost of such
a survey, it would appear difficult to find a more worthy purpose
for the expenditure of public moneys than for the development of
such surveys. Since such information is so essential for the develop
ment of effective programs in agricultural research and extension, it is
our hope as public workers, that the soil survey program in Florida
may be energetically resumed and expanded to include the entire
State as rapidly as possible. Soil surveys are under way at the present
time in Alachua and Collier Counties though entirely without benefit
of assistance from the State other than the cooperation of Experiment
Station workers in organizing the programs in the County and the
assistance of the County organization in defraying the field expenses
of the Federal workers engaged in doing the work.
23




Methods and Limitations of Soil Analysis
R. A. Camgan
In view of the increasing popular interest in methods of soil test
ing, it has been thought that there might be some demand for a dis
cussion of this field from the standpoint of its application to questions
of soil fertility. The direct study of fertility is not the only object
of Soil Science. It is however, the principal concern of the soil chemist,
representing, as it does, the most important application of soil studies
to agriculture. The following discussion will therefore be devoted
entirely to the application of analytical methods to the evaluation of
soil fertility.
Total Analysis
When it was first recognized that continued cropping may leave
the soil deficient in certain essential plant food constituents, the most
obvious procedure for studying these deficiencies was to analyze the
soil. Ones first inclination might be to determine the total quantity
of each essential element present in the soil, in other words, to run what
is known as a total analysis. By a total analysis we do not necessarily
mean that all constituents present are tested forso as to get a series
of percentages that will add to 100%but only that in the case of
each element that is tested for, the total amount of that element
present is determined. In carrying out an analysis of this kind, a
finely ground sample of the soil is mixed with powdered sodium
carbonate and the resulting dry mixture is melted in a platinum cruc
ible by heating to bright redness. This drastic treatment attacks the
minerals of the soil in such a way that the total quantities of substan
tially all the non-volatile elements present, except silica, can be brought
into solution by subsequent treatment with acid. The undissolved
silica can be weighed and the elements in solution, namely iron, alum
inum, calcium, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus and others can be
determined by the conventional processes of chemical analysis. In
cidentally, sodium and potassium have to be determined by a different
procedure, which is, however, similar in principle to that of the main
analysis.
As already pointed out, this type of analysis reveals the total
percentage of each element present, irrespective of the forms in which
it may occur, with certain minor exceptions. The system of analysis
employed is the result of years of work by chemists in many parts
of the world and is universally recognized as being capable of giving
results of an accuracy quite satisfactory for most purposes. Because
of the involved series of laboratory operations necessary, the method
is rather cumbersome and very time-consuming and can be success
fully handled only by a skilled operator working in a well-equipped
laboratory. The expense involved is accordingly too great to permit
very extensive use of this type of procedure in routine analysis.
25


Let us see, however, what kind of information a total analysis
can give us. Consider a soil containing a total of 0.20% potash. This
is equivalent to 4000 pounds per acre. Suppose an application of 1 000
pounds per acre of a fertilizer containing 5 % of potash were found
to be justified on this soil. The quantity of actual potash applied
would then be only 50 pounds per acre. Yet the original soil con
taining 4000 pounds per acre was in need of potash fertilizer. The
example given here is entirely plausible, conservative, in fact. In this
case, a total analysis would reveal 4000 pounds per acre on the un
fertilized soil and 4050 pounds per acre on the fertilized soil. As
a matter of fact, it would be extremely difficult if not impossible, to
run a total analysis accurately enough to show this slight difference.
Were it possible, the figures obtained would obviously be of little or
no value, since the 50 pounds added in the fertilizer was infinitely
more important to the crop than the entire 4000 pounds originally
in the soil. The situation just outlined results from the fact that the
4000 pounds of potash in the original soil occur mostly in the form
of compounds which are relatively insoluble in the soil water and
largely inaccessible to the plant for this reason. The potash in the
fertilizer, however, is added in the form of easily soluble compounds
which can be readily assimilated by plants.
The above illustration has been presented simply to exemplify
the fact that knowledge of the total quantity of a plant nutrient in the
soil would be altogether inadequate as a guide in planning fertilizer
applications. What is needed is a means of estimating only that part
of the total supply of any given element which is or may readily be
come soluble in the soil water.
There is no intention of implying that the method of total analysis
should be unreservedly condemned for use in the study of the soil.
This type of analysis has a definite place in research in the compar
ison and classification of soils, in studying the natural processes of
soil formation and as an aid in understanding certain properties of
the soil.
Determination of Readily Available Plant Nutrients
We have seen that a total analysis does not correlate with the
capacity of a soil to supply the plant food constituents. It is natural,
then, that we should inquire whether or not it might be possible to
find an extracting solution which would have the power to dissolve
the various plant nutrients from a sample of soil to an extent com
parable with the ability of a plant to assimilate these elements from
the same soil. In other words, our object would be attained if we
could devise a solution which, in its solvent action on the essential
plant nutrients, would duplicate the feeding power of the plant. If
a sample of soil were shaken in contact with such a solution, the more
soluble constituents would pass into solution leaving behind the rel
atively insoluble forms undisolved. The resulting extract could then
be filtered from the mass of soil and analyzed for its content of plant
nutrients. An analysis of this kind, if it accomplished all that was
26


expected of it, would give us the desired information regarding the
fertilizer needs of our soil. This system of analysis has, indeed, as
sumed great importance in the investigation of soil fertility. The met
hod is, however, subject to limitations which are not apparent in the
light of the preceding discussion.
Before proceeding further, it is probably advisable to define two
of our most commonly used terms.
( 1 ) Availability. When we speak of a certain quantity of an ele
ment as being available we mean that that quantity of the element
is present in forms of chemical combination which are more or less
readily soluble in the soil water and therefore may become accessible
for the use of the plant within the immediate future. There is no
sharp distinction between available and unavailable forms in
many cases. These terms have meaning only in a comparative sense.
(2) Base Exchange. The property of base exchange is one of the
most typical characteristics of soils. This property resides in the fine
ly divided clay and organic matter. The latter two materials are able
to hold certain basic elements such as potassium (potash), calcium
(lime) and magnesium in a loose form of combination from which
they may be readily displaced by chemically similar elements occurr
ing in the soil solution. This process of replacement is a simple act of
exchange. Thus an atom of potassium, in solution in the soil water,
may displace a sodium atom from a clay particle. The potassium
atom then takes the place formerly held by the sodium atom and the
sodium atom passes into solution. The two atoms merely exchange
places. The same potassium atom might in turn be displaced by an
atom of some other basic element. Moreover, the process of exchange
between two elements may operate in either direction. For any given
soil, the direction in which the exchange takes place is governed in
part by the composition of the water solution in contact with the soil
particles.
Elements which are held by the soil in this way are said to be in
the exchangeable or replaceable form. The process of replace
ment is known as base exchange and is of importance in the case
of potash, calcium, magnesium, ammonia nitrogen and other elements
as well. The nutrients held in the soil in exchangeable form are com
monly considered to be available for use by plants, since they are
only retained in a loose state of combination with the soil particles.
However, all of the available nutrients are not necessarily held in
the exchangeable form. For example, the phosphorus in freshly
applied superphosphate is readily available simply because it occurs
in a soluble form.
We can now return to our consideration of methods of deter
mining the quantities of available nutrients in the soil by the use of
extracting solutions. It is evident that the really essential feature of
any such method is the extracting solution used. The problem of
devising appropriate solutions for this purpose has been studied since
1845. In this year Daubeny proposed the use of carbonated water,
27


a solvent which has since been advocated by more recent investigators
on the ground that it approximates the solution surrounding the feed
ing root hairs in the soil, which itself is highly charged with carbonic
acid given off by the roots. Dyer, in 1 894, proposed 1 % citric acid,
since this strength of acid approximates the acid content of an average
plant sap and was therefore expected to imitate the action of plant
roots on the soil. Some workers have used N/200 hydrochloric acid,
claiming that this strength of acid dissolves from the soil quantities of
plant nutrients corresponding to the amounts removed by an ordinary
crop. Fraps, in Texas, has advocated 0.2N nitric acid for determining
available phosphorus, a recommendation which is based on his obser
vation that this acid dissolves completely the phosphates of calcium
which are believed to furnish available phosphorus, and exerts but little
action on the phosphates of iron and aluminum which he considers
to be relatively unavailable. Pure water and even alkaline solutions
are sometimes used.
These examples are presented to indicate the range of variation
in the solutions employed and in the reasoning governing their sel
ection. Various others, too numerous to mention, have been ad
vocated by different investigators. Most of these solutions contain
a small concentration of acid, the function of which is the decompos
ition and resulting solution of the more easily attacked compounds
of the nutrient elements. In many cases neutral salts are added to
aid in controlling the pH of the solution or to confer the base ex
change property on it. There is a widespread feeling that the deter
mination of the exchangeable potassium, calcium and magnesium gives
about as reliable an indication of the immediately available supplies
of these elements as can be expected in the present state of develop
ment of soil analysis. For this determination, a solution of a neutral"
salt such as ammonium chloride or preferably ammonium acetate is
used.
It appears from the foregoing remarks that there is only limited
agreement among soil chemists in regard to the selection of suitable
solvents. This fact, though, is merely indicative of the difficulties
involved. The availability of a nutrient in the soil is affected not only
by its solubility, but by the rate at which it actually dissolves, and by
the rate at which it may be absorbed by the plant. The availability
is in some cases diminished by the presence of other materials in the
soil which have the property of slowly tying up considerable quan
tities of originally soluble material in insoluble forms. The actual
quantity of a given nutrient taken up by the crop is the net result of
the operation of these and other conflicting factors. Yet in running
an analysis we attempt, in a single laboratory operation, to evaluate all
these factors in terms of a single number. Fortunately, however, the
one factor of solubility (or replaceability) probably dominates the
results in the larger number of cases. Hence, on studying data obtained
by certain of the methods in use, we find a reasonable degree of corr
elation between the test results and crop response to fertilization.
As a result of the operation of the disturbing factors referred to, how-
28


ever, irregularities are rather common, even with methods that have
attained a measurable degree of success.
On comparing several of the extracting solutions in current use,
wide differences may be noted in the quantities of a given plant nut
rient extracted from the same sample of soil. For example, suppose
two different solvents differing markedly from each other in acid
content are used for determining available phosphorus in a series of
three soils. Results somewhat as shown in the adjoining table would
be entirely plausible.
Soil No
... i
2
3
Phosphorus extracted by strongly acid
solvent, lb./acre
.100
200
300
Phosphorus extracted by weakly acid
solvent, lb./acre
... 10
20
30
At first sight it might appear that the data obtained by
one or
the other of these methods must necessarily be erroneous. Certainly
the prospect of calculating a fertilizer formula from either of these sets
of figures does not look promising. On the other hand, soil No.2
shows twice as much available phosphorus as soil No. 1 by either
method., A similar relation holds for soil No. 3. Thus, regardless
of which of the two solvents is used, we get the same picture of the
relative amounts of available phosphorus in the three soils. The ab
solute magnitude of the figures obtained is unimportant provided
that the test can faithfully reveal significant differences between diff
erent levels of nutrient concentrations in the soil. From this standpoint
the two solvents in the above discussion would be equally satisfactory.
In using a soil analytical method the most vital question of all
is that of whether the test results actually mean something in terms of
crop yields or other plant response. The ultimate criterion of the
adequacy and availability of nutrients in the soil is to be found in the
growth and condition of the crop. A method of analysis for available
plant nutrients becomes of value, then, only when it has been shown
to give results which correlate with the fertilizer needs of the soil as
determined by the response of the crop to fertilization.
Nothing that has been said here is intended to imply that soil
analysis can supplant practical experience. Probably the most rat
ional view is to regard soil testing as a potentially valuable aid to be
used only as supplementary to practical experience, that is, to use it
as a guide in forming judgments which otherwise would have to depend
on experience alone. A method of analysis can reach its maximum
usefulness only in the hands of an intelligent worker who has full
knowledge of local conditions together with experience in the inter
pretation of the test, under these conditions. Valid conclusions can
be drawn only when due consideration is given to all factors which
may affect the interpretation of the test. Soil type and the kind of
crop to be grown are of vital importance in this connection.
29


Soil Reaction (pH)
The determination of pH is one test which we can justly regard
with some degree of satisfaction. The fundamental importance of
soil pH in practical agriculture is unquestioned and the application
of this test has undoubtedly resulted in far-reaching benefits. Fairly
satisfactory methods exist for the determination of this property and
the interpretation of the test results is reasonably well understood for
a number of soils and crops.
The glass electrode method is generally recognized as being the
most satisfactory, at least from the standpoint of accuracy. The
quinhydrone electrode can, however, be used with satisfaction if cer
tain exceptional soils are excluded. Unfortunately, the latter two
methods require rather expensive electrical apparatus. In the absence
of this equipment, colorimetric methods can be used on a great many
soils, if proper working conditions are adhered to.
Lest it be implied that investigators have approached a stable
viewpoint in their understanding of soil pH and its application, it is
perhaps desirable to indicate briefly the direction which experimental
work in this field is taking.
Customary practice in determining pH involves agitating the sam
ple of soil with water and running the actual pH test on the resulting
soil-water suspension. Dilution with water has been necessary in the
past since the conventional electrodes available have been serviceable
only in fluid mixtures. For avoiding the error inherent in diluting
the soil with water, the use of a new spear-type glass electrode has
been suggested by McGeorge ( 1 ). This is a rugged type of electrode
which can be pressed directly into the moist, undiluted soil or into
soil which has been moistened with a minimum proportion of water.
Readings taken in this way have been assumed to give indications
of the pH of the soil under actual field conditions more accurately
than can be obtained by the conventional procedure.
Another interesting development has been the study of the effect
of root hairs on the pH of the microscopic layer of soil water in their
immediate neighborhood. By working with electrodes having micros
copic dimensions Sekera (2) has shown, for example, that in a soil
where the pH of the prevailing soil solution is about 6.0, the pH in
the layer of water in immediate contact with the root hairs may be
as low as 4.9, due to evolution of carbon dioxide by the root hairs.
This observation would tend to indicate that plants actually draw
their nourishment from a solution having a pH which is not necess
arily that of the soil solution as a whole, as determined by our present
methods.
These examples have been presented to indicate in what manner
further extension of our knowledge in this field may result in improve
ment both in methods and in interpretation.
(1) McGEORGE, W. T., Jour. Am. Soc. Agron. 29, 841 (1937).
(2) SEKERA, F., quoted by KUBIENA, W., in Micropedology, Collegiate Press,
Ames, Iowa (1938).
30


The Spectrograph
Increasing recognition of the importance of the trace elements
in practical agriculture has resulted in the application of the spectro
graph to the routine analysis of various agricultural materials. Since
these elements occur in minute quantities, their determination by chem
ical procedures is often attended with considerable difficulty and at
great expense for labor and materials. The advantages of the spec
trograph have been particularly evident for this type of analysis,
since by its use, the certain detection of minute traces of many elements
can be affected much more rapidly and economically. In the case
of numerous elements, the spectrograph can detect the presence of
smaller quantities than can be found by chemical procedure. Perhaps
a brief explanation of the principle of operation of this instrument
may be in order.
Light is believed to be transmitted through space in the form
of a continuous series of waves. Differences in color are due to dif
ferences in the length of the waves, measured along the direction in
which the light is travelling. Violet light consists of relatively short
waves. Red light has nearly twice the wave-length of violet light.
White light results from the mixture of all colors, ranging from the
shortest violet waves through blue, green, yellow, and orange up to
the longest red waves. White light becomes separated into all of its
component colors by passing through a prism, which in its simplest
form is merely a triangular block of glass. In going through the
prism the light rays are bent to one side. Since the shorter wave
lengths are bent more than the long ones, the violet light is found
to be separated from the red light. If the separated white light after
passing through the prism, is allowed to fall on a white surface, there
will be observed a continuous band of color with violet on one end
and red on the other, the remaining colors falling in between in the
order named above.
Now when any substance is raised to a high temperature it gives
off light. The light given off may consist of various wave-lengths
but in the case of an incandescent gas the actual wave-lengths em
itted are characteristic of the chemical composition of the substance.
When cooking on a gas stove, we may often notice irregular patches
of flame which glow with a characteristic yellow light. This yellow
color is due to the presence in the flame of vapors of the metal
sodium which has been spilled on the burner in the form of common
salt (sodium chloride). Compounds of potash under similar cir
cumstances give a violet color; barium compounds give a green;
and strontium compounds, a red color. In each case the color is due
to a particular wave-length of light. Under certain conditions the
appearance of these colors can be used for identifying the elements
named simply by direct observation with the eye while holding a
particle of the unknown material in the hottest part of a flame. This
is, of course, impossible when numerous chemical elements are present
in the same sample. With the aid of the spectrograph, however,
the various wave-lengths can be separated and each one identified.
31


In doing this, the sample of materialwhich may be soilis placed
in a crater in the lower carbon of an arc light. The arc is turned on
and in the intense heat the entire sample vaporizes, each chemical
element present emitting its own characteristic wave-lengths of light.
This light is allowed to fall on an opening in the form of a very fine
vertical slit between two jaws of metal. If a camera were placed
immediately behind this slit, there would be obtained on developing
the photographic plate, nothing but a single short vertical line, the
image of the illuminated slit. In the spectrograph, however, a prism
is interposed between the slit and the photographic plate. As ex
plained above, the prism separates the various wave-lengths of light
so that instead of one single image, there results a horizontal row
of short vertical lines. Each of these lines is an image of the slit, but
each line corresponds to some definite wave-length of light emitted by
the incandescent vapors of a definite chemical element in the arc.
From the exact position of any given line it is possible to determine
what chemical element gave rise to that particular wave-length by
comparison with the lines produced by all the known elements. In
this way it is possible for one who is thoroughly familiar with the
various spectrum lines, as they are called, to identify the elements
present in a sample.
To determine actual quantities present, the photoelectric cell is
used. With its aid it is possible to measure the intensity of blackening
of any given line, a quantity which is related to the amount of the
element present. If, in analyzing a soil by this method, the soil itself
is placed directly in the arc, then obviously a total analysis is obtained.
If an analysis for available percentages is desired, resort must be had
to the use of an extracting solution, as described above. The spec
trograph may also be applied, however, to the analysis of the resulting
solution.
Field Kit Tests
The methods discussed in the foregoing paragraphs have, in the
main, legitimate application in the investigation of soil fertility and
are representative of procedures employed in the various research
institutions engaged in this field of study. Although opinions may
differ as to interpretation, the definiteness of the information secured
can be depended upon. In the conduct of a research program, where
so much depends on the reliability of the data secured, the use of
reasonably standardized laboratory methods is a matter of necessity.
There has arisen, however, a demand for a rough and ready
system of soil testing for use in the field by workers without partic
ular training in laboratory technique. In response to this demand,
several field kits for so-called quick testing have appeared. In
adapting a laboratory method for field use, the obvious requirement
of effective simplification of procedure necessarily places decided res
trictions on the precision obtainable. It remains to be seen just how
32


serious this limitation may be in the use of the field kit. Thus, the
extent to which these kit tests might be generally applicable under
Florida conditions must await the accumulation of further experience.
SUMMARY
The determination of the total percentage present does not give
definite information regarding the availibility of a given plant nutrient
in the soil.
Approximate knowledge of the availibility of a nutrient may be
gained by determining the amount of it soluble in certain solvents,
subject to the limitation that the test results be not too literally
interpreted. Data obtained in this way should ordinarily be under
stood to have meaning only in a comparative sense.
The determination of soil pH by present methods is generally
recognized to yield information of immediate practical value, although
further studies of this test give promise of materially extending its
usefulness.
A rough explanation has been given of the principles employed
in the use of the spectrograph. The applications of this instrument
in agricultural research have been pointed out.
EDITORS NOTE: The numerous questions asked from the floor following this gen
eral discussion of methods of soil analysis were indicative of the genuine interest that
exists in this subject; also of the rich field of endeavor which the Committee
on Methods of Analysis has for its very own.
33




The Soil and Water Conservation Problem in the
Everglades

Dr. R. V. Allison
I am sure we all regret very much that Mr. Herman Gunter, our
State Geologist, could not find it possible to be with us today to out
line the intimate relation of the field of Hydrology to Soil Science
and to Florida agriculture, and to point out some of the more impor
tant problems in this field with which we are confronted practically
every day.
Our consciousness of the importance of a better understanding
of the duty of water and its relation to the soil as well as to the plant
has developed rapidly here in Florida during the past few years espec
ially as these relationships have to do with the movement of soil water
and the availability to the roots of growing plants of a proper supply
of this vital solvent at all times. As we get into the problem, how
ever, we quickly come to the realization of how dangerously little
we know even about the relationship of this dynamic, soil-water cycle
to the stability and effectiveness of the soil fertility complex as ex
pressed in the ordinary growth of plants. Florida is a flat country
with notably high and low seasonal rainfall, a country of fires at one
time and floods at another. What she needs is a happy middleground
between the normal trend of these two extremes and this can be at
tained only by intelligent study and planning followed by methodical
management and control.
Inasmuch as there are few, if any other, persons in the State with
sufficient basic knowledge of our water resources to cover this question
in the breadth of its original statement, and in the manner in which
we hoped Mr. Gunter would treat it, and since your Chairman gave
his prior promise to say a few words on some phase of the subject in the
event he could not be present, I should like to discuss with you, in a
preliminary sort of way, what long has been regarded by some of us
as one of the most important hydrological problems to be found in
this or any other State. Reference is to our great need for a com
prehensive soil and water conservation program for the Everglades.
In referring to the Everglades conservation problem as basically
hydrological and primarily of a water control nature it is necessary to
understand, first of all, something of the genesis of the Everglades
soils.
In the first place the peat and muck soils blanketing the vast
expanse of this great area were formed almost entirely from sawgrass
in the presence of an excess of water, probably a condition of partial
to complete inundation most of the year, just as other organic soils
of this nature have been formed. This should not be taken to mean
that there were not periods of low water table and even drought in
the course of the passing centuries that have witnessed the formation
35


of these soils. Charcoal and ash in the deeper layers of the soil pro
file in several sections tell us that there were deficiencies of moisture
and extensive fires from time to time. Nevertheless, the predominant
influence has been water. Otherwise there would have been no ap
preciable accumulation of plant material in the form in which we find
it and which constitutes the body proper of these remarkable soils.
Furthermore, the topography of the supporting foundation mat
erial upon which the Everglades deposit has developed, consisting of
porous lime rock, marl or sand, is not of the nature of a closed basin
but rather of a broad, open trough about 50 miles wide. This extends
essentially from Lake Okeechobee on the North to Cape Sable on the
South, most of the way between low land elevations to the east and
west only a few feet higher than the surface of the Everglades itself.
The average gradient of the surface, southwards, is little more than
two inches to the mile. In its undisturbed condition, therefore, the
Everglades was a vast, unbroken plain of gray-green sawgrass as far
as the eye could reach.
Lake Okeechobee, lying at the head of the Everglades, also
serves as a great, shallow basin at the foot of the Kissimmee Valley.
Thus, we have the three components of an immense hydrologic unit,
( 1 ) The Kissimmee River, and numerous smaller streams (the water
shed), (2) Lake Okeechobee (the storage basin) and (3) The Ever
glades (the overflow area), all of which shall have to be taken into
careful account in planning a soil and water conservation program for
the area as a whole.
Just as the soils of the Everglades were formed by the grace of
an abundance of water, so are such soils destroyed by injudicious
drainage operations that are not followed up with proper protective
measures. This has been the tragedy of the Everglades. For the past
quarter century a large scale drainage development has served only
to dewater vast areas, much of which under the best possible con
ditions of agricultural expansion would not be needed for many decades
to come. What is the result in the meantime? Sheer destruction.
Catastrophic fires have swept over the area nearly every winter (the
dry season) that have not only destroyed immense potential soil values
but also caused undue hardship to plant, animal and human life that
happened in the way of the biting flames or billowing clouds of acrid
smoke.
Aside from actual burning, the oxidation and shrinkage of such
soils when exposed in this way takes an even greater toll. Thus,
shrinkage alone, as a result of air drying, of an excavated profile from
sawgrass soil four feet long, nine inches wide and six inches deep show
ed a reduction of about four volumes into one! Under natural con
ditions in the open glades four miles south of the Bolles Canl where
there has been no cultivation whatsoever, careful measurements have
shown a surface subsidence of 3.45 feet, or about one third of the
original depth of the peat. ( 1 ) It is found to be appreciably greater
near the large canals, as might be expected. With the incidence of fire,
almost any loss might be experienced in a single season from the burn-
(1) See Figure 22, Page 56.
36


ing of only the plant cover and accumulated surface debris on down
to several feet of the soil body itself. All of this, of course, is indep
endent of the progressive surface subsidence of these soils that ac
companies cultivation. Following the first breaking, the loss of elevat
ion is quite rapid due, in good part, to physical compaction in form
ing a denser soil body. Then it slows up quite appreciably. How to
slow down this subsidence or bring it to a complete halt after a reas
onable period of cultivation is the vital question in the continued use
of soils of this nature. The principal answer must always be in the
proper handling of the ground water in relation to crop rotations that
are developed with this all-important objective in view.
Inasmuch as the technique of conservation is necessarily differ
ent under cultivated and uncultivated conditions, the Everglades prob
lem might well be divided into two parts on this basis for clarity of
discussion and understanding.
(A) Lands that are definitely under cultivation or located with
in a sub-drainage unit and available for cultivation at any time,
and
(B) Lands outside of sub-drainage districts and a part of the
open, unreclaimed Everglades which comprise nine tenths or
more of the total area at the present time.
A. Developed Lands.
In the Everglades proper there are, or were, between two and
three millions of acres of organic soils, some of it of great potential
value. Of this, approximately 100,000 acres are under cultivation at
the present time. Even if an additional area of 100,000 acres were to
be placed in use during the next twenty years it is obvious that the
great bulk of the area would still remain for development by post
erity; that is, if it is not completely destroyed in the meantime by our
present program of neglect.
Properly developed and carefully cultivated, the Everglades soils
are highly productive. Cane yields during the past season over large
fields have been as high as 80 tons or more of cut cane per acre, and
sugar yields as high as 9.25 tons. The average for the entire crop
for the season now closing is more than 40 tons per acre, with an
average sugar content of more than 10.6 per cent. Beans, celery,
potatoes, cabbage and many other truck crops are equally responsive.
More than a thousand boxes of celery have been produced per acre;
more than 35 tons of cabbage, and other crops in proportion. Forage
crops for the support of a livestock industry are of particular promise,
since, taken in conjunction with sugar cane, they will not only constit
ute an excellent base for the general type of farming that this country
especially requires but also would appear distinctly favorable for a
soil of this nature where the highest possible water table should be
maintained together with a minimum of cultivated surface exposure,
all in the interest of soil conservation through the prevention of sur
face subsidence.
37


Accordingly, under cultivated conditions, we need to know more
of the effect of cultivation and of water control conditions involved
in various systems of agriculture upon the permanence of the soil mat
erial itself. Therefore, the planning of water control for cultivated
areas must be carefully coordinated with that on the undeveloped areas
which should be flooded as much of the year as possible.
B. Undeveloped Lands.
From the above definition of the manner in which the Everglades
soils have been formed and the combustible nature of their principal
components, it is apparent that the main problems of conservation
for immediate attention are in the open, undeveloped sections of the
area, which have not been touched by the plow, and for great acreages
of which there may not be economic need of development for decades
to come.
The fact that there has been a general dewatering of this vast
and unused, unattended area of organic soil over the central and lower
part of the peninsula for a number of years has created several prob
lems in addition to that of soil conservation which automatically become
a part of the project as a whole.
Notable among these are:
1. Overdrainage of the Everglades National Park area and pro
gressive destruction of many of its most important natural feat
ures including food resources for wild life.
2. A lowering of the freshwater table under the agricultural
areas of the lower east coast from Florida City to West Palm
Beach, part of it the most tropical section of the United States,
with heavy damage to the productivity of these areas in terms
of winter vegetables, sub-tropical fruits and other types of gen
eral and specialized agriculture found in the region.
3. A dangerous decline of the recharging action by surface wat
ers over important domestic water supply areas to the west of the
metropolitan sections of the lower east coast that is causing real
alarm at the present time.
4. A notable effect in producing lower winter temperatures and
so setting up this expansive area in the open glades as a great
basin of cold in the form of night temperatures that are a
real menace to agriculture in all contiguous areas. Under con
ditions of low water-tables in the open glades that have pro
duced a deep layer of dry, combustible material over the surface
(following the first frost) and a foot or so of dry, fibrous top
soil, winter temperatures as low as 9 degrees F. have been
recorded in undeveloped sections!
Thus, over-drainage and excessive dewatering of the open, un
used sections of the Everglades have not only stopped the formation
of soil by processes that should continue as long as possible but are
producing shrinkage and oxidation losses, independent of burning,
that are all but incredible. Burning of these soils and soil materials
38


under such conditions, through the long dry seasons lasting through
most of the winter, adds enormously to these losses. The past win
ter has been one of the worst on record, insofar as physical damage
to the Everglades soils is concerned.
There is only one logical answer to all these problems that is
at all practical and that is RE-WATERING. That is to say, there
should be held on these unused areas not only all the rainwater that
naturally falls on them but this should be supplemented, just as faT
as is found possible and feasible, by water from the original source
of overflow, namely Lake Okeechobee. By this means the soils in
the sections so flooded will not only be protected against shrinkage,
natural oxidation and burning, but the natural processes of soil format
ion will be reinstated.
Furthermore, the restoration of overland flow of surface waters
down the peninsula will reestablish natural values in the Everglades
National Park that are vital to the future of that area. Such a re
watered condition of the back country also will elevate the natural
water gradient under the agricultural areas of the lower east coast,
referred to under 2 above, as it finds its way to sea level through
the porous subsoil in a manner that should give appreciable relief to that
problem. In the same way a flooding of the recharge areas to the west
of the metropolitan areas of the lower east coast should bring relief
to the domestic water supply problems of that section and take care
of any amount of pumping that may be thrown against them at any
time in the future. Finally, the establishment of a great, shallow,
inland lake of this nature should go far in ameliorating low winter
temperatures that have developed in the past out of the de-watered
condition of the back country referred to under 4 above, and which
will continue to menace the agriculture of the important contiguous
areas just as long as the Everglades is handled as it has been during
the past two decades.
PROCEDURE
In a problem of this dimension, long range planning must be
stressed and every consideration given to all three components of the
system, namely, the watershed, the reservoir, and the overflow area.
Above all, the needs of the areas that already have been reclaimed
should be sharply differentiated from those of the unreclaimed sec
tions on the one hand, and the permanent water reserve areas on
the other. The fact that the Federal government already has expend
ed more than seventeen millions of dollars in the construction of a per
manent, massive dike around certain developed sections of Lake Okee
chobee constitutes a truly indispensable beginning in the proper hand
ling of the regional waters involved in this great project. As a mat
ter of fact, it places the entire project on a new and much more feas
ible plane of consideration than it ever has been on before. This,
coupled with the very constructive attitude of the District Office of
39


the U. S. Engineers charged with the maintenance and operation of
these lake control facilities, is one of the most hopeful and heartening
signs for the future.
A. Lands Under Cultivation.
The primary need in connection with lands under cultivation
is for careful, exacting study in the handling of the ground water
under such conditions looking to economic plant response on the one
hand and the best possible stabilization of the soil body on the other
which will prevent, if possible, at a certain reasonable point, any further
surface subsidence, whatsoever. Very careful consideration must be
given to water relationships of this nature as between developed and
undeveloped areas especially as related to irrigation requirements and
drainage operations. In fact this consideration should become the
basis of the general plan of development for the Everglades in the
future. Such a plan should not only require a unit basis of land de
velopment but also must be broad enough and comprehensive enough
to envision the handling of the last unit of reclaimable land at whatever
time economic conditions may permit such development. When the
absolute need for establishing permanent water resources as a part of
such a plan is fully realized the intriguingly complicated nature of the
problem as a whole becomes more evident. The first question then
becomes, where should these reserve areas be located and on how
extensive a basis should they be planned. This phase of the planning
must be preceded by soil and other physical surveys.
B. Undeveloped Lands.
While the problems associated with the proper use of the land
under cultivated conditions are exceedingly important, and a great
amount of research is still needed in this connection, the most press
ing consideration we are now facing is in the proper handling of the
great area of undeveloped lands. In other words, it is here that we
are experiencing the greatest soil losses and it is the re-watering of the
de-watered expanse that should bring such profound benefits as, in part,
have been listed above. Accordingly the following steps would appear
to be a logical series leading to the organization of a comprehensive
plan for handling the Everglades both from the standpoint of proper
development and protection of cultivated areas and conservation of the
soil and water resources of unreclaimed sections.
1. A comprehensive review and study should be made of all
available engineering, meteorological, and other physical data pertain
ing to all parts of the Everglades area and its environs wherever it
may be found, whether in Washington, Tallahassee, Jacksonville, West
Palm Beach, Miami, Everglades City, or Clewiston. Although there
is an enormous amount of data available at different points and from
different sources, no such comprehensive digest and evaluation has
ever been made of it to serve as a definite basis for further study and
planning.
40


2. Air surveys should be developed for most of the area not
only to serve as base maps for soil and other surveys but also for the
assistance they would give in the evaluation of other phases of the
work. Naturally air surveys of this section of Florida would also serve
many other useful purposes.
3. Immediately basic information furnished under 1 and 2
becomes available it will be possible to begin rapidly to fill in missing
data by instrument and other surveys to the end that a comprehensive
and adequate physical basis for planning will be had.
4. Contemporaneously with the rounding out of the physical sur
vey under 3 above, research and demonstration features of the
general project should be planned, some of them necessarily of a long
time nature, and put into effect. Such studies and demonstrations
should be the outgrowth of an integrated analysis by both State and
Federal subject matter specialists from every field of interest that has
a bearing on the problems involved.
5. As soon as an adequate system of data for any phase of the
general problem is available for the purpose, long range planning
should be instituted. Out of this should grow, first of all, a works
program for soil and water conservation in the undeveloped sections
of the Everglades.
6. Any works program of a permanent nature should be devel
oped as a definite and integral part of the general plan for the Ever
glades, which plan should be a unit plan and the basis for the dev
elopment of all reclaimable sections of the area in the future.
7. Contemporaneously with the cooperative development of the
physical program and general plan for the future, careful coordination
also must be had among Federal, State and local officials from the
standpoint of adjusting present conditions of land ownership and tax
delinquency as this is a vital part of the problem as a whole.
SUMMARY STATEMENT
The principal problem in the Florida Everglades is that of dev
eloping a definite plan of reclamation for the area as a whole. This
must be broad enough to supply information on how to improve met
hods of development and use of these organic soils on the one hand,
and on the other, to hold the undeveloped or reserve areas under
the protective influence of the highest possible water table throughout
the entire year. There is no incompatibility between the two pro
cedures or purposes for developed and undeveloped lands, respectively.
In fact, they can very definitely and effectively supplement each other.
Such a plan furthermore, must be broad enough to encompass the
individual problems of all three components of the system, namely,
the watershed (Kissimmee Valley), the storage basin (Lake Okee
chobee), and the overflow area (Everglades), and so draw them into
a closely interwoven schedule of development as a whole.
41


This problem of the proper handling of organic soils is not by
any means peculiar to Florida. It is to be found in practically every
state in the Union notably, perhaps, in Minnesota, Michigan, California
and North Carolina. There is little doubt that the Everglades area is the
most extensive and valuable of all. If a successful project can be
organized in Florida, therefore, it will doubtless assist very materially
in the development of the peculiar technology required for the handling
of this particular type of conservation problem wherever it may be
found.
EDITORS NOTE: The brief discussion of the Everglades problem outlined above
represents an extension of Doctor Allisons remarks that is based in part on a
statement on the same subject that was prepared by him only a few days later
(April 24) for the record of a hearing before a Sub-committee of the Senate
Appropriations Committee in Washington.
The spontaneous discussion from the floor that followed this presentation
indicated in a very definite way the widespread interest that exists in this vital
problem. This discussion not only involved the problems of the Everglades proper,
but those of the various sections of the Kissimmee Valley as well, indicating
excellent insight of all participants into the broader aspects of a vital situation
that now has been fully opened for public review.
As a result of this active discussion from the floor, the President of the
Society was instructed to appoint a standing committee whose object would be
to collect, study, and summarize existing data from all available sources, relative
to the Everglades problem, the results of its work to be presented in the form
of reports at future meetings of the Society together with recommendations
for action in the future. This authorization was found to fall well within the
framework of the Constitution (Article IV) and a Soil and Water Conservation
Committee subsequently was appointed, Page 64 of this Proceedings, which
has State-wide responsibility in this important field.
NOTE: With the close of this phase of the program, the meeting was
adjourned until the following morning when a joint meeting with the
Florida State Florticultura! Society was scheduled. The total recorded
attendance at the organization meeting was 81. A large part of this
group subscribed to formal membership in the Society in the course
of the meeting or responded favorably to invitations to do so by corres
pondence within a few days following the meeting when the list
was carefully checked.
42


The photographs that follow show something of the natural con
ditions in the open, undeveloped Everglades, past and present, some
of the reclamation and water control relationships, the possibilities
of a considerable range of agricultural plants, including the striking
benefits from the use of certain trace elements on the Everglades peat
and, finally, the great importance of water control and careful land
use planning especially from the standpoint of SOIL CONSERVATION.
FIGURE 1. The Open Glades, looking southeast in the direction of Fort Lauderdale
through a narrow border of elder along the North New River Canal at a position about
12 miles south of Lake Okeechobee. The land cover reaching to the horizon is the char
acteristic sawgrass of the Everglades. Note the bank of water hyacinths along the edge
of the canal. If not held in check this plant multiplies rapidly and soon clogs the channel.
43


FIGURE 2. A close-up of sawgrass (Cladium sp.) from which the main body of the
Everglades soil has been formed. This is an extremely coarse, heavy sedge characterized
by strong, siliceous teeth along either margin as well as the back of the midrib. Normally it
grew to a height of 8 to 10 feet under the natural conditions of protection that existed
in the Everglades prior to general drainage operations. A dense cover of grass of this
nature was exceedingly difficult and even hazardous to penetrate especially with the
facilities for traverse available to early survey parties.
44


FIGURE 3. Impenetrable growth of Custard apple (Anona sp.) that characterized
a narrow belt of high grade muck along the south and east shores of Lake Okeechobee
prior to reclamation activities. It was on account of the growth of this species, which
occurred only on the high grade muck for the most part, that this soil has been known
as Custard apple soil for many years. In formal soil survey reports it is now being
designated as Okeechobee muck. Photo by Dr. Blatchley of Indianapolis about 1910.
FIGURE 4. A view of the Lower Glades in the Everglades National Park area
where the sawgrass meets the mangrove, taken from a position on the Ingraham High
way about ten miles north of Flamingo. The soil profile in this location is made up of
blue-green algae marl to a depth of about three inches over a three inch layer of peaty
muck underlain by about six inches of geologic marl over lime rock.
45


FIGURE 5. An early dredging operation in the open glades, the dredge Everglades
cutting its way through the deep, wet peat characteristic of the area. Note the absence
of any shrub or tree growth whatsoever, entirely to the horizon. Photo taken about 1910
at a position about twelve miles south of Lake Okeechobee by Dr. Blatchley of Indianapolis.
FIGURE 6. Barging supplies into the Lake Okeechobee area through the South
Canal, during the early days of reclamation. With the development of good highways
throughout the region the use of the arterial drainage canals for transportation purposes
has ceased entirely. This latter fact will minimize very considerably the cost of an
effective program of soil and water conservation in the Everglades since this can be
accomplished in the open, undeveloped areas only by restoring the land to its original
condition of overflow as much of the year as possible.
46


FIGURE 7. A natural cover of pigweeds in the Lake Okeechobee area characteristic
of this and other types of wild growth that quickly occupies the land when cultivation
ceases. Such a growth as shown above will develop in the Everglades in six or seven
weeks under late Spring conditions.
47


FIGURE 8. A Storey Gyrolette working on the property of the U. S. Sugar Cor
poration in the deep muck soils of the Upper Glades near Lake Okeechobee. The revolving
tines or plows stir the soil thoroughly to a depth of about 20 inches without turning
it to any appreciable extent. This is proving a valuable operation especially in bringing
newly developed land into production. Unnecessary stirring, cultivation and exposure of soils
of this nature should be strictly avoided, however, in the interest of conservation.
FIGURE 9. Moleing in the muck soils of the Everglades. A torpedo-shaped tool
is drawn behind a thin, shoe-like implement at the lower end of the heavy knife
that projects into the soil from the rear end of the horizontal beam that is slung mid
way between the truss wheels. The depth of the mole is regulated by the windlass.
If carefully done, water control channels (drainage and irrigation) are formed in the
soil by this means which are useful for several seasons. The excavated profile (inset)
shows the natural opening formed by the mole in the soil and the complete manner in
which the cut made by the knife closed (immediately above the opening) after its passage.
From the raggedness of the cut midway between the opening and the surface, however,
it is evident that the knife had accumulated a considerable amount of refpse across its
edge and was shoving it along ahead of it. Note the fibrous character of the peat throughout
the profile especially in the lower depths. A) surface of soil. B) Imperfect line of cut.
C) Perfect line of cut. D) The mole opening formed in the peat.
48


FIGURE 10. General view of part of a series of water table plots installed at the
Everglades Experiment Station while still being planted to a single crop to study the
uniformity of the various areas. Eight different water tables or soil moisture controls, in
cluding two with overhead spray and one with a fluctuating ground water table, are involved
in this study of plant relationships and preferences along with oxidation and subsidence
effects upon the soil itself.
49


FIGURE 11. A section of the Lake Okeechobee dike at the time of planting Bermuda
grass to protect its sloping sides against washing. This is a massive structure designed
to hold the lake in place under any and all conditions. It is one of the vital keys to a
constructive, long-range soil and water conservation program for the Everglades and for
South Florida.
FIGURE 12. An air view of the Port Mayaca development on the eastern shore
of Lake Okeechobee. Note the lake in the background and St. Lucie Canal (the eastern
control outlet) across the upper, right-hand corner flowing towards the Atlantic Ocean.
There is here illustrated an excellent system of water control (drainage and irrigation)
through the use of dikes and pumps as well as wind control through the use of Casuarina
Iepidophloea as a windbreak.
50


FIGURE 13. The key to efficient and economic water control in a great, flatland
area like the Everglades is to be found in highly efficient, low-lift pumps of the type
shown above. Without doubt there has been more and better work done during the
past ten years in the improvement of low-lift pumps for use under South Florida con
ditions than throughout all previous time, with most of the glory for what has been
accomplished falling to Messrs. Roy O. Couch and Norman C. Storey of Grant and Miami,
Florida, respectively. The installation shown is a reversible panel type at the Everglades
Experiment Station.
FIGURE 1 4. The clogged condition of this canal with water hyacinths and grass
suggests the serious problem of canal maintenance for efficient water control that is
to be found under the sub-tropical conditions of the Florida Everglades.
51


FIGURE 15. Response of sugar cane to treatment of the Everglades peat with copper
sulfate. The five Stools on the right had no treatment whatsoever except bluestone
at the rate of thirty pounds per acre. The small plant on the left, characteristic of all
plants on the check plot, received no copper sulfate whatsoever.
FIGURE 16. Response of peanuts to treatment of Everglades peat with the so-
called trace elements. The central plot, foreground, had a complete treatment, except
copper. The plot to the right, with the stake, had the same basic treatment with copper
sulfate included. The central plot, back-ground, is a complete check with no treatment
whatsoever. Inset, left, check plants with no treatment; right, copper sulfate; center,
combination treatment with copper and zinc. The effect of the zinc was to promote an
early response to copper and consequently earlier maturity, the plants of the combination
treatment being practically mature while those receiving only copper were still in full veg
etative growth. Planted May 5; photographed October 31; variety Valencia.
52


FIGURE 1 7. Heavy crops of sugar cane are grown on the rich muck soil of the
Everglades under proper conditions of water control. Note the heavy cover of cane leaves
that remain on the soil in addition to the great mass of new, fibrous roots that develop
in the soil each year. The Athey truss-wheel carts in which the cane is transported from
the field to the cars for loading carry about five tons each.
53


FIGURE 18. A pasture cover at the Everglades Experiment Station suggestive of
the lush, highly nutritive grasses that can be grown on these organic soils, perhaps with
a minimum of drainage from the soil conservation and water control standpoint. The
animals in the picture are purebred Devons.
FIGURE 19. A field of snap beans in the Everglades at harvest time. With the
development of truck crops in this area at a practical maximum, further reclamation of
appreciable acreages in the future shall have to find other types of farming enterprises.
From the soil conservation standpoint it is hoped they may require less cultivation and
exposure of the soil than is necessary for most truck crops.
54


FIGURE 20. Castor beans growing under Everglades conditions show considerable
promise in this area in connection with the new interest that is developing in this plant.
Much remains to be done with this crop in breeding and selection for the purpose or
purposes desired.
FIGURE 21. A great fire raging in the open Everglades over a front of twenty-five
or thirty miles and about that distance or farther from the camera as viewed from the
Everglades Experiment Station looking in the direction of Miami (extreme right) which
is about eighty-five miles distant. During winters of exceptional dryness in the past,
great sections of the Everglades have burned over, frequently with heavy losses of soil.
Smoke and ashes carried to coastal areas from such fires not only have been a source
of great discomfort to the entire population but, at times, also have been so heavy as
actually to interfere with highway traffic even during the daytime.
55


FIGURE 22. Surface subsidence of Everglades soil due to oxidation, compaction and
shrinkage. According to the benchmark shown in the picture the sea-level elevation of
the surface of the land at this point was 18.5 in 1916, when the position was established.
In 1932, the time of the photograph, it was 16.1. Other intermediate levels are indicated
for 1919, 1921 and 1925. There was no evidence or local record of burning having been
involved at any time in this loss. The location is about 4 miles south of Lake Okeechobee
along the North New River Canal at its intersection with the Bolles Canal.
56


FIGURE 23. Another evidence of shrinkage in the muck soils of the Everglades is to
be found in the great surface cracks that develop. The above picture was taken from a
position on highway No. 25 between Belle Glade and West Palm Beach after a sweeping fire
had burned away all dead vegetation and sawgrass. Some of the cracks were found to
extend three or four feet into the soil. Note the ash on some of the isolated blocks in
dicating the soil was burned to a depth of 4 to 8 inches in many places.
FIGURE 24. The complete loss of a levee of considerable cross section by burning
indicates a further need for the best possible water control at all times. Note that the
soil beneath the levee burned to a considerable depth below the level of the adjacent land.
57




Joint Session with the Florida State Horticultural
Society
Wednesday morning, April 19, 1939
The joint meeting was called to order at 9:30 A. M. and was
presided over by Dr. H. C. Henricksen, a member of the Executive
Committee of both Societies. The papers presented at this meeting
are to be published in the Proceedings of the Horticultural Society,
which may be consulted for full details. Accordingly, only a brief in
dication of the content of each paper is given in the following summary
of the program.
1.The Cycle of Organic Matter in Soils.
Dr. F. B. Smith, Department of Chemistry and Soils, Flor
ida Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
The author outlined the functions of organic matter in agricul
tural soils and stressed the importance of maintaining an adequate
supply of it in the sandy soils of the South. Methods of supplying
organic matter are described and evaluated.
2.A Rapid Laboratory Method for the Determination of
Exchangeable Magnesium in the Soil.
Dr. Michael Peech, Soil Chemist, Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
A new method for the rapid analysis of soils for their content
of exchangeable magnesium is presented. Data are summarized from
the analyses of soils collected from 5 19 commercial groves. The
exchangeable magnesium content of the soil, as determined by this
method, is shown to be correlated with the presence or absence of
bronzing of the foliage.
3.The Adaptability of Rapid Laboratory Methods to the
Study of Highly Organic Soils.
Dr. W. T. Forsee, Soil Chemist, Everglades Experiment
Station, Belle Glade, Florida.
A number of the more common methods of testing soils are
without value for the analysis of peats and mucks since the extractants
used dissolve such quantities of highly colored organic matter that the
usual color and turbidity tests cannot be carried out in the resulting
extracts. In this paper, the author presents a system of analysis which
has been devised specifically to obviate this difficulty.
59


4. Florida Citrus Malnutrition Leaves.
G. M. Bahrt, Division of Soil Fertility, Bureau of Plant
Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Orlando, Florida.
A description is given of various leaf patterns encountered in
citrus species with a discussion of their interpretation as symptoms of
known deficiencies in the light of the authors experience through
several years of research in this field.
5. Question Box.
R. S. Edsall, Wabasso, Florida.
Mr. Edsall conducted a highly interesting Question and Answer
session. Maintenance of soil organic matter and corrective treatments
for trace element deficiencies commanded the greatest interest in this
part of the program.
60


Committees

The chief objective in setting up the subject matter committees
provided by Article IV of the constitution is, naturally, the advance
ment of the whole purpose and work of the Society. This can be
done only by keeping the committees as active as possible.
Committees do good and accomplish their purpose not merely by
the chairman or various members giving an undue portion of their
time to the work, but to a greater extent, it is believed, by having a well
thought out plan of action and seeing to it that each member contributes
his proportionate share. Accordingly, that chairman is wise who fits his
program carefully to the time of his committee members, making sure,
however, that the effort of each, no matter how small, contributes in
a definite way to the accomplishment of the objective for which the
committee was formed.
Inasmuch as some of the most important work of the Society will
be developed by the various subject matter committees outlined
below it will be an important duty of the Executive Committee to assist
the various chairmen in every way possible. At such time as it is
impossible for the chairman of a given committee to continue actively
in his assignment he should be relieved by the Executive Committee
and a new chairman named. Further than this the Executive Com
mittee will depend very largely upon the chairmen of the various
committees to report upon the activity of their members and for rec
ommendations as to names to be dropped or new members to be
appointed.
The Secretary of the Society will serve as secretary of all com
mittees of which the chairman does not prefer to choose a secretary
from his own group.
I. MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE
Secretary of S. S. S. F
Mr. Jack O. Holmes
Mr. C. D. Kime
Mr. W. J. Adair
Mr. Hibbard Casselberry
Mr. J. O. Zipperer
Mr. John R. Wilson
Gainesville (Chairman)
Tampa
Gainesville
Jacksonville
Winter Park
Ft. Myers
West Palm Beach
The work of the Membership Committee is exceedingly important
to the development of the Society. Its personnel will largely be made
up of representatives from other active organizations in the State hav
ing a definite interest in soils work. This group will be actively res
ponsible for maintaining the membership and interesting new members
in the objectives of the Society.
61


II. SOIL SURVEY COMMITTEE
Mr. George F. Westbrook
Mr. S. H. Bowman
Mr. Ernest R. Graham ....
Mr. G. W. Lee
Mr. Ed. Scott
Mr. Wayne Thomas
Clermont (Chairman)
Clermont
Miami
Hastings
Everglades City
Plant City
The most important responsibility of the Soil Survey Committee
will be to impress upon the members of our Society in particular and
upon the citizens of the state in general, Floridas dire need for an
aggressive soil survey program.
The only business-like approach to our soil or land problems from
any standpoint is upon the soil survey basis. Defined in the simplest
possible terms, a soil survey is little more than a carefully developed
inventory which treats individual types of soil as natural objects and
classifies them accordingly. Such a survey will show us what soils we
have, where they are in the state and how much of each we have,
in the aggregate, whether for a given area or for the state as a whole.
It is also the only safe and satisfactory basis for grouping soils into
classes and studying the capability of the land in a systematic and
efficient manner.
At the present time satisfactory up-to-date soil surveys and maps
are available for only two counties and the editions of both of these
are practically exhausted. All other surveys are not only out of date
but also out of print and entirely unavailable at the present time. The
soil survey is needed as a definite basis not only for our research pro
gram in soils but for extension work, land appraisal, land use planning,
road building and a wide variety of other purposes as well.
III. METHODS OF ANALYSIS COMMITTEE
Mr. L. H. Rogers
Mr. R. A. Carrigan ....
Dr. W. T. Forsee, Jr.
Dr. W. L. Lott
Dr. Michael Peech
Mr. R. P. Thornton
Mr. G. M. Volk
Gainesville (Chairman)
Gainesville (Secretary)
Belle Glade
Clewiston
Lake Alfred
Tampa
Gainesville
The state-wide interest that is developing in soil analysis and
testing gives the program of this committee a place of immediate im
portance in the work of the Society. It will be responsible for eval
uating methods in current use and recommending new ones from time
to time as they become available from one source or another and are
found adaptable to our Florida soils. It will doubtless work closely
with a similar committee that has been set up in the Agricultural Ex
periment Station to study methods of analysis for soils and related
materials.
62


IV. TERMINOLOGY COMMITTEE
Dr. Michael Peech
Dr. R. V. Allison
Mr. J. R. Henderson
Dr. F. B. Smith
Mr. G. M. Volk
Lake Alfred (Chairman)
Gainesville
Gainesville
Gainesville
Gainesville
The literature of Soil Science contains a considerable number of
terms referring to very practical materials and matters that sometimes
are rather difficult for the lay-reader to grasp. By way of example
pH, base exchange, soil colloids, availability (of fertilizer
elements), etc., might be mentioned. It will be the purpose of the
Terminology Committee to assemble the most commonly used ex
pressions in this field that seem to be giving the most trouble and
prepare a report for distribution to the membership that will furnish a
clear, simple statement of the meaning and application of these terms
employing simple, graphic means wherever it may be of advantage to
do so. It is believed such a presentation will materially assist our public
discussion of soil problems since these terms will thereby rapidly
become a part of the vocabulary and understanding of all who are
sufficiently interested to give them the requisite amount of study. The
membership may be canvassed, in part at least, to determine what
terms should be considered first.
V. RESEARCH COMMITTEE
Dr. L. W. Gaddum
Mr. W. LE. Barnett ..
Mr. Clarence Bitting ..
Mr. H. C. Brown
Mr. R. A. Carlton
Mr. Luther Chandler
Mr. Stephen Chase
Mr. R. O. Couch
Dr. Roy Cross
Dr. David Fairchild ...
Mr. F. W. Heiser
Dr. H. C. Henricksen
Dr. L. R. Jones
Mr. H. I. Mossbarger
Dr. Wilson Popenoe .
Mr. Waldo Sexton
Mr. Chas. R. Short ....
Dr. T. M. Simpson
Mr. N. C. Storey
Dr. J. W. Turrentine
Dr. S. A. Waksman ...
Mr. B. F. Williamson
Dr. R. C. Williamson
Mr. Gar Wood
Gainesville (Chairman)
Mt. Dora
New York City and Clewiston
Clermont
West Palm Beach
Homestead
Dunedin
Grant
Kansas City, Missouri
Coconut Grove
Fellsmere
Eustis
Madison, Wisconsin
Miami
Guatemala City, Guatemala
Vero Beach
Clermont
Gainesville
Miami
Washington, D. C.
.... New Brunswick, New Jersey
Gainesville
Gainesville
Detroit and Miami
63


Through the wide contact and diverse interests of the various
members of the Research Committee with agricultural conditions over
the state and outside of the state, many constructive ideas should be
forthcoming as to what is most needed in a soils research program
for Florida and how it can be most effectively coordinated with other
agencies in the state having interest in this field or in closely allied
fields.
Naturally the Research Committee shall have to give urgent sup
port to the Soil Survey Committee and, in turn, expect much from the
committee on Methods of Analysis. Many of the other committees of
the Society among them, Soil and Water Conservation, Extension,
Tropical Soils, Forest Relationships, will be looking to the Re
search Committee for assistance and guidance. Thus the Committee
on Fertilizer Recommendations will be particularly dependent on re
search for definite help once the great mass of data and recommendat
ions that are available have been assembled and analyzed as a basis
for further study.
VI. SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION COMMITTEE
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Dr.
Mr.
Dr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
George B. Hills .
John A. Baker ...
J. E. Beardsley ..
A. P. Black
V. V. Bowman ....
Geo. F. Catlett ....
B. S. Clayton
C. Kay Davis
F. C. Elliot
C. L. V. Exselsen
Herman Gunter
Ben Herr
H. R. Leach
Frazier Rogers
D. S. Wallace
W. Turner Wallis
J. Mark Wilcox
Jacksonville (Chairman)
New York City
Clewiston
Gainesville
Gainesville
Jacksonville
Belle Glade
Ft. Lauderdale
Tallahassee
New York and Miami
Tallahassee
West Palm Beach
Washington, D. C.
Gainesville
Ocala
West Palm Beach (Secretary)
Miami
The most important tangible asset of the State, next to the soil, is
its water supply. Consequently its efficient conservation and use is a
most important and practical problem especially since, under most con
ditions, in conserving and otherwise properly handling the natural wat
er supply we also protect and maintain the productive capacity of the
soil.
The first responsibility of the Soil and Water Conservation
Committee will be to examine the field from a State-wide viewpoint.
Following such an examination, it would naturally be expected that the
area with the most critical problems would receive first attention.
64


Inasmuch as the general field of this committee divides rather
sharply into two sections, one of a technical nature having to do with
engineering and other technological aspects, and the other of a public
relations nature involving land ownership and tax delinquency prob
lems, it is expected that sub-committees to cover these respective phases
will be formed.
VII. FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS COMMITTEE
Mr. W. L. Tait
Mr. G. M. Bahrt
Mr. J. F. Bazemore
Dr. J. R. Beckenbach
Mr. G. H. Blackmon
Mr. R. E. Blaser
Dr. Frederick Boyd ..
Mr. John Camp
Dr. Dana G. Coe
Mr. E. F. DeBusk
Mr. R. S. Edsall
Mr. W. M. Fifield
Mr. B. F. Floyd
Mr. T. J. Hanley
Mr. J. R. Henderson
Dr. F. S. Jamison
Mr. J. G. Kelley
Mr. C. D. Kime
Mr. J. H. Logan
Dr. A, R. Merz
Mr. M. U. Mounts
Dr. J. R. Neller
Mr. W. T. Nettles
Mr. R. E. Norris
Mr. F. M. OByrne ...
Mr. A. J. Peacock
Mr. W. H. Sachs
Mr. J. Lee Smith
Mr. J. J. Taylor
Mr. H. A. Thullbery .
Mr. G. M. Volk
Mr. W. F. Ward
Mr. J. D. Warner
Mr. Alec White
Winter Haven (Chairman)
Orlando
Orlando
Bradenton
Gainesville
Gainesville
Belle Glade
Gainesville
Lakeland
Gainesville
Wabasso
Homestead
Davenport
Nichols
Gainesville
Gainesville
Blountstown
Gainesville
Clearwater
Washington, D. C.
West Palm Beach
Belle Glade
Gainesville
Tavares
Lake Wales
Plant City
Orlando
Gainesville
Tallahassee
Haines City
Gainesville
Brooksville
Quincy
Tampa
For a long time the fertilizer situation in Florida has been regarded
as being so complex and involved as to defy comprehensive analysis
and study. Such a view would seem to be supported somewhat by
the fact that during the fiscal year 1938-39 nearly 8500 fertilizer
brands and special mixtures were registered in the office of the State
Chemist in Tallahassee!
65


This is doubtless due in good part to the fact that there is such
a wide variety of plants grown in the state on a commercial and sub
commercial basis and for a great diversity of other purposes; also
to the fact that our soils are so complex and variable and, as yet, have
been systematically surveyed only to a very limited extent; and furth
ermore, more and more elements in the trace element group are
coming into the field of nutrition; and finally, the temperature range
from North to South in the state and the variation in moisture from
season to season also adds much to the already complex situation.
In the face of such a thoroughly complex situation and in the ab
sence of anything approximating an adequate research program in soil
fertility to progressively keep abreast of the rapidly pyramiding de
mands there has developed, Topsy-like, exactly what we now have.
In the aggregate it does look complex. Broken into those all-important
components, the requirements of the individual plant and soil, it be
comes definitely manageablein fact, comparatively simple.
The first work of the Fertilizer Recommendations Committee
shall have to be the grouping of its personnel according to the fields
of information with which its members are most familiar and in which
they can make the best contributions. Many of the individuals with
special knowledge of particular crops such as field crops, truck crops,
citrus, etc., might well serve as chairmen of sub-committees for that
particular field of effort with freedom to extend the membership of
their units and of the committee as a whole, if this appears necessary
in order to get on with the work in an effective manner.
Before actually starting the work, doubtless it will be found con
venient to develop a systematic manner of recording the ideas, pract
ices and data now extant and in common use relating to the fertilizer
and cultural needs of the individual crop and the individual soil, break
ing it down on a factorial basis until adequate integration and study
can be made of the whole.
Once the information is individualized in this way and so arranged
that it can be approached in an understanding manner, much may be
done in grouping that pertaining either to soils or plants or both.
Where information is inadequate or wholly lacking, however, we should
face the situation squarely and plan our research program accordingly.
As a matter of fact, it is anticipated that the findings of the com
mittee may be of more value to the Research Committee as a back
ground for planning further work than for any direct usefulness they
may have in the applied field. In any event it is an interesting field
of effort and its critical importance bespeaks the sympathy and assis
tance of the whole Society for the membership of this committee.
66


VIII.TEACHING COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. F. B. Smith
Professor of Soil Microbiology, University of Florida, Gainesville
The function of this committee shall be not only to encourage
the teaching of soils but to improve the character of the training that
is given on all levels of instruction.
Education is the key to a great many of the social problems with
which we are struggling. What will it profit us to develop information
by intensive research in soils or any other agricultural subject if there
is not available trained leadership in the field to put it effectively into
practice?
The personnel and program of this committee will be developed
during the coming year and is certain to find a field that is rich in
opportunity.
IX.EXTENSION COMMITTEE
Chairman: Mr. Ed. L. Ayers
County Agent, Manatee County, Bradenton
In many parts of the country it is sometimes thought that exten
sion work in agriculture is getting ahead of research, as it were. Since
extension work in soils in Florida is still to be initiated for the most
part, obviously we have not yet arrived at the above danger by a
considerable margin.
In Mr. Ayers the Society has a capable salesman who knows the
problem well. He now has the year before him to get his group to
gether and get on with the task.
X.TROPICAL SOILS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. H. H. Bennett
Chief, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D. C.
Much has been said, especially during the past two or three
years, regarding the vitalization of our relationships with our Latin
American neighbors to the South. In all of this, one has heard little
mention of such an humble approach to the problem as through the
strong community of interest that is being found in soil and plant
relationships and the vital challenging problems associated with them
everywhere.
To the extent that this is true, it is believed we have neglected
a channel of contact that is more powerful in its own way than any
thing which has been known to diplomacy of the conventional kind.
Further than this, our problems here in Florida have more in common
with those of the Inter-American nations than do those of any other
State.
67


In asking Dr. Bennett to accept the Chairmanship of the Com
mittee on Tropical Soils we had in mind not only the broad experience
he has had in this field and his deep technical interest in these soils but
also those qualities of leadership which have raised him in a few years
from the position of an individual worker to the head of one of the
most important Bureaus in the entire Government when measured
by the rapidity of its growth and the essential good it has done.
XI. FOREST RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Prof. H. S. Newins
Director, School of Forestry, University of Florida, Gainesville
It is feared that too frequently we look upon growing trees as nat
ural entities that will develop in spite of any progressive changes that
might be taking place in the soil environment either as a result of their
growth or for other reasons. The cycle of the forest crop is so long
that alterations in plant and soil characteristics and growth rate may not
be too quickly discernible.
The essential thinness of some of our Florida soils upon which
we may wish to continue to grow trees for many centuries is such that
perhaps we should be especially solicitous of what the individual timber
crop is removing from the land and just what should be done to main
tain the productivity of various types of soil in terms of forest growth
in the future.
All of this is, of course, intimately bound up with other soil prob
lems such as moisture supply, the effect of burning forest cover, etc.,
which combine to make an interesting field for discussion and study.
If the committee to be developed can match in vigor and enthusiasm
that of our newly established School of Forestry, then we shall indeed
have added a lively adjunct to our Forum.
XII. ANIMAL RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. R. B. Becker
Animal Husbandman, Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville
In consequence of the important discoveries that have been made
during the past few years in the field of plant, animal and human
nutrition that center around the apparently vital role of several of the
trace elements in living processes, a new and rapidly growing interest
has developed in soil and plant relationships from this standpoint.
Insofar as Florida is concerned there are, for instance, extensive
areas of our pasture and range lands that are known to produce for
age and pasture plants deficient in certain of these elements. An im
portant beginning has been made in this study but it is fully recognized
as only a start. Work of this nature must be developed on the basis
68


of soil type and plant quality if we are to have a picture of the prob
lem that is clear and sound from every standpoint.
Doctor Becker and his associates in the Department of Animal
Husbandry have made good progress in attacking this broad problem
in this basic manner which will not only encourage fundamental work
on soil and plant relationships, but furnish information that is vital
in the field of human nutrition. This is particularly true since man
requires both plant and animal sources of food in his diet so the con
dition of his nutrition, as related to the soil, is not only affected dir
ectly by the plant but indirectly by it, as well, through the animal.
XIII. HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. Chester F. Ahmann
1043 West Masonic Street, Gainesville
Whether we have it clearly in mind at all times or not, the true
objective of practically all our agricultural research and study is the
comfort and well-being of man. As the result of several years of
specialized training and of active research in the field of human nutrit
ion while connected with the Agricultural Experiment Station, it is
doubtful if there is any physician or other individual in the State who
has the picture of human dependence on food qualities derived from
the soil so clearly in mind as Doctor Ahmann.
As a practicing physician Dr. Ahmann continues to have daily
opportunity for case studies in this field, many of them the epitome
of human misfortune and despair. The situation is, of course, much
worse in some sections of the State than in others. It will be the
particular function of this committee to effect and maintain the strong
est possible liaison between the medical profession on the one hand
and the broad field of agricultural research involving soil, plant, animal
and human relationships on the other, which associations and contacts
can be so mutually helpful, if sympathetically maintained, in advanc
ing the study and care of this phase of our social problem from a num
ber of standpoints.
XIV. RESOLUTIONS AND PRESS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Mr. W. F. Therkildson
Editor, All Florida, The Miami Herald
The responsibility of the Resolutions and Press Committee of any
organization that has a healthy desire to grow and do things is so
well known as scarcely to deserve comment especially when our Soc
iety has had the good fortune to find such a Chairman as Mr. W. F.
Therkildson to take over.
69


All Florida is rapidly coming to know Therk through his
ALL FLORIDA' page that appears regularly in the Miami Sunday
Herald, The editorial skill with which he has developed this assign
ment is a real tribute to the ingenuity, industry and experience that
stand behind his daily routine.
However the Society may develop in the future and whatever
it may accomplish, it is certain to be heavily indebted to the overall
work of this group. Accordingly the Executive Committee is asking
Mr. Therkildson to develop the personnel and program of his com
mittee as best fits his ideas and plans for the future.
70


Charter Members of the Society
The Executive Committee is confident that all persons interested
in soils work from any standpoint in Florida, will be pleased to learn
that our Soil Science Society closed its first official year with a charter
membership roll totaling 375 names.
ABBOTT, JOHN B., Dir. Agr. Research, Am. Cyanamide Co., 3 0 Rockefeller Plaza, New
York, N. Y.
ADAIR, W. J., Florist, Box 471, Jacksonville.
ADDERLEY, J. C., Agriculturist, Box 43 0, Pensacola.
AHMANN, DR. C. F., Physician and Surgeon, 1 043 W. Masonic St., Gainesville.
ALLABAND, WILLIAM A., Area Conservationist, S. C. S.. Tallahassee.
ALLISON, DR. R. V., Head, Dept, of Soils, U. of Fla., Gainesville.
ALSMEYER, LOUIS H., County Agricultural Agent, Sebring.
ANDERSON, E. J., Bookkeeper, 320 Valencia Rd., W. Palm Beach.
ANDERSON, FRED S., Nurseryman, 33 1 Tarpon Drive, Ft. Lauderdale.
ANDREWS, DR. F. B., Assoc. Truck Horticulturist Everglades Experiment Station, Belle
Glade.
ARNAU, N. L., Wabasso.
AYERS, ED. L., County Agricultural Agent, Bradenton.
BAHRT, GEO. M., Assoc. Soil Technologist, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Orlando.
BAILES, S. E., Salesman, Box 64, Eustis,
BAILEY, E. R., Tung Grower, Box 202, Ocala.
BAILEY, R. Y., Regional Agronomist, Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, South
Carolina.
BAKER, JOHN H., Executive Director, Nat. Assoc, of Audubon Societies, 1006 Fifth Ave.,
New York, N. Y.
BANNING, FORREST D., Civil Engineer, Fla. Power and Light Co., Palatka.
BARBER, RAYMOND, V., Armour Fertilizer Works, Palmetto.
BARNETT, GORDON J., Fern Grower. Fern Park.
BARNETT, W. LE., Chairman, State Research Committee, Florida Citrus Growers, Inc.,
Mt. Dora.
BARTLUM, W. LEONARD, Pres., Florida Agr. Supply Co., Orlando.
BAUMGARTNER, T. R., Landscape Gardener, Box 3 28, North Miami.
BAZEMORE, J. F., State Manager, Chilean Nitrate Educational Bureau, 5 6 East Pine St.,
Orlando.
BEARDSLEY, J. E., Real Estate and Farming, Clewiston.
BEARDSLEY, J. W., Student, University of Florida, Clewiston.
BECKENBACH, DR. J. R., Truck Horticulturist in Charge, Bradenton Field Station,
Bradenton.
BECKER, DR. R. B., Dairy Husbandman, Fla. Agr. Expt. Sta., Gainesville.
BECKMAN, B. J., Gardener, 3 747 Main Highway, Coconut Grove.
BELL, DR. C. E., Associate Chemist, Fla. Agr. Expt. Sta., Gainesville.
BENNETT, GARDNER, Dist. Supervisor, Farm Security Adms., 3 120 San Jose St., Tampa.
BENNETT, DR. H. H., Chief. Soil Conservation Service, U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
BENSON, NELS, Grad. Student, State Col. of Wash., Pullman. Wash.
BERRY, J. B., Soil Chemist, Waverly Growers Corp., Winter Haven.
BESTOR, HORACE A., Civil Engineer, U. S. Sugar Corp., Clewiston.
BETZNER, L. C., Hardware Merchant, Belle Glade.
BITTING, CLARENCE R., President, U S. Sugar Corporation, New York, N. Y.
BLACK, DR. A. P., Prof, of Agr. Chemistry, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
BLACKMON, G. H., Head, Dept, of Hort., Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
BLASER, JOHN A., Pres.-Mgr., Royal Palm Nurseries, Oneco.
BLASER, ROY E., Asst. Agronomist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
BOLTON, W. E., Asst. Agr. Supt., Western Division, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
BOOTH, W. S., Citrus Grower, Conner.
BOOTS, V. A., Farm Supplies, South Bay.
BORDA, EUGENE, Grad. Student in Soils, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
BOUIS, C. G., President, Florida Fruit Company, Fort Meade.
BOURNE, DR. B. A., Chief, Agr. Research, U. S. Sugar Corp., Clewiston.
BOWMAN, S. H., Pres., Fla. Assoc. Real Estate Boards, Clermont.
BOWMAN, V. V., Asst, to the Director, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
BOYD, E. M., Eagle Lake.
BOYD, DR. FREDERICK, Asst. Agronomist, Everglades Exp. Sta., Belle Glade.
BRADDOCK, R. L., Farmer, Belle Glade.
BRAGDON, K. E., Production Mgr., Winter Haven Citrus Growers Association, Winter
Haven.
BREGGER, DR. THOMAS, Sugarcane Physiologist, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle
Glade.
BRIGGS, W. R., Horticulturist, Growers Fertilizer Co., Ft. Pierce.
BRIGHT, JAS. H., President, Martha Bright Ranch, Hialeah.
BROOKS, DR. A. N., Plant Pathologist, Plant City Field Station, Box 522, Lakeland.
BROOKS, J. H., Manager, East Coast District International Fruit Corp, Peters.
BROWER, J. K.t Island Nurseries, Box 110, Palm Beach.
BROWN, H. C., Mgr. Am. Diatomite Co., Clermont.
71


BROWN, HAMLIN L., D airy Husbandman, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
BROWN, M. L., Lab. Asst., Citrus Exp. Station, Lake Alfred.
BROWN, W. R., The Brown Company, Berlin, N. H.
BRYAN, DON S., Student, Bartow High School, Bartow.
BRYAN, R. L., Secy.-Treas., Lake Garfield Nurseries Company, Bartow.
BRYANT, F. E., Agr. Supt., Eastern Division, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Azcar.
BUCK, DR. WILLIAM J., Physician, Belle Glade.
BUIE, DR. T. S., Regional Conservator, Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, S. C.
BURTON, CLIFFORD H., Fern Grower, Crescent City.
BUTLER, ALFRED F., Agricultural Technologist, United Fruit Co., Watson Grove, Gregory
Park P. O., Jamaica, B. W. I.
CAIN, THOMAS L., Jr., County Agricultural Agent, Cocoa.
CAIvIP, JOHN P., Asst. Agronomist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
CAREL, E. G., Manager, Hector Supply Company, West Palm Beach.
CARLTON, R. A., Agr. Agent, Seaboard Air Line R. R., West Palm Beach.
CARNES, ARVY, Regional Engineer, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
CARRIGAN, R. A., Asst. Chemist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
CARTWRIGHT, A. B., Farmer, Chosen.
CASLER, E. T., Chemical Supt., Phosphate Mining Co., Nichols.
CASSELBERRY, HIBBARD, Winter Park Ferneries, Winter Park.
CATLETT, DR. G. F., Chief Engineer, State Board of Health, Jacksonville.
CHALMERS, J. G., Chemical Salesman, F. W. Berk and Co., 420 Lexington Ave., New York,
N. Y.
CHANDLER, LUTHER, Grower, Homestead.
CHASE, STEPHEN, Citrus Grower, Dunedin.
CHATELIER. DR. PAUL, Chemist, 43 60 Central Ave., St. Petersburg.
CLARK, A. S., Eustis.
CLAYTON, B. S., Drainage Engineer, Soil Conservation Service, Everglades Exp. Station,
Belle Glade.
CLEMENTS, W. B., Clements Chemical Pest Service, West Palm Beach.
COACHMAN, WALTER F., Jr., Pres. McLin-Coachman Co., Inc., Jacksonville.
COE, DR. DANA G., Citrus Grower, Mossmoor Estate, Rt. 2, Lakeland.
COLLINS, Wm. R., Citrus Grower, 80 Mt. Tom Road, New Rochelle, N. Y., (Mandarin, Fla.)
COMMANDER, C. C., Gen. Manager, Florida Citrus Exchange, Box 23 49, Tampa.
CONKLING, W. DONALD, Citrus Culture Corporation, Eustis.
CONRAD, FRED, Gardener, 3 250 South Miami Ave., Miami.
COOPER, DR. WILLIAM C., Associate Physiologist, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A.,
Orlando.
CORRIGAN, FRANCIS H., Poultryman and Grove Owner. Bradenton.
COUCH, R. O., Couch Manufacturing Company, Grant.
COWGILL, CARL F., Nurseryman, 205 Lois Avenue, St. Petersburg.
CROSS, DR. ROY, Chemist, 700 Baltimore Ave., Kansas City, Mo.
CRUMPTON, R. T., Gardening, Boca Grande.
DAETWYLER, M. J., Landscape Nurseryman, 5 0 E. Colonial St., Orlando.
DANCY, R. C., Fertilizer Salesman, 3216 Emperado St., Tampa.
DAVIS, C. KAY, Area Conservationist, S, C. S., 801 Sweet Bldg., Ft. Lauderdale.
DAVIS, DR. ROBERT L., Assoc. Agronomist, S. C. S., Belle Glade.
DAVIS, DR. R. O. E., Fertilizer Research Div., U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
DeBUSK, E. F., Citriculturist, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
DERRYBERRY, W. N., Superintendent of Estate, 6204 South Sta., W. Palm Beach.
DEW, JAMES A., President, Palm Beach Peat Co., Box 13 2, West Palm Beach.
DOUGLAS, Wm. B., Agronomist, Fellsmere Sugar Producers Association, Fellsmere.
DUFF, WALTER W-, Attorney, 135 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, Ill.
DUKES, HUGH, Asst. Soil Surveyor, S. C. S., Graceville.
duPUIS, DR. J. G., Physician, Surgeon and Farmer, 6043 N. E. 2nd Ave., Miami.
duPUIS, JOHN G., Jr., Dairyman, Box W., Little River Sta., Miami.
EDDINS, DR. A. H., Plant Pathologist, Hastings Field Sta., Hastings.
EDSALL, HENRY J., Citrus Grove Manager, Bradenton.
EDSALL, ROBERT S., Agriculturist, Am. Fruit Growers, Inc., Wabasso.
ELEUTHERA LIMITED, Hatvhet Bay, Eleuthera, Bahamas.
ELLIOT, F. C., Civil Engineer, Trustee Internal Improvement Fund, Tallahassee.
ELLIS, ROY H., Insecticide and Fungicide Manufacturer, 1210 Kuhl Ave., Orlando.
ELY, C. W., Farmer, South Bay.
ERCK, GEORGE H., Farmer, Weirsdale.
EVANS, CHARLES B., Asst. Soil Technologist, S. C. S., 801 Sweet Bldg., Ft. Lauderdale.
EVANS, W. E., County Agricultural Agent, Sarasota.
EXsELSEN, CARL L. V., Attorney, 813-14 Ingraham Bldg., Miami.
FAIRCHILD, DR. DAVID, Plant Explorer, Coconut Grove.
FEHMERLING, G. B., Chemist, Citrus Exp. Sta., Lake Alfred.
FEINBERG, IRVING, Research Chemist, Box 118, Sanford.
FIFIELD, W. M., Horticulturist, Acting in Charge, Sub-Tropical Experiment Station,
Homestead.
FLANDERS, FRED A., Civil Engineer, U. S. Engineers, Moore Haven.
THE FLORIDA GROWER, Bert Livingston, Assoc. Editor, Box 23 5 0, Tampa.
FLOYD, BAYARD F., Vice-Pres. Wilson and Toomer Fertilizer Company, Davenport.
FORSEE, DR. W. T., Jr., Associate Chemist, Everglades Exp. Sta., Belle Glade.
FT. LAUDERDALE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, August Burghard, Exec. Sec.,
Ft. Lauderdale.
FOURMY, JOHN V., Chemist, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Azcar.
72


FRANCIS, JAMES G., Chemist, Am. Liquid Fertilizer Co.; 129 Front St., Marietta, Ohio.
FREE, B. Y., Grower, Belle Glade.
FUGATE, J. BRYANT, Nurseryman, Boca Grande.
FULLER, GLENN L., Chief, Regional Physical Surveys, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
GADDUM, DR. L. W., General College, University of Florida, Gainesville.
GALL, OWEN, Junior Soil Surveyer, S. C. S., Hope, Arkansas.
GARY, W. Y., Assistant State Chemist, Tallahassee.
GLAZIER, E., Supt. H. C. Phipps Estate, Box 492, Palm Beach.
GRAHAM. ERNEST R., Dairyman and Farmer, Miami.
GREATHOUSE, DR. LUCIEN H., Chemical Engineer, Citrus Exp. Sta., Lake Alfred
GREEN, THEODORE C., Soil Scientist, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
GREGG, A. A., Florist, Box 2423, West Pa,lm Beach.
GUNN, COLIN, State Coordinator, S. C. S., Gainesville.
GUNTER, HERMAN, Geologist, State Board of Conservation, Tallahassee.
HAINES CITY CITRUS GROWERS ASSOC., Haines City .
HALL, JOHN C., Traffic Representative, Merchants and Miners Line, Miami.
HAMPSON, C. M., Agr. Economist, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
HANDLEMAN, HENRY C., Nurseryman, Lake Wales.
HANEY, H. L., Celery Grower, Belle Glade.
HANLEY, T. J., Comptroller, Phosphate Mining Co., Nichols.
HARTT, E. W., Citrus Grower, Box 3 5 6, Avon Park.
HAWKINS, CARL W., Executive Vice-Pres., Model Land Co., St. Augustine.
HEARN, W. E., Regional Inspector, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
HEISER, F. W., Gen. Manager, Fellsmere Sugar Producers Association, Fellsmere.
HELMS, H. B., Area Agronomist, S. C. S.. Tallahassee.
HENDERSON, J. R., Assoc. Chemist, Dept, of Soils, Fla. Agr. Exp. Station, Gainesville.
HENDRICKSON, B. H., Project Supervisor, Southern Piedmont Experiment Station, Athens,
Georgia.
HENRICKSEN, DR. H. C., The Borinquen Research Laboratory, Eustis.
HERR, BEN, Executive Secretary, Okeechobee Flood Control Board, West Palm Beach.
HILL, ARTHUR M., Jr., Citriculturist, Box 1123, Vero Beach.
HILLS, GEO. B., Consulting Engineer, Box 4817, Jacksonville.
HOCKNEY. GEORGE, Gardener, Box 2193, Sta. A., Palm Beach.
HOLLY HILL FRUIT PRODUCTS, Inc., R. M. Atkins, Pres., Daytona Beach.
HOLMES, JACK O., Landscape Contractor, Box 417, Tampa.
HOOPER. H. P., Gardener, 2 7 Star Island, Miami Beach.
HORNBURG, DR. P. H., Agronomist, The Organic Nitrogen Inst., Norfolk, Virginia.
HOUGHTALING, FRANCIS S., Farmer, Box 549, Miami.
HOUGHTALING, N. E., Truck Farmer, Box 5 49, Miami.
HOWARD, R. P., Agricultural Economist, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
HUGHES, R. C., Research Asst. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
HUNDERTMARK, B. W., Field Asst. U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
HUNTER, J. H., Asst. Soil Technologist, Bureau Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Albany,
Georgia.
HURLEBAUS, E. H., Production Manager, Clearwater Citrus Growers Association, Clearwater.
JACKSON, R. D., Jackson Grain Company, Tampa.
JACOB, KENNETH D., Chemist, Fertilizer Research Division, Bureau of Plant Industry,
U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
JAMISON, DR. F. S., Truck Horticulturist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Station, Gainesville.
JERNIGAN, W. P., Asst. Agr. Supt., U. S. Sugar Corp., Azcar.
JOHNSON, JESSE W., Nurseryman, Route 1, Largo.
JOHNSTONE. WILLIAM, Florist and Nurseryman, 1209 Central Ave., St. Petersburg.
JONES, H. W., Asst. Soil Surveyor, S. C. S., Graceville.
JONES, LUTHER, Realtor and Farmer, Belle Glade.
JONES, L. R., Emeritus Prof, of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin, Madison,
Wisconsin.
KEENAN, EDWARD T., Keenan Soil Laboratory, Frostproof.
KELBERT, DAVID G. A., Asst. Plant Pathologist, Bradenton Field Station, Bradenton.
KELLEY, E. R., Ornamental Gardens, 1018 N. W. 2nd St., Miami.
KELLEY, JOHN G., County Agricultural Agent, Blountstown.
KEW, THEODORE, Chemist, 313 E. Rollins Ave., Orlando.
KIDDER, R. W., Asst. Animal Husbandman, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
KILGORE SEED CO., H. R. Manee, Vice-President, Plant City.
KIME, C. D., Sr., Farm Products Agent, Tenn. Coal, Iron and R. R. Co., Box 61, Gainesville.
KIME C. D., Jr., Graduate Student in Soils, University of Florida, Gainesville.
KINCAID, DR. R. R., Assoc. Plant Pathologist, North Florida Experiment Station, Quincy.
KING, BATTY, Nurseryman, Estero.
KING, FRANK C., Agr. Manager, Brown Company, Shawano.
KIRCHMAN, A. ., Oil Distributor, Belle Glade.
KLATTS, L. E., Salesman, Lake Jem.
KLEIN. MILTON A., Gardener, Star Route, Box 150, W. Palm Beach.
KNOWLES, DR. H. L.. Asst. Professor of Physics, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
KOPF A. C., Nueva Gerona, Isle of Pines, Cuba.
KROME, WILLIAM H., Fruit Grower, Box 596 Homestead
KUNZE, A. E., Chief Metallurgist, Tenn. Coal, Iron and R. R. Co., Birmingham, Alabama.
LAW PERCY, Sec., Mapes Formula and Guano Co., Jacksonville.
LAWRENCE, ROBERT F., General Supt., Boca Raton Club, Boca Raton.
LAWTON, B. E., County Agricultural Agent, Ft. Lauderdale.
73


LEACH, H. R., Hydraulic Engineer, S. C. S., Bethesda, Maryland.
LEE, G. W., Manager, Hastings Potato Growers Assoc., Hastings.
LEHMANN, KARL, Lake County Chamber of Commerce, Montverde.
LEICHLITER, J. FRANK, Landscape Gardener, 1605 E. Ida St., Tampa.
LEIGHTY, RALPH G., Soil Surveyor, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D. C.
LEONARD, GEORGE V., Farmer and Citriculturist, Hastings.
LEWIS, O. C., Area Soils Technician, S. C. S., Tallahassee.
LIEFELD, T. A., Asst. Silviculturist, Southern Forest Experiment Station, U. S. D. A.,
Lake City.
LOGAN, J. H., County Agricultural Agent, Clearwater.
LOTT, DR. WREAL L., Soil Technologist, U. S. Sugar Corp., Clewiston.
LOWRY, M. W., Regional Soil Conservationist, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
LUCAS, GLENN H., Salesman, Wilson and Toomer Fertilizer Co., Leesburg.
LYNCH, S. J., Asst. Horticulturist, Sub-Tropical Experiment Station, Homestead.
McCLOUD, D. D., County Agricultural Agent, Perry.
McCONELL, L. S., Gardener, 2025 Brickell Ave., Miami.
McCORMICK, SAM H., Sec.-Treas., Miami Jockey Club, Hialeah.
McINTOSH, HENRY T., District Chairman, National Resources Planning Board, Albany,
Georgia.
McPECK, JOHN K., 328 So. Lakeview Drive, Sebring.
MALONE, J. W., County Agricultural Agent, Marianna.
MANATEE FRUIT CO., Palmetto.
MANDA, W. J., Orchid Grower, Okeechobee and Elizabeth Streets, West Palm Beach.
MANN, H. B., Southern Manager, Am. Potash Institute, Atlanta, Georgia.
MARCO, M. B., Asst. Soil Surveyor, Bur. of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
MATHEWS, A. L., Tech, and Economic Reports, 3 04 Chamber of Commerce Bldg., Orlando.
MATTHEWS, S. W., Staff Writer, Miami Daily News, Miami.
MERCER, L. R., Supt., B. F. Williamson Co., Gainesville.
MERZ, DR. ALBERT R., Chemist, Fertilizer Research Division, U. S. D .A., Washington, D. C.
MIDDLETON, DR. H. E., Sr. Soil Conservationist, Soil Conservation Service, East Falls
Church, Virginia.
MILLER, RALPH L., Entomologist, Fla. Agr. Supply Co., Orlando.
MINER, JAMES T., Farmer, Box 113, Boynton.
MOORE, K. C., County Agricultural Agent, Orlando.
MOORE, O. M., Truck Grower, Belle Glade.
MORAN, JAY W., Vice-President, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
MOSSBARGER, H. L., Florida Power and Light Company, Miami.
MOUNTS, M. U., Count Agricultural Agent, West Palm Beach.
NALL, W. C., Civil Engineer, U. S. Engineers, Moore Haven.
NEFT, JOSEPH, Gardener, Hobe Sound.
NELLER, DR. J. R., Biochemist in Charge, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
NELSON, G. M., Landscape Gardener, Melbourne.
NETTLES, W. T., District Agent, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
NEWELL, DR. WILMON, Provost for Agriculture, University of Florida, Gainesville
NEWINS, H. S., Director, School of Forestry, University of Florida, Gainesville.
NIELAND, L. T., Extension Farm Forester, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
NIKITIN, DR. A. A., Tennessee Copper Company, Copperhill, Tenn.
NORRIS, JAMES, Norris Grain Co., 1640 Board of Trade, Chicago, Ill.
NORRIS, R. E., County Agricultural Agent, Tavares.
OBYRNE, F. M., Waverly Growers Cooperative, Lake Wales.
OKELLEY, E. B., Gen. Agr. Agent, Atlantic Coast Line R. R., Jacksonville.
PANCOAST, THOMAS J., Pres. Miami Beach Improvement Company, Miami Beach
PATTERSON, R. Y., Civil Engineer, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
PEACOCK, A. J., Synthetic Nitrogen Products Corp., Box 95, Plant City.
PEECH, DR. MICHAEL, Soils Chemist, Citrus Exp. Station, Lake Alfred.
PETERS, F. C., INC., Truck Crops and Livestock, Goulds.
PETERS, JOHN S., Salesman, International Agr. Corp., Peters.
PHIPPS, JOHN H., Farmer, Box 707, Tallahassee.
PLANK, DONALD K., Forester, U. S. Engineers, Moore Haven.
PLUMMER, J. K., Director, Products Division, Tennessee Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia.
PQPENOE, DR. WILSON, Horticulturist, United Fruit Co., Guatemala City, Guatemala.
POWER, J. W., Convention Manager, 3 06 City Hall, Miami.
PREWITT, W. C., Agr. Supt. Western Division, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
PRINGLE, S. W., Nurseryman, Leesburg.
PRODUCERS SUPPLY, INC., Palmetto.
RAY, W. C., Farmer, Proprietor, Silver Springs, Silver Springs.
RENEGER, C. A.,, Soil Technologist, Babson Park.
REYNOLDS, B. T., Grove Manager, Auburndale.
RICH, FRANK H., Asst. Production Mgr., Florence Citrus Growers Association, Winter
Haven.
RICHARDSON, A. R., Real Estate, Tallahassee.
RICHARDSON, W. W., Secy., Simonton Ranch, Inc., Micanopy.
RILEY, J. F., Jr., Investments, Box 70, Palm Beach.
74


RITCHEY, GEO. E., Associate Agronomist, Bureau of Plant Industry, Fla. Agr. Expt.
Station, Gainesville.
ROBERTSON, ROSS E., Farmer, Belle Glade.
ROGERS, FRAZIER, Prof, of Agricultural Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville.
ROGERS, L. H., Associate Biochemist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
ROHDE, GEORGE, Traveling Representative, Bausch and Lomb Optical Co., 1324 Eye St.,
N. W., Washington, D. C.
ROOD, RAY S., Gardener, Jupiter.
ROSS, DR. EDWARD, Chemist, Dr. Phillips Company, Orlando.
ROWE, R. L., Florist and Nurseryman, Drawer W, Melbourne.
RUMSEY, MRS. LEE W., Housewife, Belle Isle, Miami Beach.
SACHS, WARD H., Agronomist, E. I. duPont de Nemours Co., Box 2158, Orlando.
SAVAGE, C. B., Plant Pathologist, West Palm Beach.
SCOTT, ED, Clerk, Circuit Court, Collier County, Everglades.
SCOTT, E. P., Farm Management Specialist, Farm Security Administration, Box 5 79,
Gainesville.
SENN, DR. P. H., Head, Dept, of Agronomy, Agricultural College, University of Florida,
Gainesville.
SERVIS, J. D., Graduate Student in Agr. Chemistry, University of Florida, Gainesville.
SEXTON, W. E., Horticulturist, Dairyman, Farmer, Vero Beach.
SHANNON, C. BARRY, Publisher, Palm Beach.
SHAW, C. C., Salesman, Hector Supply Company, Miami.
SHEELY, WALTER J., Extension Beef Specialist, Agr. Ext. Service, Gainesville.
SHELTON, E. N., Tennessee Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia.
SHINN, CHAS. M., Manager, Growers Fertilizer Cooperative, Lake Alfred.
SHORT, C. R., Box 3 43, Clermont.
SIEPLEIN, DR. O. J., Research Chemist, Box 215, Coral Gables.
SIMPSON, DR. T. M., Dean, Graduate School, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
SINGLETON, GRAY, Agr. Agent, Federal Land Bank, Columbia, S. C.
SKINNER, B. C., Box 3 028, Dunedin.
SMITH, DR. F. B., Soil Microbiologist, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
SMITH, J. LEE, District Agricultural Agent, Gainesville.
SOULE, M. J., Nurseryman, 933 39th Ave. North, St. Petersburg.
SPARKMAN, J. K., Salesman, U. S. Phosphoric Products Corp., Box 3269, Tampa.
SPENCER, A. P., Vice-Director, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
STABLER, DAVID K., Landscape Supt., Mountain Lake Corp., Lake Wales.
STAFFORD, W. M., Chief Fire Warden, Everglades Fire Control District, Lake Worth.
STAMBAUGH, SCOTT U., Horticulturist, Babson Park.
STAUTENBURG, FRANK, Gardener, Box 133, Coconut Grove.
STEIN, FRITZ, Farmer, Box 488, Belle Glade.
STEPHENS, MILES E., Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, S. C.
STETT, FRANK, Manager, Hobe Sound.
STEVENS, F. D., Sugar Cane Agronomist, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
STIRLING & SONS, FRANK, Horticulture, R. F. D. Route 1, Ft. Lauderdale.
STOKES, W. E., Head, Dept, of Agronomy, Florida Agr. Experiment Station, Gainesville.
STOREY, NORMAN C., Inventor and Machinist, 825 N. W. 72nd St., Miami.
STORROCK, JAMES D., Landscape Contractor, Box 23 48, Palm Beach.
SUGGS, GEO. W., District Mgr., Technical Service Bureau, The Barrett Company, 13?
Carnegie Way, Atlanta, Georgia.
SWENSON, A. F., Supt., C. C. Bolton Estate, Box 2586, Palm Beach.
SYNTHETIC NITROGEN PRODUCTS CORPORATION (Dr. Arthur M. Smith), 285 Mad
ison Ave., New York, N. Y.
TABER, G. L., Jr., Nurseryman, Glen Saint Mary.
TAIT, W. L., Int. Fruit Corporation, Winter Haven.
TALBERT, DALE, Grove Manager, Vero Beach.
TAYLOR, ARTHUR E., Soil Scientist, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Washington,
D. C.
TAYLOR, J. J., State Chemist, Dept, of Agriculture, Tallahassee.
TAYLOR, ROY, Gardener, Boca Grande
THERKILDSON, W. F., Editor, All Florida, Miami Herald, Miami.
THOMAS, WAYNE, Realtor, Plant City.
THOMPSON, RALPH P., Citrus Grower, Winter Haven.
THOMPSON, RUSSELL, Miami Beach.
THORNTON, R. P., Chemist, Thornton and Company, 1145 E. Cass Street, Tampp
THULLBERY, H. A., Production Mgr., Haines City Citrus Growers Association, Haines
City.
TIGERT, DR. JOHN J., President, University of Florida, Gainesville.
TOMASELLO, RUDOLPH P., Spraying and Fertilizer Service, 911 Begonia Road, W. Palm
Beach.
TOWNSEND, DR. G. R., Plant Pathologist, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
TURNER, H. A., Landscape Superintendent, Boca Raton.
TURRENTINE, J. W., President, Am. Potash Institute, Inc., 1016 Investment Bldg.,
Washington, D. C.
VAN DOREN, H. W., Florist and Nurseryman, 2412 20th St., South, St. Petersburg.
VAN LANDINGHAM, E. M., Grower, Belle Glade.
VAUGHN, H. T., Chemist, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
VOLK, G. M., Chemist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Station, Gainesville.
WAKSMAN, DR. S. A., Prof, of Soil Microbiology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick,
New Jersey.
75


WALKER, DR. M.N., Plant Pathologist in Charge, Leesburg Field Station, Leesburg.
WALLACE, DONALD S., District Engineer, U. S. Geological Survey, Ocala.
WALLIS, W. TURNER, Consulting Engineer, National Resources Planning Board, West
Palm Beach.
WARD, W. F., Asst. Animal Husbandman in Charge, W. Central Florida Experiment
Station, Brooksville.
WARNER, J. D., Agronomist Acting in Charge, North Florida Experiment Station, Quincy.
WATKINS, MARSHALL O., Asst. County Agricultural Agent, Plant City.
WEAVER, RUDOLPH, Director, School of Architecture and Allied Arts, Univ. of Florida,
Gainesville.
WEDDING, CHAS. R., Nurseryman, St. Petersburg.
WEDGWORTH, MRS. RUTH S., Manager, Wedgworth Estate, Belle Glade.
WELLS, ARTHUR, Farmer, Belle Glade.
WELLS, HENRY K., Real Estate, Palm Beach.
WESEMEYER, FRED J., V. P. A. and W. Bulb Co., Ft. Myers.
WESTBROOK, GEO. F., Clermont.
WESTVELD, R. H., Prof, of Silviculture, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
WHIPP, C. LESLIE, Whipps Azalea Gardens, Callahan.
WHITAKER, J. W., Sales Manager, Swift and Company, Bartow.
WHITE, ALEC, County Agricultural Agent, Tampa.
WILCOX, C. B., Citrus Grower, 3 1 6 DeSoto Circle, Orlando.
WILCOX, J. MARK, Seybold Bldg., Miami.
WILCOX, MARK, Farmer, R. R. No. 3, Box 482, Orlando, (Bridgeton Pa.)
WILL, L. E., Garage Operator, Belle Glade.
WILLIAMSON, B. F., Chemist, Manufacturer and Farmer, Gainesville
WILLIAMSON, F. L., Grower, Clewiston.
C\* Head Prof- of Physics, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
WILLSON, GEO. C., Graduate Student in Soils, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
WILSON, JOHN R., Spraying and Insecticides, Box 6044, West Palm Beach.
WILSON, LEO H., Production Manager Domino Citrus Association, Box 48, Bradenton.
WILSON, R.A., Nurseryman, Jupiter.
WINTER GARDEN ORNAMENTAL NURSERY, INC., Wholesale Growers of Tropical Plants,
Winter Garden.
WIRT, EARL, Jr., Asst, in Horticulture, Florida Agr. Experiment Station, Gainesville.
WITT, A. C., Florist, Box 4-A, South Miami.
WOLF, NORMAN L., Grove Owner and Operator, Cocoa.
WOOD, J. H., Gardener, 4705 ^ Parker Ave., W. Palm Beach.
WOOD, GAR, Pres. Chemurgic Research Corporation, 813-14 Ingraham Bldg. Miami.
WRAY, FLOYD L., Citrus, Hollywood.
WRIGHT, STANLEY H., Coordinator, Southeastern Florida Joint Investigation, Box 1 188.
West Palm Beach.
YANCEY, F. D., Fruit Grower, Umatilla.
YOTHERS, W. W., Consulting Citriculturist, 45 7 Boone Street, Orlando.
YOUNG, DR. C. T., Banking and Investments, Box 948, Plant City.
YOUNG, T. W., Graduate Student, Dept, of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York.
ZIEGLER, L. W., Winter Haven.
ZIPPERER, J. O., Rex Beach Farms, Ft. Myers.
It will be greatly appreciated if members will send in corrections
or additions for the names and addresses in the above membership roll,
as we are anxious to have it as complete and correct as possible. We
believe it a worthwhile part of the record to have the occupation or
business connection of each member known to the whole group and
solicit the assistance of each individual to that end.
76


Constitution and By-Laws of the Soil Science Society
of Florida
Article 1.
NAME
The name of this organization shall be the Soil Science Society of Florida.
OBJECTIVES
Article II.
The objectives of this Society shall be to foster all phases of Soil Science,
both as to its development and application, namely, in the fields of research,
teaching and extension.
Article III.
MEMBERSHIP
Any person or organization interested in the objectives of the Society shall
be eligible to membership in the Society.
SECTIONS
Article IV.
The integration of the activity of the Society shall be limited to certain
functional committees until it becomes evident that sectionalization on the
basis of subject matter will serve a definite purpose in advancing the work.
Such committees will be appointed each year.
AFFILIATION
Article V.
This Society may become affiliated, as a State unit, with such National Soc-
ities as the Soil Science Society of America provided the requirements of
such affiliation are not such as to be at variance with the provisions of the
Constitution of the Florida Society.
OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY
Article VI.
The officers of the Society shall be a President, a Vice-President, a Secretary-
Treasurer, and an Executive Committee. The Executive Committee shall
consist of the President of the Society (Chairman), the Vice-President, the
Secretary-Treasurer, and the most recent past president.
Article VII.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
The President shall appoint a nominating committee of three members in ad
vance of the annual meeting. This committee shall nominate a candidate for
Vice-President, the Vice-President for the year automatically succeeding to the
presidency. Other nominations may be made from the floor. Election of the
Vice-President shall be by ballot. The term of office shall be for one year.
The Secretary-Treasurer shall be appointed by the Executive Committee.
DUTIES OF OFFICERS
Article VIII.
Section 1. The President shall be the Executive Officer of the Society. He
shall preside over the meetings of the Society and its Executive Committee.
He shall be responsible for the arrangement of the programs of the Society
with the help of the Executive Committee and such other assistance as he may
appoint or request.
77


He shall appoint such committees as may be deemed advisable by the Exec
utive Committee under Article IV of the Constitution or as may be requested
or directed from the floor by majority vote.
He shall continue to serve on the Executive Committee of the Society for one
year following his retirement from the presidency.
Section 2. The Vice-President shall be elected annually by ballot from the
slate prepared by the nominating Committee supplemented by any nominations
from the floor.
He shall act for the President in his absence and otherwise assist him with
the duties of that office.
He shall automatically succeed to the presidency of the Society at the expir
ation of his annual term.
Section 3. The Secretary-Treasurer shall be appointed by the Executive
Committee.
He shall keep the minutes of all regular meetings and the financial records
of the Society.
He shall pay the bills of the Society, following the approval of the President.
He shall act as Secretary and as Editor of the Executive Committee in its
function as an Editorial Board.
Section 4. The Executive Committee shall outline the program of activities
and formulate the policies of the Society.
It shall recommend functional committees for appointment under Article IV
of the Constitution.
It shall act on all matters arising between the regular meetings of the Society.
It shall act as the Editorial Board of the Society of which the Secretary-Treas
urer shall be the Editor.
TIME AND PLACE OF MEETING
Article IX.
The annual meeting of the Society or any joint meeting of the Society with
other societies shall be at a time and place determined or agreed upon by the
Executive Committee of the Society.
Article X.
AMENDMENTS
Amendments may be proposed (1 ) by the Executive Committee directly or
(2) by petition of any ten (10) members of the Society. The amendment
may be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members present at any annual
meeting, provided notice of same has been distributed to the membership of
the Society at least fifteen (15) days previous to the meeting at which it is
to be acted upon.
BY-LAWS
1. Dues. The annual dues for membership in the Society shall be one dollar
($1.00).
2. Expenditures. Bills for any expenditures made by the officers of the Society
in transaction of official business, after approval by the President of the
Society, shall be submitted to the Treasurer for payment.
3. Committees. Such standing and special committees may be appointed by the
President as seems desirable to carry on the work of the Society, as provided
by Article VIII, Section 1, of the Constitution.
4. Quorum. A quorum at the annual meeting or any other business meeting
which may be called shall consist of at least 20 per cent of the members.
5. Amendments. The by laws may be amended at any regular meeting of the
Society by a two-thirds vote of the members present.
Adopted in Organization Session
Hollywood, Florida
April 18, 1939.
78








977


Full Text
The Soil science society
OF
FLORIDA
PROCEEDINGS
VOLUME I
1939
FIRST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY
HOLLYWOOD
April 18, 1939

" There is an important place in
Florida Agriculture for a forum of this
type that can be used as a 'clearing
house' for the technical worker and the
grower, as well as others engaged in closely
related enterprises that find common
interest in the practical application of the
basic principles of Soil Science. The tech
nical worker may be able to assist the
grower from time to time with some of his
knotty problems, but no less will the grower
assist the technical worker by this oppor
tunity to bring in his problems and
experience for a good and thorough dis
cussion. I fear this latter angle of benefit
is too frequently overlooked.
Dr. Wilmon Newell,
Provost for Agriculture,
University of Florida.

The Soil Science Society
of
Florida
PROCEEDINGS
Volume 1
1939
FIRST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY
HOLLYWOOD
April 18, 1939
m
OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY
1939- 1940
R. V. Allison President
Gainesville
Michael Peech Vice-President
Lake Alfred
Henry C. Henricksen Member Executive Committee
Eustis
Richard A. Carrigan Secretary-Treasurer
Gainesville

Acknowledgments

The publication of this first volume of the Proceedings of the
Soil Science Society of Florida has been made possible largely through
the generous interest of and contributions by the following organiz
ations:
The U. S. Sugar Corporation
The Chemurgic Research Corporation
The Florida Power and Light Company
On behalf of all those attending the organization meeting of the
Society on April 1 8, 1 939, in Hollywood, and of the substantial mem
bership of more than three hundred and fifty persons that has develop
ed in the course of the first official year of the existence of the Society,
the Executive Committee wishes to take this opportunity to thank
the Florida State Horticultural Society for its generosity in sponsoring
our organization meeting in the fine manner that it did; also the
Hollywood Beach Hotel for the splendid hospitality and service pro
vided by its officers and staff throughout the meetings.
THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. Acknowledgments 2
2. Dedication to the Memory of Dr. Robert Marlin Barnette 4
3. Foreword 7
4. Preliminary Organization Meetings 9
5. Final Organization Meeting in Hollywood, April 18, 1939.
(a) Minutes of the Meeting 1 1
(b) Contributed Papers.
1. The Place of Soil Science in a Program of
Agricultural Research for Florida 1 3
Dr. T. S. Buie.
2. The Soils of Florida 1 5
J. R. Henderson.
3. Methods and Limitations of Soil Analysis 25
R. A. Carrigan.
4. The Soil and Water Conservation Problem
in the Everglades 35
Dr. R. V. Allison.
6. Joint Meeting with the Florida State Horticultural Society,
April 19, 1939. (Abstracts of Contributed Papers).
1. The Cycle of Organic Matter in Soils 59
Dr. F. B. Smith.
2. A Rapid Laboratory Method for the Determination
of Exchangeable Magnesium in the Soil 59
Dr. Michael Peech.
3. The Adaptability of Rapid Laboratory Methods to
the Study of Highly Organic Soils 59
Dr. W. T. Forsee.
4. Florida Citrus Malnutrition Leaves 60
G. M. Bahrt.
5. Question Box 60
R. S. Edsall.
7. Subject Matter Committees Duties and Personnel 61
8. Charter Membership 71
9. Constitution and By-Laws 77

Reprinted
From the Report of the Committee on Resolutions, American Society of
Agronomy, presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society,
Washington, D. C., November 17, 1938.
JJdbert dlarlttt Jaanicttc
I ^ OCTOR ROBERT MARLIN BARNETTE, Chemist at the Agricultural
Experiment Station of the University of Florida, was killed instantly on the
evening of October 31, 1938 while driving alone in his car a few miles north of
Gainesville. In the immediate family of his parents Dr. Barnette is survived by
three sisters and a brother, all living in South Carolina at the present time. Dr.
Barnette was born in Rock Hill, County of York, South Carolina, November 30,
1900. I n 1 920 he graduated from Clemson College and in 1 923 received the
Ph. D. degree from the University of New Jersey where he specialized in soil
chemistry.
Following his graduation from the New Jersey institution, Dr. Barnette spent
a year abroad in travel and study. His study was divided equally between the
Rijkslandbouwproefstation in Groningen, Holland, where he studied under Dr.
D. J. Hissink and at the Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule, in Zurich, Switz
erland, where he spent much of his time in the laboratories of the late Professor
George Wiegner.
Following his return to the United States, Dr. Barnette worked for two years
as Assistant Chemist at the Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station. In 1925
he was appointed Assistant Chemist at the Florida Agricultural Experiment
Station, became Associate Chemist in 1929 and Chemist in 1932. At the time of
his death he was in charge of the Land Use Division of the Department of Chemis
try and Soils.
As indicated by his published works, Dr. Barnette has largely interested him
self in the fundamental nutrition of plants especially as influenced by the physical
characteristics of the soil environment in which they grow. Having studied with
Wiegner and Hissink in Europe just at the time base exchange phenomena in the
soil were beginning to be understood and their importance appreciated, Dr. Bar
nette became a pioneer worker in this field in Florida and in the Southeast.
Throughout his work both organic and inorganic colloids were emphasized and the
importance of the role of organic matter in the soil in this and other connections
repeatedly pointed out.
In the death of Dr. Barnette the American Society of Agronomy and the
Soil Science Society of America have lost a keenly discerning and energetic
worker. To all who have had personal associations with him and especially to
those of us who have been privileged to live and work closely with him there
can not but come a deep feeling of loss in the passing of a staunch and ever
sympathetic friend.
R. V. Allison

In dedicating this First Proceedings of the Soil Science Society
of Florida to the memory of Doctor Barnette, the many scores of his
friends who are now members of this Society, established since the
time of his death, are fully conscious that there was little in this life
closer to Barneys heart than the advancement of Soil Science, es
pecially as it related to those conditions peculiar to Florida. For many
months prior to his death the development of such a Forum was con
stantly in his thoughts. In honoring him thus the Society and all that it
stands for in turn is honored by the vision and record of a life whose
passing preceded its birth.


Foreword
The Soil Science Society of Florida was organized particularly to
serve Florida Agriculture. Its forum is open to all who are sincerely
interested in discussing any of its multitudinous problems that have
a definite relationship with the soil. In the words of our Provost for
Agriculture, Doctor Wilmon Newell, There is an important place in
Florida Agriculture for a forum of this type that can be used as a
clearing house for the technical worker and the grower, as well as
others engaged in closely related enterprises that find common in
terest in the practical application of the basic principles of Soil Science.
The technical worker may be able to assist the grower from time to
time with some of his knotty problems, but no less will the grower
assist the technical worker by this opportunity to bring in his prob
lems and experience for a good and thorough discussion. I fear that
this latter angle of benefit is too frequently overlooked.
This service can be developed in two particular ways: (1) By
holding local or state-wide meetings that will be followed by published
or mimeographed proceedings and (2) By intensive study and dev
elopment of well-defined fields of subject matter through carefully
appointed committees as provided by Article IV of the Constitution.
The attendance upon and interest in our organization meeting
in Hollywood, of which the present Proceedings is a record, repre
sents a definite example of what can be accomplished by the first means.
Our growers are particularly interested in local problems or in group
problems that center around a particular crop or type of farming.
Others of our workers are interested in state-wide soils problems, a good
and thorough discussion and understanding of which will add to the
effectiveness of their service in many respects. Both groups can read
ily be reached by the forum of the Soil Science Society.
The committee phase of the work lends itself particularly to the
organization and development aspects of the Society and its program
as a whole. This is covered in detail in a proper section of this Pro
ceedings where the names and personnel of the committees appointed
to date are listed and their individual responsibilities outlined in a
general way. From certain standpoints this is one of the most import
ant activities of the Society, that is, if each committee will study its
assignment or assignments carefully, analyze its data clearly and report
upon it candidly.
That a similar interest exists in other states is indicated from the
fact that such a society as ours was organized in Indiana under the
genial leadership of Dr. George W. Scarseth on the evening of Decem
ber 1 0, 1 938, thus preceding ours here in Florida by four months.
It is our carefully considered opinion that there is a truly vital
place in the framework of the national organization (Soil Science

Society of America) for active state sections or societies of this nature
since a strong national unit then results merely by a careful piecing
together of the energies and enthusiasms of the local groups. The
national officers would thus be relieved, to a large extent, of the ted
ious routine of membership responsibilities and the maintenance of
general interest in the work. Likewise state forums of this nature can
take care of local problems and the national programs thus freed
of much material of this nature that falls definitely below the level
of national interest.
Such a plan of development would leave the national officers
more time for the consideration of programs and plans of work of
which the Science is so badly in need at the present time. We should
like to join Indiana in a friendly challenge to workers in still other
states where interest in all phases of soils work may incline them to the
development of a local or state forum for the intensive development
of this important branch of the Agricultural Sciences.

Preliminary Organization Meetings at Gainesville

A. January 12, 1939.
At the close of a general discussion of a number of soil problems
by a group of workers in Gainesville on the evening of January 1 2, the
oft-discussed question was again raised of organizing a definite Soil
Science Society of Florida. The chief advantages cited were:
1. The forum of such a society could entertain the discussion of
a wide variety of subjects in the field of Soil Science and
closely related sciences as they pertain to Florida Agriculture
with simultaneous advantages to the technical worker, the
commercial worker, the grower and any others who may be
interested in attending and taking part.
2. Such meetings and discussions would assist very materially
in maintaining state-wide interest and sustaining member
ship in our national society, simultaneously improving our
contributions to the national forum and leaving the national
officers greater freedom to work on other than routine matters.
This meeting was called largely for the discussion of methods
of analysis and was attended by twenty workers in the field of soils
and allied subjects, including representatives from the Everglades Ex
periment Station at Belle Glade and the Citrus Experiment Station at
Lake Alfred.
interest in the formation of such a society grew in a surprising
way in the course of the discussion and an organizing committee con
sisting of Dr. R. V. Allison (Chairman), Mr. R. A. Carrigan
(Secretary), Dr. F. B. Smith, Dr. Michael Peech and W. L. Tait was
set up.
By general agreement it was decided that steps should be taken
to set up a state-wide society or forum consisting of individuals or
organizations interested in the development and application of Soil
Science in Florida. It was proposed that the possibility of holding
an organization meeting in conjunction with the regular annual meet
ings of the Florida State Horticultural Society some time in April, be
explored. There was a general understanding, furthermore, that in the
event of its successful formation, the State Society might later under
take to establish some form of affiliation, as a State section, with the
Soil Science Society of America.
B. March 2 7, 1939.
A second meeting was called at Gainesville on March 27, 1939
for the purpose of furthering the plans for the formation of the State
Society. Essentially the same group was present as attended the ear
lier meeting. At this time a preliminary draft of a proposed Con
stitution and By-Laws was presented and thoroughly discussed. It
was accepted as provisional for presentation at the state-wide organ
ization meeting.
9

The Chairman placed before the meeting an invitation from Col.
B. F. Floyd, Secretary of the Florida State Horticultural Society to
hold the state-wide organization meeting of the Soil Science Society
of Florida in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Florida State
Horticultural Society in Hollywood, in April. This generous invitation
was accepted by unamimous vote and the organizing committee was
instructed to make plans accordingly.
10

Final Organization Meeting in Hollywood
April 18, 1939

A. Minutes of the First Annual Meeting of the Soil Science Society
of Florida, April 18, 1939.
The meeting was called to order at 2 :00 P. M. by the Chairman
of the Organizing Committee, Dr. R. V. Allison. The first order of
business was a call for the selection or election of an acting chairman
for the organization meeting. A motion was made, seconded and
carried that Dr. Allison serve in this capacity.
Copies of the proposed Constitution and By-Laws were distrib
uted to all present. It was then read Article by Article and Section
by Section. Following a suggestion of the chairman that informality
be observed in regard to eligibility for voting, a motion to accept the
proposed Constitution and By-Laws as written was passed by a un
animous vote.
Since the Constitution, as accepted, provided for the inclusion
of the immediate past president of the Society in the Executive Com
mittee, it was necessary that an election be held to select someone to
fill this post for the first year of the Societys existence. Accordingly,
a nominating committee was appointed by the chairman to select
nominees for this position as well as make nominations for the offices
of President and Vice-President. The nominating committee consisted
of Dr. J. R. Neller, Belle Glade, Dr. H. C. Flenricksen, Eustis and
Mr. R. L. Braddock, Belle Glade. Following brief deliberation, the
committee recommended the names of Dr. R. V. Allison, Gainesville,
for President and Dr. Michael Peech, Lake Alfred, for Vice-Preident
and suggested that nominations be made from the floor for the open
position on the Executive Committee. Motions were then made from
the floor that nominations for President and Vice-President cease.
The motions were seconded and favorably voted on.
Nominations for Member of the Executive Committee were
made for the following men: Mr. W. F. Therkildson, Miami, Dr. O. J.
Sieplein, Miami, Mr. R. P. Thornton, Tampa and Dr. FI. C. Henricksen,
Eustis. Dr. Henricksen was elected by a second ballot. Mr. R. A.
Carrigan was appointed Secretary-Treasurer by the President.
There was considerable discussion in the meeting relative to el
igibility for membership in the Society. The opinion of those present
was overwhelmingly in favor of throwing membership open to all who
might be interested in the objectives of the Society to the extent of
giving it their support. It was generally understood that eligibility
for membership would not be contingent upon technical or scientific
standing or professional occupation, but that one of the chief aims
of the Society would be to bring the technical man and the practical

grower together in a forum where an open discussion of the problems
and experiences of all would result in mutual advantages to members
of both groups.
Immediately after the business meeting a program of general
interest involving four papers or discussions as listed below, was pre
sented. Due to the enforced absence of Mr. Harold Mowry, who was
scheduled to read a paper on The Place of Soil Science in a Program
of Agricultural Research for Florida, Dr. T. S. Buie, Regional Con
servator of the Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, South Carolina,
kindly consented to speak extemporaneously on this subject. Mr.
Herman Gunter, State Geologist of the State Board of Conservation,
Tallahassee, Florida who was scheduled to speak on Problems of
Hydrology Related to Florida Agriculture, was also unfortunately
unable to attend the meeting. In his place Dr. Allison gave an im
promptu discussion of the soil and water conservation problem in the
Everglades.
B. Contributed Papers:
A program of contributed papers and discussions was rendered
as follows:
1. The Place of Soil Science in a Program of Agricultural Re
search for Florida.
Dr. T. S. Buie, Regional Conservator, U. S. Soil Conservation
Service, Spartanburg, South Carolina.
2. The Soils of Florida.
J. R. Henderson, Department of Chemistry and Soils, Florida
Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
3. Methods and Limitations of Soil Analysis,
Richard A. Carrigan, Department of Chemistry and Soils, Florida
Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
4. The Soil and Water Conservation Problem in the Everglades.
Dr. R. V. Allison, Head, Department of Chemistry and Soils,
Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
12

The Place of Soil Science in a Program of Agricultural
Research for Florida
Dr. T. S. Buie

Floridas sphere of agricultural influence radiates far beyond its
boundaries as a large percentage of its farm products, particularly
citrus fruits and vegetables, is sold outside of the State. Modern
merchandising methods have helped create a widespread consumer
demand, and thousands of persons outside of the State are engaged
in the distribution and marketing of these products. In addition to cit
rus fruits and vegetables, Florida also produces substantial quantities
of grain, tobacco, cotton, and sugar cane.
The demand for Florida agricultural products also has led to a
high degree of specialization in farming practices. Practices that insure
high yields, especially of crops for out-of-state markets, are employed.
Growers, too, have been quick to adopt the latest methods developed
by agricultural science that enable them to take greater advantage of
a variety of climate and soil conditions.
From the foregoing we can see that the interest in Floridas ag
riculture extends far beyond its citrus groves, large vegetable tracts,
and other farming areas. That means that a large part of the Nation
is directly concerned with the manner in which Florida handles its
soil resources. If these resources are misused and should the soils
productivity be so seriously affected that high yields are no longer
possible, Im sure that consumers farther north would quickly point
a condemning finger at Florida. They, too, would be affected.
Climatic conditions give Florida a decided advantage over other
States in the race to reach northern markets. But regardless of this
favorable condition, Florida will do well to make an inventory of its
soil resources as a basis for their proper management. Its hopes for
a balanced and permanent agriculture will fall short unless its land
is used wisely.
How to use the land better than we have is not a simple prob
lem. This objective can not be achieved without concerted planning
and action by farmers, aided by every Federal, State, and local agency
that has anything to contribute to better land-use practices.
The soil scientist makes a definite contribution to better land
use. He determines the physical, chemical, and biological nature of
the soil, which furnishes the scientific background for dealing with the
practical problems. His services should be of particular value in Flor
ida as the state has a large variety of soils. This makes the land-use
problem more complicated, and the services of the soil scientist all the
more necessary. All soils can be put to good use provided their capab
ilities are fully understood.
13

One of the major functions of soil research is to furnish a solid
foundation for land-use classification, which in turn develops into
proper land-use planning. Not until areas are at least classified rough
ly as suitable or not suitable for specific farming purposes will it be
possible for Florida to safeguard itself against the tragic mistakes of
land misuse so evident in many other sections of the country.
I am particularly glad to have had the opportunity to take part
in the inauguration of the Soil Science Society of Florida, and I feel
certain that its contributions will play no small part in the preservat
ion of Floridas most valuable heritage, its soil.
14

The Soils of Florida
m
J. R. Henderson

Soils are natural bodies. Like people, they are born, develop
gradually and become mature. Furthermore, the characteristics of
soils, like those of the human races, vary in response to the environment
under which they have developed. The features of a Swede are mark
edly different from those of a Mediterranean, and those of the Med
iterraneans are unlike those of an African. Similarly, the soils of warm
regions are unlike those of cold or temperate regions; those of humid
regions unlike those of arid regions; and those of poorly drained areas
unlike those in well drained areas. Thus, the soils of Florida should
be markedly different from those of Alaska, Ohio, or Utah, and those
in one part of the State, different from those in some other part; and
indeed they are. Let us examine, therefore, the features by which
soil differences are recognized.
If in any well drained, gently rolling area, a hole is dug from the
surface down to the unaltered geological formation, and the exposed
profile examined, several distinct layers will be noted. Further exam
ination will show that each of these layers differs from the others in
several important characteristics of which the most distinct are: (1)
color, (2) texture, (3) structure, (4) consistence, and (5) thickness.
Variations in the characteristics described above exhibited by diff
erent soils are due to variations in one or more of the following soil
forming factors: (1) parent material, (2) relief, (3) age, (4) climate,
and (5) vegetation.
The modern system of soil classification is based upon the diff
erences in soil characteristics which have developed under the
influence of the soil-forming factors in various combinations and de
grees of intensity.
In the field, soils are classified into three simple unitsthe series,
the type and the phase. The soil series is a group of soils alike in all
characteristics except the texture and in some cases the thickness of the
surface layers or A horizons. The series is named for some town,
county, river or other prominent landmark where these soils were first
recognized. For instance, the Norfolk series of soils were first given
official recognition at Norfolk, Va.
The soil type is a subdivision of the soil series which, wherever
it occurs, is uniform in all characteristics. The soil type is named by
adding a term denoting the texture of the surface layer to the soil
series name. Examples: Norfolk fine sand and Norfolk fine sandy
loam. Sometimes a soil type differs from the typical in some external
characteristic which is important from the standpoint of land use as
slope, erosion, or degree of stoniness. Such variations are called phases
and are designated by adding a descriptive term to the soil type name.
Example: Norfolk fine sand, flat phase.
15

These simple units of classification are used in ordinary soil
survey work but they are too numerous for use in gaining a comprehen
sive idea of the soils over wide areas. Consequently, the series are
grouped into families and these into great soil groups and these
into still larger groups and so on until all soils are grouped into three
orders. Logically, the numbers of features taken into consideration
decrease as the groups become more inclusive.
Of these larger units we are concerned here with only twothe
orders and the great soil groups. The three soil orders arezonal,
intrazonal and azonal.
The zonal soils have well developed profile characteristics which
reflect the dominating influence of the active soil forming factors,
climate and vegetation. The intrazonal soils have well developed
profile characteristics which reflect the dominating influence of relief
or parent material. The azonal soils have poorly developed profile
characteristics which reflect youthfulness, or extreme conditions of
parent material or relief.
Within these three orders there are 25 great soil groups. In
Florida, the three soil orders are represented by eight of the great soil
groups.
I AND II. THE RED AND YELLOW SOILS
The zonal order is represented by the Red and Yellow great soil
groups. These soils are characterized by brownish-gray, grayish-brown
or reddish-brown surface layers over yellow, brownish-yellow, yellow
ish-brown or brownish-red sub-surface layers over yellowish-red, red
or dark red subsoils. The subsoil rests upon gray, yellow and red
mottled parent material. The Yellow soils are characterized by light
gray, gray or dark gray surface layers over yellowish-gray, grayish-
yellow or yellow subsurface layers over yellow or yellowish-red sub
soils. The parent material beneath the subsoil is yellow, gray, and red
mottled. Both the Red and Yellow soils are acid or slightly acid
throughout the profile.
Since the Red and Yellow soils are very closely associated, the var
ious series can best be described in groups which include members
of both great soil groups.
1. Clay Lands of West Florida.
From Madison west across the northern half of the panhandle, the
soils consist of sandy loams which have developed from marine de
posits of sands and clays. The soils in this area may be divided into
three groups. The differences between the three groups find their
greatest expression in the texture and consistence of various layers of
the profile. Within each group the differences are mainly color
differences which are expressed most significantly in the subsoils,
(see Table I.)
16

2.Central Florida Hammock Areas.
In the high lime hammocks of Marion, Alachua, Citrus, Her
nando and Pasco Counties are found three soil series the parent mat
erials of which have been derived from or influenced by the underlying
limestones. The important characteristics of these soils are shown in
Table II.
3.Sandy Soils of West Florida.
From Madison County west a group of sandy soils lie between the
flatwoods to the south and the clay lands to the north. Three
soilsNorfolk, Ruston and Orangeburg sands are found in the area.
They differ from the sandy loams of the corresponding series (already
described) in that the colors of the sub-surface layers of the sands
are the same as those of the subsoils in the sandy loams and the sub
soils are found at greater depths.
4.The Central Ridge of the Peninsula.
Extending from Hamilton County south to near Lake Placid in
Highlands County is a ridge occupied mainly by five soil series which
are noted for their sandiness. (See Table III for general descriptions)
The most important of these are the Norfolk sands which occupy
75 per cent of the area and support more than three-fourths of Floridas
citrus industry. Outside of the citrus belt they are used mainly for special
crops such as watermelons, tobacco, peanuts and for forestry. The
Norfolk series is followed in order of decreasing importance by the
Blanton, Orlando, Eustis and Ft. Meade series.
The Blanton soils because of their low position are generally too
cold for citrus but in localized areas where protected against frost
damage they are quite as good as the Norfolk soils. The Orlando
soil is perhaps the best general purpose soil of the five, being used
for citrus and truck in the citrus section and for truck and general
farm crops in other parts of the area. The Ft. Meade series is about
as good as the Orlando as a general purpose soil but is less desirable
for citrus because of its high frost risks. The Eustis soil is used mainly
for citrus for which it is generally regarded as slightly more desirable
than the Norfolk.
17

Yellow
TABLE I
SOME IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE RED AND YELLOW SANDY LOAMS
OF NORTHWEST FLORIDA.
Consistence & Texlure of Subsoil
Color
Characteristics
Friable sandy
clay.
Heavy friable
sandy clay
Brittle or
heavy plastic
clay
Gray surface,
grayish-yellow
or yellow sub
surface, yellow
subsoil
Norfolk
Marlboro
Tifton
Susquehanna
Gilead
Brownish-gray
surface, yellow or
yellowish brown
subsurface, red
dish-yellow or
yellowish-red
subsoil
Ruston
Faceville
Cuthbert
Grayish-brown
surface, yellowish-
brown or brown
ish-yellow sub
surface, red sub
soil.
Orangeburg
Magnolia
Luverne
Reddish brown
surface, brownish'
red subsurface,
red or dark red
subsoil.
Red Bay
Greenville
Akron
Light > Heavy
18

TABLE 2
COLOR CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RED AND
YELLOW SOILS OF THE CENTRAL
FLORIDA HAMMOCK AREAS
Series
Surface
Subsurface
Subsoil
Fellowship
Dark Gray
Yellowish-gray
or brownish
gray
Gray, yellow,
brown & red
mottled
Hernando
Gray or gray
ish brown
Grayish yellow
to yellowish'
brown
Brownish'yel"
low or yellow
ish brown
Gainesville
Brownish'gray
or grayish
brown
Yellowish-red
or reddish
brown
Reddish brown
TABLE 3
COLOR CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RED AND
YELLOW SANDS OF FLORIDA
Soil Series
Surface
Subsurface
1
Orangeburg
grayish brown
red
Ruston
brownish-gray
yellowishred
Eustis
brownish-gray
yellowish'red
Norfolk
gray
yellow
Blanton
gray
gr. & yel. or pale yel.
Orlando
dark gray
yel."gr. or gr. yel.
Ft. Meade
1
dark gray
yel. gr. or br.-gr.
19

5. The Knolls of the Clay Flatwoods
There are two minor Yellow sandy loamsDunbar and Eulonia
which occupy slightly elevated areas within and adjacent to the clayey
flatwoods of North Florida and gentle slopes in the Red and Yellow
sandy loam area of Northwest Florida. They are similar to the Norfolk
sandy loams but differ from them in that drainage is not as well estab
lished in the former. The Eulonia has a heavy semi-plastic subsoil
while the Dunbar has a friable subsoil like that of the Norfolk sandy
loams.
The intrazonal soils of Florida are represented by the Ground
Water Podzols, Half-Bog and Bog soils.
III. THE GROUND WATER PODZOLS
The Ground Water Podzols occur in the flatwoods where they are
intimately associated with the slightly lower Half-Bog soils. They have
developed on marine deposits of sands and clays.
The Ground Water Podzols, commonly known as hardpan soils
are characterized by light gray, gray or dark gray surface layers over
light gray or white subsurface layers over black or dark brown sub
soils. The subsoils grade below into white sandy parent material.
These soils are acid to strongly acid throughout the profile. This great
soil group which includes more than half of the flatwoods, is repre
sented by only two soil seriesLeon and St. Johnsand these by
only the sands. The two series are distinguished by the color of the
surface layers. In the Leon soil the surface layer is light gray or gray
while in the St. Johns it is dark gray.
IV. THE HALF-BOG SOILS
The Half-Bog soils occupy an intermediate position in the poorly
drained flatwoods where they are associated with the slightly higher
Ground Water Podzols on the one hand and the slightly lower Bog
soils on the other. Most of the soils in this great soil group have devel
oped on marine deposits of sands and clays but some of them have
been derived from or influenced by marls.
The Half-Bog soils are characterized by gray, dark gray or black
surface layers over light gray, yellowish-gray or grayish-yellow sub
surface layers over yellow and gray mottled or bluish gray subsoils.
With the exception of some of the marl soils they are acid to strongly
acid.
1. The Clayey Flatwoods
In the upper reaches of the St. Johns valley and in smaller areas
elsewhere, are found three poorly drained sandy loams which have
heavy plastic clay sub-soils. These three soils may be easily distinguished
from each other. The Bladen soil has a gray surface while the Bayboro
soil has a dark gray or black surface. The Coxville soil has a gray
20

surface like that of the Bladen but differs from it and the others in hav
ing red mottling in the subsoil.
Another group of three sandy loams occurs in small areas widely
scattered throughout the flatwoods. They have friable or slightly
sticky sandy clay subsoils. The three members are distinguished by the
color of the surface and subsurface layers. The Portsmouth soil has
a dark gray or black surface while Plummer has a light gray or gray
surface. The subsurface layers of both Plummer and Portsmouth
are light gray. The Scranton soil differs from the Portsmouth in hav
ing a yellowish-gray or grayish-yellow subsurface.
2. The Sandy Flatwoods
By far the greatest part of the Half-Bog soils are sandy. These
sandy soils may be placed in four series. The Portsmouth soil has a
dark gray or black surface over a light gray subsurface. The other
three are similar to the Portsmouth but may be easily distinguished by
comparison. The Hyde soil differs in that the dark surface extends
to a depth of 1 8 inches to 2 feet. The Plummer soil differs in that
the surface is light gray or gray. The Scranton soil has a yellowish-
gray or grayish-yellow subsurface.
3. The Marl Hammocks
Near either coast and along some of the streams in the penin
sular section of the State are narrow strips of what are known as Marl
Hammocks. The soils in these areas have been derived from or in
fluenced by the marl formations which occur at depths usually within
four feet of the surface. Up to the present time only one soil series
Parkwoodhas been established to represent this condition. How
ever, it seems that at least three well-distinguished soils may be found
in the area. One of them has a heavy black surface which extends
downward to a depth of two or three feet.i Another has a gray or dark
gray surface over a light gray subsurface which passes into a dark
brown or yellow, gray, and brown mottled clay. The clay layer is
2 to 1 8 inches thick and rests upon marl. The third soil has a gray
or dark gray surface which passes directly into marl at depths of from
8 to 1 2 inches.
V. THE BOG SOILS
The Bog soils occur in the Everglades, Istokpoga Marshes, St.
Johns Marshes, and in numerous other marshy and swampy areas
throughout the peninsula. They consist of plant remains in various
stages of decomposition, commonly mixed with small amounts of
mineral material. These soils are usually acid to strongly acid when
developed out of immediate contact with lime in some form, but most
of those in the Everglades are only slightly acid or even neutral, due
to the prevailing marl or limestone upon which the organic deposit
has been formed. These soils have not been definitely classified
into series. They are called muck, peaty muck or peat depending
21

upon the stage of decomposition. Muck is well decomposed, usually
black. Peat is only partially decomposed and is usually brown. Peaty
muck is an inseparable mixture of peat and muck.
The Azonal soils are represented in Florida by the Dry Sands,
Lithosols, and Alluvial soils.
VI.THE DRY SANDS
The Dry Sands occupy the excessively drained sandy ridges of
the peninsula and dunes along the beaches. They consist of almost
pure sands.
There are four soil series in the area. The St. Lucie has a thin
light gray surface over a white subsurface which extends to depths
of four or more feet without change. The Lakewood differs from the
St. Lucie in that the subsurface is yellow at depths below 12 to 24
inches. The Dade differs from the St. Lucie in that the subsurface
layer rests upon limestone at depths of 12 to 36 inches. The Palm
Beach soil consists of gray and brown sands mixed with fragments
of small sea shells.
VII.THE LITHOSOLS
The Lithosols are confined to comparatively small areas near the
southern tip of the peninsula and the Keys. They consist of what is
commonly known as rock land or pine land and marl.
The Rockdale series consists of limestone with numerous small
surface cavities filled with red to reddish-brown sandy loams and silt
loams or gray to grayish-brown sands. This soil is neutral to slightly
alkaline.
The Perrine series consists of light gray, very finely divided marl
(calcium carbonate) mixed with variable amounts of sand and organic
matter. Possibly several new soil series will be established on the basis
of organic matter or sand content when these areas are surveyed in
detail.
VIII.THE ALLUVIAL SOILS
The Alluvial soils occupy stream bottoms which are subject to
overflow. Since these soils are of little importance in Florida, they will
not be discussed here.
The foregoing discussion of Florida soils has been based on in
formation gained from detailed surveys conducted by the Soil Survey
Division of the United States Department of Agriculture and from
22

reconnaissance surveys by the College of Agriculture of the Univ
ersity of Florida. Only about one-fourth of the State has been covered
by detailed surveys, however, and most of these are now obsolete
due to marked improvement that has been made during the past few
years in the techniques required in this work. In any event, the re
ports and maps are now out of print for the most part and no longer
available at any price.
Some of the most notable aspects of the modern development
of the soil survey are the use of highly accurate aerial photographs
as base maps, insistent emphasis on the utility of the survey which
has encouraged the grouping of minor separations and the inclusion
of such highly pratical information as slope (from the standpoint
of cold drainage as well as water drainage and related soil erosion
implications), land cover and degree of erosion where this is a factor.
This means that we are woefully lacking in information on the
distribution of our soils with the exception of Lake and Polk counties
where the surveys are sufficiently modern (1923 and 1927 respect
ively) to serve present purposes. Even these two reports already
are practically out of print. In view of the basic value of the soil
survey for all types of agricultural research and planning and for many
other purposes such as equitable tax assessment, road planning and
construction and rural zoning and in view of the limited cost of such
a survey, it would appear difficult to find a more worthy purpose
for the expenditure of public moneys than for the development of
such surveys. Since such information is so essential for the develop
ment of effective programs in agricultural research and extension, it is
our hope as public workers, that the soil survey program in Florida
may be energetically resumed and expanded to include the entire
State as rapidly as possible. Soil surveys are under way at the present
time in Alachua and Collier Counties though entirely without benefit
of assistance from the State other than the cooperation of Experiment
Station workers in organizing the programs in the County and the
assistance of the County organization in defraying the field expenses
of the Federal workers engaged in doing the work.
23


Methods and Limitations of Soil Analysis
R. A. Camgan
In view of the increasing popular interest in methods of soil test
ing, it has been thought that there might be some demand for a dis
cussion of this field from the standpoint of its application to questions
of soil fertility. The direct study of fertility is not the only object
of Soil Science. It is however, the principal concern of the soil chemist,
representing, as it does, the most important application of soil studies
to agriculture. The following discussion will therefore be devoted
entirely to the application of analytical methods to the evaluation of
soil fertility.
Total Analysis
When it was first recognized that continued cropping may leave
the soil deficient in certain essential plant food constituents, the most
obvious procedure for studying these deficiencies was to analyze the
soil. Ones first inclination might be to determine the total quantity
of each essential element present in the soil, in other words, to run what
is known as a total analysis. By a total analysis we do not necessarily
mean that all constituents present are tested forso as to get a series
of percentages that will add to 100%but only that in the case of
each element that is tested for, the total amount of that element
present is determined. In carrying out an analysis of this kind, a
finely ground sample of the soil is mixed with powdered sodium
carbonate and the resulting dry mixture is melted in a platinum cruc
ible by heating to bright redness. This drastic treatment attacks the
minerals of the soil in such a way that the total quantities of substan
tially all the non-volatile elements present, except silica, can be brought
into solution by subsequent treatment with acid. The undissolved
silica can be weighed and the elements in solution, namely iron, alum
inum, calcium, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus and others can be
determined by the conventional processes of chemical analysis. In
cidentally, sodium and potassium have to be determined by a different
procedure, which is, however, similar in principle to that of the main
analysis.
As already pointed out, this type of analysis reveals the total
percentage of each element present, irrespective of the forms in which
it may occur, with certain minor exceptions. The system of analysis
employed is the result of years of work by chemists in many parts
of the world and is universally recognized as being capable of giving
results of an accuracy quite satisfactory for most purposes. Because
of the involved series of laboratory operations necessary, the method
is rather cumbersome and very time-consuming and can be success
fully handled only by a skilled operator working in a well-equipped
laboratory. The expense involved is accordingly too great to permit
very extensive use of this type of procedure in routine analysis.
25

Let us see, however, what kind of information a total analysis
can give us. Consider a soil containing a total of 0.20% potash. This
is equivalent to 4000 pounds per acre. Suppose an application of 1 000
pounds per acre of a fertilizer containing 5 % of potash were found
to be justified on this soil. The quantity of actual potash applied
would then be only 50 pounds per acre. Yet the original soil con
taining 4000 pounds per acre was in need of potash fertilizer. The
example given here is entirely plausible, conservative, in fact. In this
case, a total analysis would reveal 4000 pounds per acre on the un
fertilized soil and 4050 pounds per acre on the fertilized soil. As
a matter of fact, it would be extremely difficult if not impossible, to
run a total analysis accurately enough to show this slight difference.
Were it possible, the figures obtained would obviously be of little or
no value, since the 50 pounds added in the fertilizer was infinitely
more important to the crop than the entire 4000 pounds originally
in the soil. The situation just outlined results from the fact that the
4000 pounds of potash in the original soil occur mostly in the form
of compounds which are relatively insoluble in the soil water and
largely inaccessible to the plant for this reason. The potash in the
fertilizer, however, is added in the form of easily soluble compounds
which can be readily assimilated by plants.
The above illustration has been presented simply to exemplify
the fact that knowledge of the total quantity of a plant nutrient in the
soil would be altogether inadequate as a guide in planning fertilizer
applications. What is needed is a means of estimating only that part
of the total supply of any given element which is or may readily be
come soluble in the soil water.
There is no intention of implying that the method of total analysis
should be unreservedly condemned for use in the study of the soil.
This type of analysis has a definite place in research in the compar
ison and classification of soils, in studying the natural processes of
soil formation and as an aid in understanding certain properties of
the soil.
Determination of Readily Available Plant Nutrients
We have seen that a total analysis does not correlate with the
capacity of a soil to supply the plant food constituents. It is natural,
then, that we should inquire whether or not it might be possible to
find an extracting solution which would have the power to dissolve
the various plant nutrients from a sample of soil to an extent com
parable with the ability of a plant to assimilate these elements from
the same soil. In other words, our object would be attained if we
could devise a solution which, in its solvent action on the essential
plant nutrients, would duplicate the feeding power of the plant. If
a sample of soil were shaken in contact with such a solution, the more
soluble constituents would pass into solution leaving behind the rel
atively insoluble forms undisolved. The resulting extract could then
be filtered from the mass of soil and analyzed for its content of plant
nutrients. An analysis of this kind, if it accomplished all that was
26

expected of it, would give us the desired information regarding the
fertilizer needs of our soil. This system of analysis has, indeed, as
sumed great importance in the investigation of soil fertility. The met
hod is, however, subject to limitations which are not apparent in the
light of the preceding discussion.
Before proceeding further, it is probably advisable to define two
of our most commonly used terms.
( 1 ) Availability. When we speak of a certain quantity of an ele
ment as being available we mean that that quantity of the element
is present in forms of chemical combination which are more or less
readily soluble in the soil water and therefore may become accessible
for the use of the plant within the immediate future. There is no
sharp distinction between available and unavailable forms in
many cases. These terms have meaning only in a comparative sense.
(2) Base Exchange. The property of base exchange is one of the
most typical characteristics of soils. This property resides in the fine
ly divided clay and organic matter. The latter two materials are able
to hold certain basic elements such as potassium (potash), calcium
(lime) and magnesium in a loose form of combination from which
they may be readily displaced by chemically similar elements occurr
ing in the soil solution. This process of replacement is a simple act of
exchange. Thus an atom of potassium, in solution in the soil water,
may displace a sodium atom from a clay particle. The potassium
atom then takes the place formerly held by the sodium atom and the
sodium atom passes into solution. The two atoms merely exchange
places. The same potassium atom might in turn be displaced by an
atom of some other basic element. Moreover, the process of exchange
between two elements may operate in either direction. For any given
soil, the direction in which the exchange takes place is governed in
part by the composition of the water solution in contact with the soil
particles.
Elements which are held by the soil in this way are said to be in
the exchangeable or replaceable form. The process of replace
ment is known as base exchange and is of importance in the case
of potash, calcium, magnesium, ammonia nitrogen and other elements
as well. The nutrients held in the soil in exchangeable form are com
monly considered to be available for use by plants, since they are
only retained in a loose state of combination with the soil particles.
However, all of the available nutrients are not necessarily held in
the exchangeable form. For example, the phosphorus in freshly
applied superphosphate is readily available simply because it occurs
in a soluble form.
We can now return to our consideration of methods of deter
mining the quantities of available nutrients in the soil by the use of
extracting solutions. It is evident that the really essential feature of
any such method is the extracting solution used. The problem of
devising appropriate solutions for this purpose has been studied since
1845. In this year Daubeny proposed the use of carbonated water,
27

a solvent which has since been advocated by more recent investigators
on the ground that it approximates the solution surrounding the feed
ing root hairs in the soil, which itself is highly charged with carbonic
acid given off by the roots. Dyer, in 1 894, proposed 1 % citric acid,
since this strength of acid approximates the acid content of an average
plant sap and was therefore expected to imitate the action of plant
roots on the soil. Some workers have used N/200 hydrochloric acid,
claiming that this strength of acid dissolves from the soil quantities of
plant nutrients corresponding to the amounts removed by an ordinary
crop. Fraps, in Texas, has advocated 0.2N nitric acid for determining
available phosphorus, a recommendation which is based on his obser
vation that this acid dissolves completely the phosphates of calcium
which are believed to furnish available phosphorus, and exerts but little
action on the phosphates of iron and aluminum which he considers
to be relatively unavailable. Pure water and even alkaline solutions
are sometimes used.
These examples are presented to indicate the range of variation
in the solutions employed and in the reasoning governing their sel
ection. Various others, too numerous to mention, have been ad
vocated by different investigators. Most of these solutions contain
a small concentration of acid, the function of which is the decompos
ition and resulting solution of the more easily attacked compounds
of the nutrient elements. In many cases neutral salts are added to
aid in controlling the pH of the solution or to confer the base ex
change property on it. There is a widespread feeling that the deter
mination of the exchangeable potassium, calcium and magnesium gives
about as reliable an indication of the immediately available supplies
of these elements as can be expected in the present state of develop
ment of soil analysis. For this determination, a solution of a neutral"
salt such as ammonium chloride or preferably ammonium acetate is
used.
It appears from the foregoing remarks that there is only limited
agreement among soil chemists in regard to the selection of suitable
solvents. This fact, though, is merely indicative of the difficulties
involved. The availability of a nutrient in the soil is affected not only
by its solubility, but by the rate at which it actually dissolves, and by
the rate at which it may be absorbed by the plant. The availability
is in some cases diminished by the presence of other materials in the
soil which have the property of slowly tying up considerable quan
tities of originally soluble material in insoluble forms. The actual
quantity of a given nutrient taken up by the crop is the net result of
the operation of these and other conflicting factors. Yet in running
an analysis we attempt, in a single laboratory operation, to evaluate all
these factors in terms of a single number. Fortunately, however, the
one factor of solubility (or replaceability) probably dominates the
results in the larger number of cases. Hence, on studying data obtained
by certain of the methods in use, we find a reasonable degree of corr
elation between the test results and crop response to fertilization.
As a result of the operation of the disturbing factors referred to, how-
28

ever, irregularities are rather common, even with methods that have
attained a measurable degree of success.
On comparing several of the extracting solutions in current use,
wide differences may be noted in the quantities of a given plant nut
rient extracted from the same sample of soil. For example, suppose
two different solvents differing markedly from each other in acid
content are used for determining available phosphorus in a series of
three soils. Results somewhat as shown in the adjoining table would
be entirely plausible.
Soil No
... i
2
3
Phosphorus extracted by strongly acid
solvent, lb./acre
.100
200
300
Phosphorus extracted by weakly acid
solvent, lb./acre
... 10
20
30
At first sight it might appear that the data obtained by
one or
the other of these methods must necessarily be erroneous. Certainly
the prospect of calculating a fertilizer formula from either of these sets
of figures does not look promising. On the other hand, soil No.2
shows twice as much available phosphorus as soil No. 1 by either
method., A similar relation holds for soil No. 3. Thus, regardless
of which of the two solvents is used, we get the same picture of the
relative amounts of available phosphorus in the three soils. The ab
solute magnitude of the figures obtained is unimportant provided
that the test can faithfully reveal significant differences between diff
erent levels of nutrient concentrations in the soil. From this standpoint
the two solvents in the above discussion would be equally satisfactory.
In using a soil analytical method the most vital question of all
is that of whether the test results actually mean something in terms of
crop yields or other plant response. The ultimate criterion of the
adequacy and availability of nutrients in the soil is to be found in the
growth and condition of the crop. A method of analysis for available
plant nutrients becomes of value, then, only when it has been shown
to give results which correlate with the fertilizer needs of the soil as
determined by the response of the crop to fertilization.
Nothing that has been said here is intended to imply that soil
analysis can supplant practical experience. Probably the most rat
ional view is to regard soil testing as a potentially valuable aid to be
used only as supplementary to practical experience, that is, to use it
as a guide in forming judgments which otherwise would have to depend
on experience alone. A method of analysis can reach its maximum
usefulness only in the hands of an intelligent worker who has full
knowledge of local conditions together with experience in the inter
pretation of the test, under these conditions. Valid conclusions can
be drawn only when due consideration is given to all factors which
may affect the interpretation of the test. Soil type and the kind of
crop to be grown are of vital importance in this connection.
29

Soil Reaction (pH)
The determination of pH is one test which we can justly regard
with some degree of satisfaction. The fundamental importance of
soil pH in practical agriculture is unquestioned and the application
of this test has undoubtedly resulted in far-reaching benefits. Fairly
satisfactory methods exist for the determination of this property and
the interpretation of the test results is reasonably well understood for
a number of soils and crops.
The glass electrode method is generally recognized as being the
most satisfactory, at least from the standpoint of accuracy. The
quinhydrone electrode can, however, be used with satisfaction if cer
tain exceptional soils are excluded. Unfortunately, the latter two
methods require rather expensive electrical apparatus. In the absence
of this equipment, colorimetric methods can be used on a great many
soils, if proper working conditions are adhered to.
Lest it be implied that investigators have approached a stable
viewpoint in their understanding of soil pH and its application, it is
perhaps desirable to indicate briefly the direction which experimental
work in this field is taking.
Customary practice in determining pH involves agitating the sam
ple of soil with water and running the actual pH test on the resulting
soil-water suspension. Dilution with water has been necessary in the
past since the conventional electrodes available have been serviceable
only in fluid mixtures. For avoiding the error inherent in diluting
the soil with water, the use of a new spear-type glass electrode has
been suggested by McGeorge ( 1 ). This is a rugged type of electrode
which can be pressed directly into the moist, undiluted soil or into
soil which has been moistened with a minimum proportion of water.
Readings taken in this way have been assumed to give indications
of the pH of the soil under actual field conditions more accurately
than can be obtained by the conventional procedure.
Another interesting development has been the study of the effect
of root hairs on the pH of the microscopic layer of soil water in their
immediate neighborhood. By working with electrodes having micros
copic dimensions Sekera (2) has shown, for example, that in a soil
where the pH of the prevailing soil solution is about 6.0, the pH in
the layer of water in immediate contact with the root hairs may be
as low as 4.9, due to evolution of carbon dioxide by the root hairs.
This observation would tend to indicate that plants actually draw
their nourishment from a solution having a pH which is not necess
arily that of the soil solution as a whole, as determined by our present
methods.
These examples have been presented to indicate in what manner
further extension of our knowledge in this field may result in improve
ment both in methods and in interpretation.
(1) McGEORGE, W. T., Jour. Am. Soc. Agron. 29, 841 (1937).
(2) SEKERA, F., quoted by KUBIENA, W., in Micropedology, Collegiate Press,
Ames, Iowa (1938).
30

The Spectrograph
Increasing recognition of the importance of the trace elements
in practical agriculture has resulted in the application of the spectro
graph to the routine analysis of various agricultural materials. Since
these elements occur in minute quantities, their determination by chem
ical procedures is often attended with considerable difficulty and at
great expense for labor and materials. The advantages of the spec
trograph have been particularly evident for this type of analysis,
since by its use, the certain detection of minute traces of many elements
can be affected much more rapidly and economically. In the case
of numerous elements, the spectrograph can detect the presence of
smaller quantities than can be found by chemical procedure. Perhaps
a brief explanation of the principle of operation of this instrument
may be in order.
Light is believed to be transmitted through space in the form
of a continuous series of waves. Differences in color are due to dif
ferences in the length of the waves, measured along the direction in
which the light is travelling. Violet light consists of relatively short
waves. Red light has nearly twice the wave-length of violet light.
White light results from the mixture of all colors, ranging from the
shortest violet waves through blue, green, yellow, and orange up to
the longest red waves. White light becomes separated into all of its
component colors by passing through a prism, which in its simplest
form is merely a triangular block of glass. In going through the
prism the light rays are bent to one side. Since the shorter wave
lengths are bent more than the long ones, the violet light is found
to be separated from the red light. If the separated white light after
passing through the prism, is allowed to fall on a white surface, there
will be observed a continuous band of color with violet on one end
and red on the other, the remaining colors falling in between in the
order named above.
Now when any substance is raised to a high temperature it gives
off light. The light given off may consist of various wave-lengths
but in the case of an incandescent gas the actual wave-lengths em
itted are characteristic of the chemical composition of the substance.
When cooking on a gas stove, we may often notice irregular patches
of flame which glow with a characteristic yellow light. This yellow
color is due to the presence in the flame of vapors of the metal
sodium which has been spilled on the burner in the form of common
salt (sodium chloride). Compounds of potash under similar cir
cumstances give a violet color; barium compounds give a green;
and strontium compounds, a red color. In each case the color is due
to a particular wave-length of light. Under certain conditions the
appearance of these colors can be used for identifying the elements
named simply by direct observation with the eye while holding a
particle of the unknown material in the hottest part of a flame. This
is, of course, impossible when numerous chemical elements are present
in the same sample. With the aid of the spectrograph, however,
the various wave-lengths can be separated and each one identified.
31

In doing this, the sample of materialwhich may be soilis placed
in a crater in the lower carbon of an arc light. The arc is turned on
and in the intense heat the entire sample vaporizes, each chemical
element present emitting its own characteristic wave-lengths of light.
This light is allowed to fall on an opening in the form of a very fine
vertical slit between two jaws of metal. If a camera were placed
immediately behind this slit, there would be obtained on developing
the photographic plate, nothing but a single short vertical line, the
image of the illuminated slit. In the spectrograph, however, a prism
is interposed between the slit and the photographic plate. As ex
plained above, the prism separates the various wave-lengths of light
so that instead of one single image, there results a horizontal row
of short vertical lines. Each of these lines is an image of the slit, but
each line corresponds to some definite wave-length of light emitted by
the incandescent vapors of a definite chemical element in the arc.
From the exact position of any given line it is possible to determine
what chemical element gave rise to that particular wave-length by
comparison with the lines produced by all the known elements. In
this way it is possible for one who is thoroughly familiar with the
various spectrum lines, as they are called, to identify the elements
present in a sample.
To determine actual quantities present, the photoelectric cell is
used. With its aid it is possible to measure the intensity of blackening
of any given line, a quantity which is related to the amount of the
element present. If, in analyzing a soil by this method, the soil itself
is placed directly in the arc, then obviously a total analysis is obtained.
If an analysis for available percentages is desired, resort must be had
to the use of an extracting solution, as described above. The spec
trograph may also be applied, however, to the analysis of the resulting
solution.
Field Kit Tests
The methods discussed in the foregoing paragraphs have, in the
main, legitimate application in the investigation of soil fertility and
are representative of procedures employed in the various research
institutions engaged in this field of study. Although opinions may
differ as to interpretation, the definiteness of the information secured
can be depended upon. In the conduct of a research program, where
so much depends on the reliability of the data secured, the use of
reasonably standardized laboratory methods is a matter of necessity.
There has arisen, however, a demand for a rough and ready
system of soil testing for use in the field by workers without partic
ular training in laboratory technique. In response to this demand,
several field kits for so-called quick testing have appeared. In
adapting a laboratory method for field use, the obvious requirement
of effective simplification of procedure necessarily places decided res
trictions on the precision obtainable. It remains to be seen just how
32

serious this limitation may be in the use of the field kit. Thus, the
extent to which these kit tests might be generally applicable under
Florida conditions must await the accumulation of further experience.
SUMMARY
The determination of the total percentage present does not give
definite information regarding the availibility of a given plant nutrient
in the soil.
Approximate knowledge of the availibility of a nutrient may be
gained by determining the amount of it soluble in certain solvents,
subject to the limitation that the test results be not too literally
interpreted. Data obtained in this way should ordinarily be under
stood to have meaning only in a comparative sense.
The determination of soil pH by present methods is generally
recognized to yield information of immediate practical value, although
further studies of this test give promise of materially extending its
usefulness.
A rough explanation has been given of the principles employed
in the use of the spectrograph. The applications of this instrument
in agricultural research have been pointed out.
EDITORS NOTE: The numerous questions asked from the floor following this gen
eral discussion of methods of soil analysis were indicative of the genuine interest that
exists in this subject; also of the rich field of endeavor which the Committee
on Methods of Analysis has for its very own.
33


The Soil and Water Conservation Problem in the
Everglades

Dr. R. V. Allison
I am sure we all regret very much that Mr. Herman Gunter, our
State Geologist, could not find it possible to be with us today to out
line the intimate relation of the field of Hydrology to Soil Science
and to Florida agriculture, and to point out some of the more impor
tant problems in this field with which we are confronted practically
every day.
Our consciousness of the importance of a better understanding
of the duty of water and its relation to the soil as well as to the plant
has developed rapidly here in Florida during the past few years espec
ially as these relationships have to do with the movement of soil water
and the availability to the roots of growing plants of a proper supply
of this vital solvent at all times. As we get into the problem, how
ever, we quickly come to the realization of how dangerously little
we know even about the relationship of this dynamic, soil-water cycle
to the stability and effectiveness of the soil fertility complex as ex
pressed in the ordinary growth of plants. Florida is a flat country
with notably high and low seasonal rainfall, a country of fires at one
time and floods at another. What she needs is a happy middleground
between the normal trend of these two extremes and this can be at
tained only by intelligent study and planning followed by methodical
management and control.
Inasmuch as there are few, if any other, persons in the State with
sufficient basic knowledge of our water resources to cover this question
in the breadth of its original statement, and in the manner in which
we hoped Mr. Gunter would treat it, and since your Chairman gave
his prior promise to say a few words on some phase of the subject in the
event he could not be present, I should like to discuss with you, in a
preliminary sort of way, what long has been regarded by some of us
as one of the most important hydrological problems to be found in
this or any other State. Reference is to our great need for a com
prehensive soil and water conservation program for the Everglades.
In referring to the Everglades conservation problem as basically
hydrological and primarily of a water control nature it is necessary to
understand, first of all, something of the genesis of the Everglades
soils.
In the first place the peat and muck soils blanketing the vast
expanse of this great area were formed almost entirely from sawgrass
in the presence of an excess of water, probably a condition of partial
to complete inundation most of the year, just as other organic soils
of this nature have been formed. This should not be taken to mean
that there were not periods of low water table and even drought in
the course of the passing centuries that have witnessed the formation
35

of these soils. Charcoal and ash in the deeper layers of the soil pro
file in several sections tell us that there were deficiencies of moisture
and extensive fires from time to time. Nevertheless, the predominant
influence has been water. Otherwise there would have been no ap
preciable accumulation of plant material in the form in which we find
it and which constitutes the body proper of these remarkable soils.
Furthermore, the topography of the supporting foundation mat
erial upon which the Everglades deposit has developed, consisting of
porous lime rock, marl or sand, is not of the nature of a closed basin
but rather of a broad, open trough about 50 miles wide. This extends
essentially from Lake Okeechobee on the North to Cape Sable on the
South, most of the way between low land elevations to the east and
west only a few feet higher than the surface of the Everglades itself.
The average gradient of the surface, southwards, is little more than
two inches to the mile. In its undisturbed condition, therefore, the
Everglades was a vast, unbroken plain of gray-green sawgrass as far
as the eye could reach.
Lake Okeechobee, lying at the head of the Everglades, also
serves as a great, shallow basin at the foot of the Kissimmee Valley.
Thus, we have the three components of an immense hydrologic unit,
( 1 ) The Kissimmee River, and numerous smaller streams (the water
shed), (2) Lake Okeechobee (the storage basin) and (3) The Ever
glades (the overflow area), all of which shall have to be taken into
careful account in planning a soil and water conservation program for
the area as a whole.
Just as the soils of the Everglades were formed by the grace of
an abundance of water, so are such soils destroyed by injudicious
drainage operations that are not followed up with proper protective
measures. This has been the tragedy of the Everglades. For the past
quarter century a large scale drainage development has served only
to dewater vast areas, much of which under the best possible con
ditions of agricultural expansion would not be needed for many decades
to come. What is the result in the meantime? Sheer destruction.
Catastrophic fires have swept over the area nearly every winter (the
dry season) that have not only destroyed immense potential soil values
but also caused undue hardship to plant, animal and human life that
happened in the way of the biting flames or billowing clouds of acrid
smoke.
Aside from actual burning, the oxidation and shrinkage of such
soils when exposed in this way takes an even greater toll. Thus,
shrinkage alone, as a result of air drying, of an excavated profile from
sawgrass soil four feet long, nine inches wide and six inches deep show
ed a reduction of about four volumes into one! Under natural con
ditions in the open glades four miles south of the Bolles Canl where
there has been no cultivation whatsoever, careful measurements have
shown a surface subsidence of 3.45 feet, or about one third of the
original depth of the peat. ( 1 ) It is found to be appreciably greater
near the large canals, as might be expected. With the incidence of fire,
almost any loss might be experienced in a single season from the burn-
(1) See Figure 22, Page 56.
36

ing of only the plant cover and accumulated surface debris on down
to several feet of the soil body itself. All of this, of course, is indep
endent of the progressive surface subsidence of these soils that ac
companies cultivation. Following the first breaking, the loss of elevat
ion is quite rapid due, in good part, to physical compaction in form
ing a denser soil body. Then it slows up quite appreciably. How to
slow down this subsidence or bring it to a complete halt after a reas
onable period of cultivation is the vital question in the continued use
of soils of this nature. The principal answer must always be in the
proper handling of the ground water in relation to crop rotations that
are developed with this all-important objective in view.
Inasmuch as the technique of conservation is necessarily differ
ent under cultivated and uncultivated conditions, the Everglades prob
lem might well be divided into two parts on this basis for clarity of
discussion and understanding.
(A) Lands that are definitely under cultivation or located with
in a sub-drainage unit and available for cultivation at any time,
and
(B) Lands outside of sub-drainage districts and a part of the
open, unreclaimed Everglades which comprise nine tenths or
more of the total area at the present time.
A. Developed Lands.
In the Everglades proper there are, or were, between two and
three millions of acres of organic soils, some of it of great potential
value. Of this, approximately 100,000 acres are under cultivation at
the present time. Even if an additional area of 100,000 acres were to
be placed in use during the next twenty years it is obvious that the
great bulk of the area would still remain for development by post
erity; that is, if it is not completely destroyed in the meantime by our
present program of neglect.
Properly developed and carefully cultivated, the Everglades soils
are highly productive. Cane yields during the past season over large
fields have been as high as 80 tons or more of cut cane per acre, and
sugar yields as high as 9.25 tons. The average for the entire crop
for the season now closing is more than 40 tons per acre, with an
average sugar content of more than 10.6 per cent. Beans, celery,
potatoes, cabbage and many other truck crops are equally responsive.
More than a thousand boxes of celery have been produced per acre;
more than 35 tons of cabbage, and other crops in proportion. Forage
crops for the support of a livestock industry are of particular promise,
since, taken in conjunction with sugar cane, they will not only constit
ute an excellent base for the general type of farming that this country
especially requires but also would appear distinctly favorable for a
soil of this nature where the highest possible water table should be
maintained together with a minimum of cultivated surface exposure,
all in the interest of soil conservation through the prevention of sur
face subsidence.
37

Accordingly, under cultivated conditions, we need to know more
of the effect of cultivation and of water control conditions involved
in various systems of agriculture upon the permanence of the soil mat
erial itself. Therefore, the planning of water control for cultivated
areas must be carefully coordinated with that on the undeveloped areas
which should be flooded as much of the year as possible.
B. Undeveloped Lands.
From the above definition of the manner in which the Everglades
soils have been formed and the combustible nature of their principal
components, it is apparent that the main problems of conservation
for immediate attention are in the open, undeveloped sections of the
area, which have not been touched by the plow, and for great acreages
of which there may not be economic need of development for decades
to come.
The fact that there has been a general dewatering of this vast
and unused, unattended area of organic soil over the central and lower
part of the peninsula for a number of years has created several prob
lems in addition to that of soil conservation which automatically become
a part of the project as a whole.
Notable among these are:
1. Overdrainage of the Everglades National Park area and pro
gressive destruction of many of its most important natural feat
ures including food resources for wild life.
2. A lowering of the freshwater table under the agricultural
areas of the lower east coast from Florida City to West Palm
Beach, part of it the most tropical section of the United States,
with heavy damage to the productivity of these areas in terms
of winter vegetables, sub-tropical fruits and other types of gen
eral and specialized agriculture found in the region.
3. A dangerous decline of the recharging action by surface wat
ers over important domestic water supply areas to the west of the
metropolitan sections of the lower east coast that is causing real
alarm at the present time.
4. A notable effect in producing lower winter temperatures and
so setting up this expansive area in the open glades as a great
basin of cold in the form of night temperatures that are a
real menace to agriculture in all contiguous areas. Under con
ditions of low water-tables in the open glades that have pro
duced a deep layer of dry, combustible material over the surface
(following the first frost) and a foot or so of dry, fibrous top
soil, winter temperatures as low as 9 degrees F. have been
recorded in undeveloped sections!
Thus, over-drainage and excessive dewatering of the open, un
used sections of the Everglades have not only stopped the formation
of soil by processes that should continue as long as possible but are
producing shrinkage and oxidation losses, independent of burning,
that are all but incredible. Burning of these soils and soil materials
38

under such conditions, through the long dry seasons lasting through
most of the winter, adds enormously to these losses. The past win
ter has been one of the worst on record, insofar as physical damage
to the Everglades soils is concerned.
There is only one logical answer to all these problems that is
at all practical and that is RE-WATERING. That is to say, there
should be held on these unused areas not only all the rainwater that
naturally falls on them but this should be supplemented, just as faT
as is found possible and feasible, by water from the original source
of overflow, namely Lake Okeechobee. By this means the soils in
the sections so flooded will not only be protected against shrinkage,
natural oxidation and burning, but the natural processes of soil format
ion will be reinstated.
Furthermore, the restoration of overland flow of surface waters
down the peninsula will reestablish natural values in the Everglades
National Park that are vital to the future of that area. Such a re
watered condition of the back country also will elevate the natural
water gradient under the agricultural areas of the lower east coast,
referred to under 2 above, as it finds its way to sea level through
the porous subsoil in a manner that should give appreciable relief to that
problem. In the same way a flooding of the recharge areas to the west
of the metropolitan areas of the lower east coast should bring relief
to the domestic water supply problems of that section and take care
of any amount of pumping that may be thrown against them at any
time in the future. Finally, the establishment of a great, shallow,
inland lake of this nature should go far in ameliorating low winter
temperatures that have developed in the past out of the de-watered
condition of the back country referred to under 4 above, and which
will continue to menace the agriculture of the important contiguous
areas just as long as the Everglades is handled as it has been during
the past two decades.
PROCEDURE
In a problem of this dimension, long range planning must be
stressed and every consideration given to all three components of the
system, namely, the watershed, the reservoir, and the overflow area.
Above all, the needs of the areas that already have been reclaimed
should be sharply differentiated from those of the unreclaimed sec
tions on the one hand, and the permanent water reserve areas on
the other. The fact that the Federal government already has expend
ed more than seventeen millions of dollars in the construction of a per
manent, massive dike around certain developed sections of Lake Okee
chobee constitutes a truly indispensable beginning in the proper hand
ling of the regional waters involved in this great project. As a mat
ter of fact, it places the entire project on a new and much more feas
ible plane of consideration than it ever has been on before. This,
coupled with the very constructive attitude of the District Office of
39

the U. S. Engineers charged with the maintenance and operation of
these lake control facilities, is one of the most hopeful and heartening
signs for the future.
A. Lands Under Cultivation.
The primary need in connection with lands under cultivation
is for careful, exacting study in the handling of the ground water
under such conditions looking to economic plant response on the one
hand and the best possible stabilization of the soil body on the other
which will prevent, if possible, at a certain reasonable point, any further
surface subsidence, whatsoever. Very careful consideration must be
given to water relationships of this nature as between developed and
undeveloped areas especially as related to irrigation requirements and
drainage operations. In fact this consideration should become the
basis of the general plan of development for the Everglades in the
future. Such a plan should not only require a unit basis of land de
velopment but also must be broad enough and comprehensive enough
to envision the handling of the last unit of reclaimable land at whatever
time economic conditions may permit such development. When the
absolute need for establishing permanent water resources as a part of
such a plan is fully realized the intriguingly complicated nature of the
problem as a whole becomes more evident. The first question then
becomes, where should these reserve areas be located and on how
extensive a basis should they be planned. This phase of the planning
must be preceded by soil and other physical surveys.
B. Undeveloped Lands.
While the problems associated with the proper use of the land
under cultivated conditions are exceedingly important, and a great
amount of research is still needed in this connection, the most press
ing consideration we are now facing is in the proper handling of the
great area of undeveloped lands. In other words, it is here that we
are experiencing the greatest soil losses and it is the re-watering of the
de-watered expanse that should bring such profound benefits as, in part,
have been listed above. Accordingly the following steps would appear
to be a logical series leading to the organization of a comprehensive
plan for handling the Everglades both from the standpoint of proper
development and protection of cultivated areas and conservation of the
soil and water resources of unreclaimed sections.
1. A comprehensive review and study should be made of all
available engineering, meteorological, and other physical data pertain
ing to all parts of the Everglades area and its environs wherever it
may be found, whether in Washington, Tallahassee, Jacksonville, West
Palm Beach, Miami, Everglades City, or Clewiston. Although there
is an enormous amount of data available at different points and from
different sources, no such comprehensive digest and evaluation has
ever been made of it to serve as a definite basis for further study and
planning.
40

2. Air surveys should be developed for most of the area not
only to serve as base maps for soil and other surveys but also for the
assistance they would give in the evaluation of other phases of the
work. Naturally air surveys of this section of Florida would also serve
many other useful purposes.
3. Immediately basic information furnished under 1 and 2
becomes available it will be possible to begin rapidly to fill in missing
data by instrument and other surveys to the end that a comprehensive
and adequate physical basis for planning will be had.
4. Contemporaneously with the rounding out of the physical sur
vey under 3 above, research and demonstration features of the
general project should be planned, some of them necessarily of a long
time nature, and put into effect. Such studies and demonstrations
should be the outgrowth of an integrated analysis by both State and
Federal subject matter specialists from every field of interest that has
a bearing on the problems involved.
5. As soon as an adequate system of data for any phase of the
general problem is available for the purpose, long range planning
should be instituted. Out of this should grow, first of all, a works
program for soil and water conservation in the undeveloped sections
of the Everglades.
6. Any works program of a permanent nature should be devel
oped as a definite and integral part of the general plan for the Ever
glades, which plan should be a unit plan and the basis for the dev
elopment of all reclaimable sections of the area in the future.
7. Contemporaneously with the cooperative development of the
physical program and general plan for the future, careful coordination
also must be had among Federal, State and local officials from the
standpoint of adjusting present conditions of land ownership and tax
delinquency as this is a vital part of the problem as a whole.
SUMMARY STATEMENT
The principal problem in the Florida Everglades is that of dev
eloping a definite plan of reclamation for the area as a whole. This
must be broad enough to supply information on how to improve met
hods of development and use of these organic soils on the one hand,
and on the other, to hold the undeveloped or reserve areas under
the protective influence of the highest possible water table throughout
the entire year. There is no incompatibility between the two pro
cedures or purposes for developed and undeveloped lands, respectively.
In fact, they can very definitely and effectively supplement each other.
Such a plan furthermore, must be broad enough to encompass the
individual problems of all three components of the system, namely,
the watershed (Kissimmee Valley), the storage basin (Lake Okee
chobee), and the overflow area (Everglades), and so draw them into
a closely interwoven schedule of development as a whole.
41

This problem of the proper handling of organic soils is not by
any means peculiar to Florida. It is to be found in practically every
state in the Union notably, perhaps, in Minnesota, Michigan, California
and North Carolina. There is little doubt that the Everglades area is the
most extensive and valuable of all. If a successful project can be
organized in Florida, therefore, it will doubtless assist very materially
in the development of the peculiar technology required for the handling
of this particular type of conservation problem wherever it may be
found.
EDITORS NOTE: The brief discussion of the Everglades problem outlined above
represents an extension of Doctor Allisons remarks that is based in part on a
statement on the same subject that was prepared by him only a few days later
(April 24) for the record of a hearing before a Sub-committee of the Senate
Appropriations Committee in Washington.
The spontaneous discussion from the floor that followed this presentation
indicated in a very definite way the widespread interest that exists in this vital
problem. This discussion not only involved the problems of the Everglades proper,
but those of the various sections of the Kissimmee Valley as well, indicating
excellent insight of all participants into the broader aspects of a vital situation
that now has been fully opened for public review.
As a result of this active discussion from the floor, the President of the
Society was instructed to appoint a standing committee whose object would be
to collect, study, and summarize existing data from all available sources, relative
to the Everglades problem, the results of its work to be presented in the form
of reports at future meetings of the Society together with recommendations
for action in the future. This authorization was found to fall well within the
framework of the Constitution (Article IV) and a Soil and Water Conservation
Committee subsequently was appointed, Page 64 of this Proceedings, which
has State-wide responsibility in this important field.
NOTE: With the close of this phase of the program, the meeting was
adjourned until the following morning when a joint meeting with the
Florida State Florticultura! Society was scheduled. The total recorded
attendance at the organization meeting was 81. A large part of this
group subscribed to formal membership in the Society in the course
of the meeting or responded favorably to invitations to do so by corres
pondence within a few days following the meeting when the list
was carefully checked.
42

The photographs that follow show something of the natural con
ditions in the open, undeveloped Everglades, past and present, some
of the reclamation and water control relationships, the possibilities
of a considerable range of agricultural plants, including the striking
benefits from the use of certain trace elements on the Everglades peat
and, finally, the great importance of water control and careful land
use planning especially from the standpoint of SOIL CONSERVATION.
FIGURE 1. The Open Glades, looking southeast in the direction of Fort Lauderdale
through a narrow border of elder along the North New River Canal at a position about
12 miles south of Lake Okeechobee. The land cover reaching to the horizon is the char
acteristic sawgrass of the Everglades. Note the bank of water hyacinths along the edge
of the canal. If not held in check this plant multiplies rapidly and soon clogs the channel.
43

FIGURE 2. A close-up of sawgrass (Cladium sp.) from which the main body of the
Everglades soil has been formed. This is an extremely coarse, heavy sedge characterized
by strong, siliceous teeth along either margin as well as the back of the midrib. Normally it
grew to a height of 8 to 10 feet under the natural conditions of protection that existed
in the Everglades prior to general drainage operations. A dense cover of grass of this
nature was exceedingly difficult and even hazardous to penetrate especially with the
facilities for traverse available to early survey parties.
44

FIGURE 3. Impenetrable growth of Custard apple (Anona sp.) that characterized
a narrow belt of high grade muck along the south and east shores of Lake Okeechobee
prior to reclamation activities. It was on account of the growth of this species, which
occurred only on the high grade muck for the most part, that this soil has been known
as Custard apple soil for many years. In formal soil survey reports it is now being
designated as Okeechobee muck. Photo by Dr. Blatchley of Indianapolis about 1910.
FIGURE 4. A view of the Lower Glades in the Everglades National Park area
where the sawgrass meets the mangrove, taken from a position on the Ingraham High
way about ten miles north of Flamingo. The soil profile in this location is made up of
blue-green algae marl to a depth of about three inches over a three inch layer of peaty
muck underlain by about six inches of geologic marl over lime rock.
45

FIGURE 5. An early dredging operation in the open glades, the dredge Everglades
cutting its way through the deep, wet peat characteristic of the area. Note the absence
of any shrub or tree growth whatsoever, entirely to the horizon. Photo taken about 1910
at a position about twelve miles south of Lake Okeechobee by Dr. Blatchley of Indianapolis.
FIGURE 6. Barging supplies into the Lake Okeechobee area through the South
Canal, during the early days of reclamation. With the development of good highways
throughout the region the use of the arterial drainage canals for transportation purposes
has ceased entirely. This latter fact will minimize very considerably the cost of an
effective program of soil and water conservation in the Everglades since this can be
accomplished in the open, undeveloped areas only by restoring the land to its original
condition of overflow as much of the year as possible.
46

FIGURE 7. A natural cover of pigweeds in the Lake Okeechobee area characteristic
of this and other types of wild growth that quickly occupies the land when cultivation
ceases. Such a growth as shown above will develop in the Everglades in six or seven
weeks under late Spring conditions.
47

FIGURE 8. A Storey Gyrolette working on the property of the U. S. Sugar Cor
poration in the deep muck soils of the Upper Glades near Lake Okeechobee. The revolving
tines or plows stir the soil thoroughly to a depth of about 20 inches without turning
it to any appreciable extent. This is proving a valuable operation especially in bringing
newly developed land into production. Unnecessary stirring, cultivation and exposure of soils
of this nature should be strictly avoided, however, in the interest of conservation.
FIGURE 9. Moleing in the muck soils of the Everglades. A torpedo-shaped tool
is drawn behind a thin, shoe-like implement at the lower end of the heavy knife
that projects into the soil from the rear end of the horizontal beam that is slung mid
way between the truss wheels. The depth of the mole is regulated by the windlass.
If carefully done, water control channels (drainage and irrigation) are formed in the
soil by this means which are useful for several seasons. The excavated profile (inset)
shows the natural opening formed by the mole in the soil and the complete manner in
which the cut made by the knife closed (immediately above the opening) after its passage.
From the raggedness of the cut midway between the opening and the surface, however,
it is evident that the knife had accumulated a considerable amount of refpse across its
edge and was shoving it along ahead of it. Note the fibrous character of the peat throughout
the profile especially in the lower depths. A) surface of soil. B) Imperfect line of cut.
C) Perfect line of cut. D) The mole opening formed in the peat.
48

FIGURE 10. General view of part of a series of water table plots installed at the
Everglades Experiment Station while still being planted to a single crop to study the
uniformity of the various areas. Eight different water tables or soil moisture controls, in
cluding two with overhead spray and one with a fluctuating ground water table, are involved
in this study of plant relationships and preferences along with oxidation and subsidence
effects upon the soil itself.
49

FIGURE 11. A section of the Lake Okeechobee dike at the time of planting Bermuda
grass to protect its sloping sides against washing. This is a massive structure designed
to hold the lake in place under any and all conditions. It is one of the vital keys to a
constructive, long-range soil and water conservation program for the Everglades and for
South Florida.
FIGURE 12. An air view of the Port Mayaca development on the eastern shore
of Lake Okeechobee. Note the lake in the background and St. Lucie Canal (the eastern
control outlet) across the upper, right-hand corner flowing towards the Atlantic Ocean.
There is here illustrated an excellent system of water control (drainage and irrigation)
through the use of dikes and pumps as well as wind control through the use of Casuarina
Iepidophloea as a windbreak.
50

FIGURE 13. The key to efficient and economic water control in a great, flatland
area like the Everglades is to be found in highly efficient, low-lift pumps of the type
shown above. Without doubt there has been more and better work done during the
past ten years in the improvement of low-lift pumps for use under South Florida con
ditions than throughout all previous time, with most of the glory for what has been
accomplished falling to Messrs. Roy O. Couch and Norman C. Storey of Grant and Miami,
Florida, respectively. The installation shown is a reversible panel type at the Everglades
Experiment Station.
FIGURE 1 4. The clogged condition of this canal with water hyacinths and grass
suggests the serious problem of canal maintenance for efficient water control that is
to be found under the sub-tropical conditions of the Florida Everglades.
51

FIGURE 15. Response of sugar cane to treatment of the Everglades peat with copper
sulfate. The five Stools on the right had no treatment whatsoever except bluestone
at the rate of thirty pounds per acre. The small plant on the left, characteristic of all
plants on the check plot, received no copper sulfate whatsoever.
FIGURE 16. Response of peanuts to treatment of Everglades peat with the so-
called trace elements. The central plot, foreground, had a complete treatment, except
copper. The plot to the right, with the stake, had the same basic treatment with copper
sulfate included. The central plot, back-ground, is a complete check with no treatment
whatsoever. Inset, left, check plants with no treatment; right, copper sulfate; center,
combination treatment with copper and zinc. The effect of the zinc was to promote an
early response to copper and consequently earlier maturity, the plants of the combination
treatment being practically mature while those receiving only copper were still in full veg
etative growth. Planted May 5; photographed October 31; variety Valencia.
52

FIGURE 1 7. Heavy crops of sugar cane are grown on the rich muck soil of the
Everglades under proper conditions of water control. Note the heavy cover of cane leaves
that remain on the soil in addition to the great mass of new, fibrous roots that develop
in the soil each year. The Athey truss-wheel carts in which the cane is transported from
the field to the cars for loading carry about five tons each.
53

FIGURE 18. A pasture cover at the Everglades Experiment Station suggestive of
the lush, highly nutritive grasses that can be grown on these organic soils, perhaps with
a minimum of drainage from the soil conservation and water control standpoint. The
animals in the picture are purebred Devons.
FIGURE 19. A field of snap beans in the Everglades at harvest time. With the
development of truck crops in this area at a practical maximum, further reclamation of
appreciable acreages in the future shall have to find other types of farming enterprises.
From the soil conservation standpoint it is hoped they may require less cultivation and
exposure of the soil than is necessary for most truck crops.
54

FIGURE 20. Castor beans growing under Everglades conditions show considerable
promise in this area in connection with the new interest that is developing in this plant.
Much remains to be done with this crop in breeding and selection for the purpose or
purposes desired.
FIGURE 21. A great fire raging in the open Everglades over a front of twenty-five
or thirty miles and about that distance or farther from the camera as viewed from the
Everglades Experiment Station looking in the direction of Miami (extreme right) which
is about eighty-five miles distant. During winters of exceptional dryness in the past,
great sections of the Everglades have burned over, frequently with heavy losses of soil.
Smoke and ashes carried to coastal areas from such fires not only have been a source
of great discomfort to the entire population but, at times, also have been so heavy as
actually to interfere with highway traffic even during the daytime.
55

FIGURE 22. Surface subsidence of Everglades soil due to oxidation, compaction and
shrinkage. According to the benchmark shown in the picture the sea-level elevation of
the surface of the land at this point was 18.5 in 1916, when the position was established.
In 1932, the time of the photograph, it was 16.1. Other intermediate levels are indicated
for 1919, 1921 and 1925. There was no evidence or local record of burning having been
involved at any time in this loss. The location is about 4 miles south of Lake Okeechobee
along the North New River Canal at its intersection with the Bolles Canal.
56

FIGURE 23. Another evidence of shrinkage in the muck soils of the Everglades is to
be found in the great surface cracks that develop. The above picture was taken from a
position on highway No. 25 between Belle Glade and West Palm Beach after a sweeping fire
had burned away all dead vegetation and sawgrass. Some of the cracks were found to
extend three or four feet into the soil. Note the ash on some of the isolated blocks in
dicating the soil was burned to a depth of 4 to 8 inches in many places.
FIGURE 24. The complete loss of a levee of considerable cross section by burning
indicates a further need for the best possible water control at all times. Note that the
soil beneath the levee burned to a considerable depth below the level of the adjacent land.
57


Joint Session with the Florida State Horticultural
Society
Wednesday morning, April 19, 1939
The joint meeting was called to order at 9:30 A. M. and was
presided over by Dr. H. C. Henricksen, a member of the Executive
Committee of both Societies. The papers presented at this meeting
are to be published in the Proceedings of the Horticultural Society,
which may be consulted for full details. Accordingly, only a brief in
dication of the content of each paper is given in the following summary
of the program.
1.The Cycle of Organic Matter in Soils.
Dr. F. B. Smith, Department of Chemistry and Soils, Flor
ida Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, Florida.
The author outlined the functions of organic matter in agricul
tural soils and stressed the importance of maintaining an adequate
supply of it in the sandy soils of the South. Methods of supplying
organic matter are described and evaluated.
2.A Rapid Laboratory Method for the Determination of
Exchangeable Magnesium in the Soil.
Dr. Michael Peech, Soil Chemist, Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
A new method for the rapid analysis of soils for their content
of exchangeable magnesium is presented. Data are summarized from
the analyses of soils collected from 5 19 commercial groves. The
exchangeable magnesium content of the soil, as determined by this
method, is shown to be correlated with the presence or absence of
bronzing of the foliage.
3.The Adaptability of Rapid Laboratory Methods to the
Study of Highly Organic Soils.
Dr. W. T. Forsee, Soil Chemist, Everglades Experiment
Station, Belle Glade, Florida.
A number of the more common methods of testing soils are
without value for the analysis of peats and mucks since the extractants
used dissolve such quantities of highly colored organic matter that the
usual color and turbidity tests cannot be carried out in the resulting
extracts. In this paper, the author presents a system of analysis which
has been devised specifically to obviate this difficulty.
59

4. Florida Citrus Malnutrition Leaves.
G. M. Bahrt, Division of Soil Fertility, Bureau of Plant
Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Orlando, Florida.
A description is given of various leaf patterns encountered in
citrus species with a discussion of their interpretation as symptoms of
known deficiencies in the light of the authors experience through
several years of research in this field.
5. Question Box.
R. S. Edsall, Wabasso, Florida.
Mr. Edsall conducted a highly interesting Question and Answer
session. Maintenance of soil organic matter and corrective treatments
for trace element deficiencies commanded the greatest interest in this
part of the program.
60

Committees

The chief objective in setting up the subject matter committees
provided by Article IV of the constitution is, naturally, the advance
ment of the whole purpose and work of the Society. This can be
done only by keeping the committees as active as possible.
Committees do good and accomplish their purpose not merely by
the chairman or various members giving an undue portion of their
time to the work, but to a greater extent, it is believed, by having a well
thought out plan of action and seeing to it that each member contributes
his proportionate share. Accordingly, that chairman is wise who fits his
program carefully to the time of his committee members, making sure,
however, that the effort of each, no matter how small, contributes in
a definite way to the accomplishment of the objective for which the
committee was formed.
Inasmuch as some of the most important work of the Society will
be developed by the various subject matter committees outlined
below it will be an important duty of the Executive Committee to assist
the various chairmen in every way possible. At such time as it is
impossible for the chairman of a given committee to continue actively
in his assignment he should be relieved by the Executive Committee
and a new chairman named. Further than this the Executive Com
mittee will depend very largely upon the chairmen of the various
committees to report upon the activity of their members and for rec
ommendations as to names to be dropped or new members to be
appointed.
The Secretary of the Society will serve as secretary of all com
mittees of which the chairman does not prefer to choose a secretary
from his own group.
I. MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE
Secretary of S. S. S. F
Mr. Jack O. Holmes
Mr. C. D. Kime
Mr. W. J. Adair
Mr. Hibbard Casselberry
Mr. J. O. Zipperer
Mr. John R. Wilson
Gainesville (Chairman)
Tampa
Gainesville
Jacksonville
Winter Park
Ft. Myers
West Palm Beach
The work of the Membership Committee is exceedingly important
to the development of the Society. Its personnel will largely be made
up of representatives from other active organizations in the State hav
ing a definite interest in soils work. This group will be actively res
ponsible for maintaining the membership and interesting new members
in the objectives of the Society.
61

II. SOIL SURVEY COMMITTEE
Mr. George F. Westbrook
Mr. S. H. Bowman
Mr. Ernest R. Graham ....
Mr. G. W. Lee
Mr. Ed. Scott
Mr. Wayne Thomas
Clermont (Chairman)
Clermont
Miami
Hastings
Everglades City
Plant City
The most important responsibility of the Soil Survey Committee
will be to impress upon the members of our Society in particular and
upon the citizens of the state in general, Floridas dire need for an
aggressive soil survey program.
The only business-like approach to our soil or land problems from
any standpoint is upon the soil survey basis. Defined in the simplest
possible terms, a soil survey is little more than a carefully developed
inventory which treats individual types of soil as natural objects and
classifies them accordingly. Such a survey will show us what soils we
have, where they are in the state and how much of each we have,
in the aggregate, whether for a given area or for the state as a whole.
It is also the only safe and satisfactory basis for grouping soils into
classes and studying the capability of the land in a systematic and
efficient manner.
At the present time satisfactory up-to-date soil surveys and maps
are available for only two counties and the editions of both of these
are practically exhausted. All other surveys are not only out of date
but also out of print and entirely unavailable at the present time. The
soil survey is needed as a definite basis not only for our research pro
gram in soils but for extension work, land appraisal, land use planning,
road building and a wide variety of other purposes as well.
III. METHODS OF ANALYSIS COMMITTEE
Mr. L. H. Rogers
Mr. R. A. Carrigan ....
Dr. W. T. Forsee, Jr.
Dr. W. L. Lott
Dr. Michael Peech
Mr. R. P. Thornton
Mr. G. M. Volk
Gainesville (Chairman)
Gainesville (Secretary)
Belle Glade
Clewiston
Lake Alfred
Tampa
Gainesville
The state-wide interest that is developing in soil analysis and
testing gives the program of this committee a place of immediate im
portance in the work of the Society. It will be responsible for eval
uating methods in current use and recommending new ones from time
to time as they become available from one source or another and are
found adaptable to our Florida soils. It will doubtless work closely
with a similar committee that has been set up in the Agricultural Ex
periment Station to study methods of analysis for soils and related
materials.
62

IV. TERMINOLOGY COMMITTEE
Dr. Michael Peech
Dr. R. V. Allison
Mr. J. R. Henderson
Dr. F. B. Smith
Mr. G. M. Volk
Lake Alfred (Chairman)
Gainesville
Gainesville
Gainesville
Gainesville
The literature of Soil Science contains a considerable number of
terms referring to very practical materials and matters that sometimes
are rather difficult for the lay-reader to grasp. By way of example
pH, base exchange, soil colloids, availability (of fertilizer
elements), etc., might be mentioned. It will be the purpose of the
Terminology Committee to assemble the most commonly used ex
pressions in this field that seem to be giving the most trouble and
prepare a report for distribution to the membership that will furnish a
clear, simple statement of the meaning and application of these terms
employing simple, graphic means wherever it may be of advantage to
do so. It is believed such a presentation will materially assist our public
discussion of soil problems since these terms will thereby rapidly
become a part of the vocabulary and understanding of all who are
sufficiently interested to give them the requisite amount of study. The
membership may be canvassed, in part at least, to determine what
terms should be considered first.
V. RESEARCH COMMITTEE
Dr. L. W. Gaddum
Mr. W. LE. Barnett ..
Mr. Clarence Bitting ..
Mr. H. C. Brown
Mr. R. A. Carlton
Mr. Luther Chandler
Mr. Stephen Chase
Mr. R. O. Couch
Dr. Roy Cross
Dr. David Fairchild ...
Mr. F. W. Heiser
Dr. H. C. Henricksen
Dr. L. R. Jones
Mr. H. I. Mossbarger
Dr. Wilson Popenoe .
Mr. Waldo Sexton
Mr. Chas. R. Short ....
Dr. T. M. Simpson
Mr. N. C. Storey
Dr. J. W. Turrentine
Dr. S. A. Waksman ...
Mr. B. F. Williamson
Dr. R. C. Williamson
Mr. Gar Wood
Gainesville (Chairman)
Mt. Dora
New York City and Clewiston
Clermont
West Palm Beach
Homestead
Dunedin
Grant
Kansas City, Missouri
Coconut Grove
Fellsmere
Eustis
Madison, Wisconsin
Miami
Guatemala City, Guatemala
Vero Beach
Clermont
Gainesville
Miami
Washington, D. C.
.... New Brunswick, New Jersey
Gainesville
Gainesville
Detroit and Miami
63

Through the wide contact and diverse interests of the various
members of the Research Committee with agricultural conditions over
the state and outside of the state, many constructive ideas should be
forthcoming as to what is most needed in a soils research program
for Florida and how it can be most effectively coordinated with other
agencies in the state having interest in this field or in closely allied
fields.
Naturally the Research Committee shall have to give urgent sup
port to the Soil Survey Committee and, in turn, expect much from the
committee on Methods of Analysis. Many of the other committees of
the Society among them, Soil and Water Conservation, Extension,
Tropical Soils, Forest Relationships, will be looking to the Re
search Committee for assistance and guidance. Thus the Committee
on Fertilizer Recommendations will be particularly dependent on re
search for definite help once the great mass of data and recommendat
ions that are available have been assembled and analyzed as a basis
for further study.
VI. SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION COMMITTEE
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Dr.
Mr.
Dr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
George B. Hills .
John A. Baker ...
J. E. Beardsley ..
A. P. Black
V. V. Bowman ....
Geo. F. Catlett ....
B. S. Clayton
C. Kay Davis
F. C. Elliot
C. L. V. Exselsen
Herman Gunter
Ben Herr
H. R. Leach
Frazier Rogers
D. S. Wallace
W. Turner Wallis
J. Mark Wilcox
Jacksonville (Chairman)
New York City
Clewiston
Gainesville
Gainesville
Jacksonville
Belle Glade
Ft. Lauderdale
Tallahassee
New York and Miami
Tallahassee
West Palm Beach
Washington, D. C.
Gainesville
Ocala
West Palm Beach (Secretary)
Miami
The most important tangible asset of the State, next to the soil, is
its water supply. Consequently its efficient conservation and use is a
most important and practical problem especially since, under most con
ditions, in conserving and otherwise properly handling the natural wat
er supply we also protect and maintain the productive capacity of the
soil.
The first responsibility of the Soil and Water Conservation
Committee will be to examine the field from a State-wide viewpoint.
Following such an examination, it would naturally be expected that the
area with the most critical problems would receive first attention.
64

Inasmuch as the general field of this committee divides rather
sharply into two sections, one of a technical nature having to do with
engineering and other technological aspects, and the other of a public
relations nature involving land ownership and tax delinquency prob
lems, it is expected that sub-committees to cover these respective phases
will be formed.
VII. FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS COMMITTEE
Mr. W. L. Tait
Mr. G. M. Bahrt
Mr. J. F. Bazemore
Dr. J. R. Beckenbach
Mr. G. H. Blackmon
Mr. R. E. Blaser
Dr. Frederick Boyd ..
Mr. John Camp
Dr. Dana G. Coe
Mr. E. F. DeBusk
Mr. R. S. Edsall
Mr. W. M. Fifield
Mr. B. F. Floyd
Mr. T. J. Hanley
Mr. J. R. Henderson
Dr. F. S. Jamison
Mr. J. G. Kelley
Mr. C. D. Kime
Mr. J. H. Logan
Dr. A, R. Merz
Mr. M. U. Mounts
Dr. J. R. Neller
Mr. W. T. Nettles
Mr. R. E. Norris
Mr. F. M. OByrne ...
Mr. A. J. Peacock
Mr. W. H. Sachs
Mr. J. Lee Smith
Mr. J. J. Taylor
Mr. H. A. Thullbery .
Mr. G. M. Volk
Mr. W. F. Ward
Mr. J. D. Warner
Mr. Alec White
Winter Haven (Chairman)
Orlando
Orlando
Bradenton
Gainesville
Gainesville
Belle Glade
Gainesville
Lakeland
Gainesville
Wabasso
Homestead
Davenport
Nichols
Gainesville
Gainesville
Blountstown
Gainesville
Clearwater
Washington, D. C.
West Palm Beach
Belle Glade
Gainesville
Tavares
Lake Wales
Plant City
Orlando
Gainesville
Tallahassee
Haines City
Gainesville
Brooksville
Quincy
Tampa
For a long time the fertilizer situation in Florida has been regarded
as being so complex and involved as to defy comprehensive analysis
and study. Such a view would seem to be supported somewhat by
the fact that during the fiscal year 1938-39 nearly 8500 fertilizer
brands and special mixtures were registered in the office of the State
Chemist in Tallahassee!
65

This is doubtless due in good part to the fact that there is such
a wide variety of plants grown in the state on a commercial and sub
commercial basis and for a great diversity of other purposes; also
to the fact that our soils are so complex and variable and, as yet, have
been systematically surveyed only to a very limited extent; and furth
ermore, more and more elements in the trace element group are
coming into the field of nutrition; and finally, the temperature range
from North to South in the state and the variation in moisture from
season to season also adds much to the already complex situation.
In the face of such a thoroughly complex situation and in the ab
sence of anything approximating an adequate research program in soil
fertility to progressively keep abreast of the rapidly pyramiding de
mands there has developed, Topsy-like, exactly what we now have.
In the aggregate it does look complex. Broken into those all-important
components, the requirements of the individual plant and soil, it be
comes definitely manageablein fact, comparatively simple.
The first work of the Fertilizer Recommendations Committee
shall have to be the grouping of its personnel according to the fields
of information with which its members are most familiar and in which
they can make the best contributions. Many of the individuals with
special knowledge of particular crops such as field crops, truck crops,
citrus, etc., might well serve as chairmen of sub-committees for that
particular field of effort with freedom to extend the membership of
their units and of the committee as a whole, if this appears necessary
in order to get on with the work in an effective manner.
Before actually starting the work, doubtless it will be found con
venient to develop a systematic manner of recording the ideas, pract
ices and data now extant and in common use relating to the fertilizer
and cultural needs of the individual crop and the individual soil, break
ing it down on a factorial basis until adequate integration and study
can be made of the whole.
Once the information is individualized in this way and so arranged
that it can be approached in an understanding manner, much may be
done in grouping that pertaining either to soils or plants or both.
Where information is inadequate or wholly lacking, however, we should
face the situation squarely and plan our research program accordingly.
As a matter of fact, it is anticipated that the findings of the com
mittee may be of more value to the Research Committee as a back
ground for planning further work than for any direct usefulness they
may have in the applied field. In any event it is an interesting field
of effort and its critical importance bespeaks the sympathy and assis
tance of the whole Society for the membership of this committee.
66

VIII.TEACHING COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. F. B. Smith
Professor of Soil Microbiology, University of Florida, Gainesville
The function of this committee shall be not only to encourage
the teaching of soils but to improve the character of the training that
is given on all levels of instruction.
Education is the key to a great many of the social problems with
which we are struggling. What will it profit us to develop information
by intensive research in soils or any other agricultural subject if there
is not available trained leadership in the field to put it effectively into
practice?
The personnel and program of this committee will be developed
during the coming year and is certain to find a field that is rich in
opportunity.
IX.EXTENSION COMMITTEE
Chairman: Mr. Ed. L. Ayers
County Agent, Manatee County, Bradenton
In many parts of the country it is sometimes thought that exten
sion work in agriculture is getting ahead of research, as it were. Since
extension work in soils in Florida is still to be initiated for the most
part, obviously we have not yet arrived at the above danger by a
considerable margin.
In Mr. Ayers the Society has a capable salesman who knows the
problem well. He now has the year before him to get his group to
gether and get on with the task.
X.TROPICAL SOILS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. H. H. Bennett
Chief, Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D. C.
Much has been said, especially during the past two or three
years, regarding the vitalization of our relationships with our Latin
American neighbors to the South. In all of this, one has heard little
mention of such an humble approach to the problem as through the
strong community of interest that is being found in soil and plant
relationships and the vital challenging problems associated with them
everywhere.
To the extent that this is true, it is believed we have neglected
a channel of contact that is more powerful in its own way than any
thing which has been known to diplomacy of the conventional kind.
Further than this, our problems here in Florida have more in common
with those of the Inter-American nations than do those of any other
State.
67

In asking Dr. Bennett to accept the Chairmanship of the Com
mittee on Tropical Soils we had in mind not only the broad experience
he has had in this field and his deep technical interest in these soils but
also those qualities of leadership which have raised him in a few years
from the position of an individual worker to the head of one of the
most important Bureaus in the entire Government when measured
by the rapidity of its growth and the essential good it has done.
XI. FOREST RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Prof. H. S. Newins
Director, School of Forestry, University of Florida, Gainesville
It is feared that too frequently we look upon growing trees as nat
ural entities that will develop in spite of any progressive changes that
might be taking place in the soil environment either as a result of their
growth or for other reasons. The cycle of the forest crop is so long
that alterations in plant and soil characteristics and growth rate may not
be too quickly discernible.
The essential thinness of some of our Florida soils upon which
we may wish to continue to grow trees for many centuries is such that
perhaps we should be especially solicitous of what the individual timber
crop is removing from the land and just what should be done to main
tain the productivity of various types of soil in terms of forest growth
in the future.
All of this is, of course, intimately bound up with other soil prob
lems such as moisture supply, the effect of burning forest cover, etc.,
which combine to make an interesting field for discussion and study.
If the committee to be developed can match in vigor and enthusiasm
that of our newly established School of Forestry, then we shall indeed
have added a lively adjunct to our Forum.
XII. ANIMAL RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. R. B. Becker
Animal Husbandman, Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville
In consequence of the important discoveries that have been made
during the past few years in the field of plant, animal and human
nutrition that center around the apparently vital role of several of the
trace elements in living processes, a new and rapidly growing interest
has developed in soil and plant relationships from this standpoint.
Insofar as Florida is concerned there are, for instance, extensive
areas of our pasture and range lands that are known to produce for
age and pasture plants deficient in certain of these elements. An im
portant beginning has been made in this study but it is fully recognized
as only a start. Work of this nature must be developed on the basis
68

of soil type and plant quality if we are to have a picture of the prob
lem that is clear and sound from every standpoint.
Doctor Becker and his associates in the Department of Animal
Husbandry have made good progress in attacking this broad problem
in this basic manner which will not only encourage fundamental work
on soil and plant relationships, but furnish information that is vital
in the field of human nutrition. This is particularly true since man
requires both plant and animal sources of food in his diet so the con
dition of his nutrition, as related to the soil, is not only affected dir
ectly by the plant but indirectly by it, as well, through the animal.
XIII. HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Dr. Chester F. Ahmann
1043 West Masonic Street, Gainesville
Whether we have it clearly in mind at all times or not, the true
objective of practically all our agricultural research and study is the
comfort and well-being of man. As the result of several years of
specialized training and of active research in the field of human nutrit
ion while connected with the Agricultural Experiment Station, it is
doubtful if there is any physician or other individual in the State who
has the picture of human dependence on food qualities derived from
the soil so clearly in mind as Doctor Ahmann.
As a practicing physician Dr. Ahmann continues to have daily
opportunity for case studies in this field, many of them the epitome
of human misfortune and despair. The situation is, of course, much
worse in some sections of the State than in others. It will be the
particular function of this committee to effect and maintain the strong
est possible liaison between the medical profession on the one hand
and the broad field of agricultural research involving soil, plant, animal
and human relationships on the other, which associations and contacts
can be so mutually helpful, if sympathetically maintained, in advanc
ing the study and care of this phase of our social problem from a num
ber of standpoints.
XIV. RESOLUTIONS AND PRESS COMMITTEE
Chairman: Mr. W. F. Therkildson
Editor, All Florida, The Miami Herald
The responsibility of the Resolutions and Press Committee of any
organization that has a healthy desire to grow and do things is so
well known as scarcely to deserve comment especially when our Soc
iety has had the good fortune to find such a Chairman as Mr. W. F.
Therkildson to take over.
69

All Florida is rapidly coming to know Therk through his
ALL FLORIDA' page that appears regularly in the Miami Sunday
Herald, The editorial skill with which he has developed this assign
ment is a real tribute to the ingenuity, industry and experience that
stand behind his daily routine.
However the Society may develop in the future and whatever
it may accomplish, it is certain to be heavily indebted to the overall
work of this group. Accordingly the Executive Committee is asking
Mr. Therkildson to develop the personnel and program of his com
mittee as best fits his ideas and plans for the future.
70

Charter Members of the Society
The Executive Committee is confident that all persons interested
in soils work from any standpoint in Florida, will be pleased to learn
that our Soil Science Society closed its first official year with a charter
membership roll totaling 375 names.
ABBOTT, JOHN B., Dir. Agr. Research, Am. Cyanamide Co., 3 0 Rockefeller Plaza, New
York, N. Y.
ADAIR, W. J., Florist, Box 471, Jacksonville.
ADDERLEY, J. C., Agriculturist, Box 43 0, Pensacola.
AHMANN, DR. C. F., Physician and Surgeon, 1 043 W. Masonic St., Gainesville.
ALLABAND, WILLIAM A., Area Conservationist, S. C. S.. Tallahassee.
ALLISON, DR. R. V., Head, Dept, of Soils, U. of Fla., Gainesville.
ALSMEYER, LOUIS H., County Agricultural Agent, Sebring.
ANDERSON, E. J., Bookkeeper, 320 Valencia Rd., W. Palm Beach.
ANDERSON, FRED S., Nurseryman, 33 1 Tarpon Drive, Ft. Lauderdale.
ANDREWS, DR. F. B., Assoc. Truck Horticulturist Everglades Experiment Station, Belle
Glade.
ARNAU, N. L., Wabasso.
AYERS, ED. L., County Agricultural Agent, Bradenton.
BAHRT, GEO. M., Assoc. Soil Technologist, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Orlando.
BAILES, S. E., Salesman, Box 64, Eustis,
BAILEY, E. R., Tung Grower, Box 202, Ocala.
BAILEY, R. Y., Regional Agronomist, Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, South
Carolina.
BAKER, JOHN H., Executive Director, Nat. Assoc, of Audubon Societies, 1006 Fifth Ave.,
New York, N. Y.
BANNING, FORREST D., Civil Engineer, Fla. Power and Light Co., Palatka.
BARBER, RAYMOND, V., Armour Fertilizer Works, Palmetto.
BARNETT, GORDON J., Fern Grower. Fern Park.
BARNETT, W. LE., Chairman, State Research Committee, Florida Citrus Growers, Inc.,
Mt. Dora.
BARTLUM, W. LEONARD, Pres., Florida Agr. Supply Co., Orlando.
BAUMGARTNER, T. R., Landscape Gardener, Box 3 28, North Miami.
BAZEMORE, J. F., State Manager, Chilean Nitrate Educational Bureau, 5 6 East Pine St.,
Orlando.
BEARDSLEY, J. E., Real Estate and Farming, Clewiston.
BEARDSLEY, J. W., Student, University of Florida, Clewiston.
BECKENBACH, DR. J. R., Truck Horticulturist in Charge, Bradenton Field Station,
Bradenton.
BECKER, DR. R. B., Dairy Husbandman, Fla. Agr. Expt. Sta., Gainesville.
BECKMAN, B. J., Gardener, 3 747 Main Highway, Coconut Grove.
BELL, DR. C. E., Associate Chemist, Fla. Agr. Expt. Sta., Gainesville.
BENNETT, GARDNER, Dist. Supervisor, Farm Security Adms., 3 120 San Jose St., Tampa.
BENNETT, DR. H. H., Chief. Soil Conservation Service, U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
BENSON, NELS, Grad. Student, State Col. of Wash., Pullman. Wash.
BERRY, J. B., Soil Chemist, Waverly Growers Corp., Winter Haven.
BESTOR, HORACE A., Civil Engineer, U. S. Sugar Corp., Clewiston.
BETZNER, L. C., Hardware Merchant, Belle Glade.
BITTING, CLARENCE R., President, U S. Sugar Corporation, New York, N. Y.
BLACK, DR. A. P., Prof, of Agr. Chemistry, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
BLACKMON, G. H., Head, Dept, of Hort., Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
BLASER, JOHN A., Pres.-Mgr., Royal Palm Nurseries, Oneco.
BLASER, ROY E., Asst. Agronomist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
BOLTON, W. E., Asst. Agr. Supt., Western Division, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
BOOTH, W. S., Citrus Grower, Conner.
BOOTS, V. A., Farm Supplies, South Bay.
BORDA, EUGENE, Grad. Student in Soils, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
BOUIS, C. G., President, Florida Fruit Company, Fort Meade.
BOURNE, DR. B. A., Chief, Agr. Research, U. S. Sugar Corp., Clewiston.
BOWMAN, S. H., Pres., Fla. Assoc. Real Estate Boards, Clermont.
BOWMAN, V. V., Asst, to the Director, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
BOYD, E. M., Eagle Lake.
BOYD, DR. FREDERICK, Asst. Agronomist, Everglades Exp. Sta., Belle Glade.
BRADDOCK, R. L., Farmer, Belle Glade.
BRAGDON, K. E., Production Mgr., Winter Haven Citrus Growers Association, Winter
Haven.
BREGGER, DR. THOMAS, Sugarcane Physiologist, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle
Glade.
BRIGGS, W. R., Horticulturist, Growers Fertilizer Co., Ft. Pierce.
BRIGHT, JAS. H., President, Martha Bright Ranch, Hialeah.
BROOKS, DR. A. N., Plant Pathologist, Plant City Field Station, Box 522, Lakeland.
BROOKS, J. H., Manager, East Coast District International Fruit Corp, Peters.
BROWER, J. K.t Island Nurseries, Box 110, Palm Beach.
BROWN, H. C., Mgr. Am. Diatomite Co., Clermont.
71

BROWN, HAMLIN L., D airy Husbandman, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
BROWN, M. L., Lab. Asst., Citrus Exp. Station, Lake Alfred.
BROWN, W. R., The Brown Company, Berlin, N. H.
BRYAN, DON S., Student, Bartow High School, Bartow.
BRYAN, R. L., Secy.-Treas., Lake Garfield Nurseries Company, Bartow.
BRYANT, F. E., Agr. Supt., Eastern Division, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Azcar.
BUCK, DR. WILLIAM J., Physician, Belle Glade.
BUIE, DR. T. S., Regional Conservator, Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, S. C.
BURTON, CLIFFORD H., Fern Grower, Crescent City.
BUTLER, ALFRED F., Agricultural Technologist, United Fruit Co., Watson Grove, Gregory
Park P. O., Jamaica, B. W. I.
CAIN, THOMAS L., Jr., County Agricultural Agent, Cocoa.
CAIvIP, JOHN P., Asst. Agronomist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
CAREL, E. G., Manager, Hector Supply Company, West Palm Beach.
CARLTON, R. A., Agr. Agent, Seaboard Air Line R. R., West Palm Beach.
CARNES, ARVY, Regional Engineer, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
CARRIGAN, R. A., Asst. Chemist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
CARTWRIGHT, A. B., Farmer, Chosen.
CASLER, E. T., Chemical Supt., Phosphate Mining Co., Nichols.
CASSELBERRY, HIBBARD, Winter Park Ferneries, Winter Park.
CATLETT, DR. G. F., Chief Engineer, State Board of Health, Jacksonville.
CHALMERS, J. G., Chemical Salesman, F. W. Berk and Co., 420 Lexington Ave., New York,
N. Y.
CHANDLER, LUTHER, Grower, Homestead.
CHASE, STEPHEN, Citrus Grower, Dunedin.
CHATELIER. DR. PAUL, Chemist, 43 60 Central Ave., St. Petersburg.
CLARK, A. S., Eustis.
CLAYTON, B. S., Drainage Engineer, Soil Conservation Service, Everglades Exp. Station,
Belle Glade.
CLEMENTS, W. B., Clements Chemical Pest Service, West Palm Beach.
COACHMAN, WALTER F., Jr., Pres. McLin-Coachman Co., Inc., Jacksonville.
COE, DR. DANA G., Citrus Grower, Mossmoor Estate, Rt. 2, Lakeland.
COLLINS, Wm. R., Citrus Grower, 80 Mt. Tom Road, New Rochelle, N. Y., (Mandarin, Fla.)
COMMANDER, C. C., Gen. Manager, Florida Citrus Exchange, Box 23 49, Tampa.
CONKLING, W. DONALD, Citrus Culture Corporation, Eustis.
CONRAD, FRED, Gardener, 3 250 South Miami Ave., Miami.
COOPER, DR. WILLIAM C., Associate Physiologist, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A.,
Orlando.
CORRIGAN, FRANCIS H., Poultryman and Grove Owner. Bradenton.
COUCH, R. O., Couch Manufacturing Company, Grant.
COWGILL, CARL F., Nurseryman, 205 Lois Avenue, St. Petersburg.
CROSS, DR. ROY, Chemist, 700 Baltimore Ave., Kansas City, Mo.
CRUMPTON, R. T., Gardening, Boca Grande.
DAETWYLER, M. J., Landscape Nurseryman, 5 0 E. Colonial St., Orlando.
DANCY, R. C., Fertilizer Salesman, 3216 Emperado St., Tampa.
DAVIS, C. KAY, Area Conservationist, S, C. S., 801 Sweet Bldg., Ft. Lauderdale.
DAVIS, DR. ROBERT L., Assoc. Agronomist, S. C. S., Belle Glade.
DAVIS, DR. R. O. E., Fertilizer Research Div., U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
DeBUSK, E. F., Citriculturist, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
DERRYBERRY, W. N., Superintendent of Estate, 6204 South Sta., W. Palm Beach.
DEW, JAMES A., President, Palm Beach Peat Co., Box 13 2, West Palm Beach.
DOUGLAS, Wm. B., Agronomist, Fellsmere Sugar Producers Association, Fellsmere.
DUFF, WALTER W-, Attorney, 135 S. LaSalle St., Chicago, Ill.
DUKES, HUGH, Asst. Soil Surveyor, S. C. S., Graceville.
duPUIS, DR. J. G., Physician, Surgeon and Farmer, 6043 N. E. 2nd Ave., Miami.
duPUIS, JOHN G., Jr., Dairyman, Box W., Little River Sta., Miami.
EDDINS, DR. A. H., Plant Pathologist, Hastings Field Sta., Hastings.
EDSALL, HENRY J., Citrus Grove Manager, Bradenton.
EDSALL, ROBERT S., Agriculturist, Am. Fruit Growers, Inc., Wabasso.
ELEUTHERA LIMITED, Hatvhet Bay, Eleuthera, Bahamas.
ELLIOT, F. C., Civil Engineer, Trustee Internal Improvement Fund, Tallahassee.
ELLIS, ROY H., Insecticide and Fungicide Manufacturer, 1210 Kuhl Ave., Orlando.
ELY, C. W., Farmer, South Bay.
ERCK, GEORGE H., Farmer, Weirsdale.
EVANS, CHARLES B., Asst. Soil Technologist, S. C. S., 801 Sweet Bldg., Ft. Lauderdale.
EVANS, W. E., County Agricultural Agent, Sarasota.
EXsELSEN, CARL L. V., Attorney, 813-14 Ingraham Bldg., Miami.
FAIRCHILD, DR. DAVID, Plant Explorer, Coconut Grove.
FEHMERLING, G. B., Chemist, Citrus Exp. Sta., Lake Alfred.
FEINBERG, IRVING, Research Chemist, Box 118, Sanford.
FIFIELD, W. M., Horticulturist, Acting in Charge, Sub-Tropical Experiment Station,
Homestead.
FLANDERS, FRED A., Civil Engineer, U. S. Engineers, Moore Haven.
THE FLORIDA GROWER, Bert Livingston, Assoc. Editor, Box 23 5 0, Tampa.
FLOYD, BAYARD F., Vice-Pres. Wilson and Toomer Fertilizer Company, Davenport.
FORSEE, DR. W. T., Jr., Associate Chemist, Everglades Exp. Sta., Belle Glade.
FT. LAUDERDALE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, August Burghard, Exec. Sec.,
Ft. Lauderdale.
FOURMY, JOHN V., Chemist, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Azcar.
72

FRANCIS, JAMES G., Chemist, Am. Liquid Fertilizer Co.; 129 Front St., Marietta, Ohio.
FREE, B. Y., Grower, Belle Glade.
FUGATE, J. BRYANT, Nurseryman, Boca Grande.
FULLER, GLENN L., Chief, Regional Physical Surveys, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
GADDUM, DR. L. W., General College, University of Florida, Gainesville.
GALL, OWEN, Junior Soil Surveyer, S. C. S., Hope, Arkansas.
GARY, W. Y., Assistant State Chemist, Tallahassee.
GLAZIER, E., Supt. H. C. Phipps Estate, Box 492, Palm Beach.
GRAHAM. ERNEST R., Dairyman and Farmer, Miami.
GREATHOUSE, DR. LUCIEN H., Chemical Engineer, Citrus Exp. Sta., Lake Alfred
GREEN, THEODORE C., Soil Scientist, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
GREGG, A. A., Florist, Box 2423, West Pa,lm Beach.
GUNN, COLIN, State Coordinator, S. C. S., Gainesville.
GUNTER, HERMAN, Geologist, State Board of Conservation, Tallahassee.
HAINES CITY CITRUS GROWERS ASSOC., Haines City .
HALL, JOHN C., Traffic Representative, Merchants and Miners Line, Miami.
HAMPSON, C. M., Agr. Economist, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
HANDLEMAN, HENRY C., Nurseryman, Lake Wales.
HANEY, H. L., Celery Grower, Belle Glade.
HANLEY, T. J., Comptroller, Phosphate Mining Co., Nichols.
HARTT, E. W., Citrus Grower, Box 3 5 6, Avon Park.
HAWKINS, CARL W., Executive Vice-Pres., Model Land Co., St. Augustine.
HEARN, W. E., Regional Inspector, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
HEISER, F. W., Gen. Manager, Fellsmere Sugar Producers Association, Fellsmere.
HELMS, H. B., Area Agronomist, S. C. S.. Tallahassee.
HENDERSON, J. R., Assoc. Chemist, Dept, of Soils, Fla. Agr. Exp. Station, Gainesville.
HENDRICKSON, B. H., Project Supervisor, Southern Piedmont Experiment Station, Athens,
Georgia.
HENRICKSEN, DR. H. C., The Borinquen Research Laboratory, Eustis.
HERR, BEN, Executive Secretary, Okeechobee Flood Control Board, West Palm Beach.
HILL, ARTHUR M., Jr., Citriculturist, Box 1123, Vero Beach.
HILLS, GEO. B., Consulting Engineer, Box 4817, Jacksonville.
HOCKNEY. GEORGE, Gardener, Box 2193, Sta. A., Palm Beach.
HOLLY HILL FRUIT PRODUCTS, Inc., R. M. Atkins, Pres., Daytona Beach.
HOLMES, JACK O., Landscape Contractor, Box 417, Tampa.
HOOPER. H. P., Gardener, 2 7 Star Island, Miami Beach.
HORNBURG, DR. P. H., Agronomist, The Organic Nitrogen Inst., Norfolk, Virginia.
HOUGHTALING, FRANCIS S., Farmer, Box 549, Miami.
HOUGHTALING, N. E., Truck Farmer, Box 5 49, Miami.
HOWARD, R. P., Agricultural Economist, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
HUGHES, R. C., Research Asst. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
HUNDERTMARK, B. W., Field Asst. U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
HUNTER, J. H., Asst. Soil Technologist, Bureau Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Albany,
Georgia.
HURLEBAUS, E. H., Production Manager, Clearwater Citrus Growers Association, Clearwater.
JACKSON, R. D., Jackson Grain Company, Tampa.
JACOB, KENNETH D., Chemist, Fertilizer Research Division, Bureau of Plant Industry,
U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
JAMISON, DR. F. S., Truck Horticulturist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Station, Gainesville.
JERNIGAN, W. P., Asst. Agr. Supt., U. S. Sugar Corp., Azcar.
JOHNSON, JESSE W., Nurseryman, Route 1, Largo.
JOHNSTONE. WILLIAM, Florist and Nurseryman, 1209 Central Ave., St. Petersburg.
JONES, H. W., Asst. Soil Surveyor, S. C. S., Graceville.
JONES, LUTHER, Realtor and Farmer, Belle Glade.
JONES, L. R., Emeritus Prof, of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin, Madison,
Wisconsin.
KEENAN, EDWARD T., Keenan Soil Laboratory, Frostproof.
KELBERT, DAVID G. A., Asst. Plant Pathologist, Bradenton Field Station, Bradenton.
KELLEY, E. R., Ornamental Gardens, 1018 N. W. 2nd St., Miami.
KELLEY, JOHN G., County Agricultural Agent, Blountstown.
KEW, THEODORE, Chemist, 313 E. Rollins Ave., Orlando.
KIDDER, R. W., Asst. Animal Husbandman, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
KILGORE SEED CO., H. R. Manee, Vice-President, Plant City.
KIME, C. D., Sr., Farm Products Agent, Tenn. Coal, Iron and R. R. Co., Box 61, Gainesville.
KIME C. D., Jr., Graduate Student in Soils, University of Florida, Gainesville.
KINCAID, DR. R. R., Assoc. Plant Pathologist, North Florida Experiment Station, Quincy.
KING, BATTY, Nurseryman, Estero.
KING, FRANK C., Agr. Manager, Brown Company, Shawano.
KIRCHMAN, A. ., Oil Distributor, Belle Glade.
KLATTS, L. E., Salesman, Lake Jem.
KLEIN. MILTON A., Gardener, Star Route, Box 150, W. Palm Beach.
KNOWLES, DR. H. L.. Asst. Professor of Physics, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
KOPF A. C., Nueva Gerona, Isle of Pines, Cuba.
KROME, WILLIAM H., Fruit Grower, Box 596 Homestead
KUNZE, A. E., Chief Metallurgist, Tenn. Coal, Iron and R. R. Co., Birmingham, Alabama.
LAW PERCY, Sec., Mapes Formula and Guano Co., Jacksonville.
LAWRENCE, ROBERT F., General Supt., Boca Raton Club, Boca Raton.
LAWTON, B. E., County Agricultural Agent, Ft. Lauderdale.
73

LEACH, H. R., Hydraulic Engineer, S. C. S., Bethesda, Maryland.
LEE, G. W., Manager, Hastings Potato Growers Assoc., Hastings.
LEHMANN, KARL, Lake County Chamber of Commerce, Montverde.
LEICHLITER, J. FRANK, Landscape Gardener, 1605 E. Ida St., Tampa.
LEIGHTY, RALPH G., Soil Surveyor, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D. C.
LEONARD, GEORGE V., Farmer and Citriculturist, Hastings.
LEWIS, O. C., Area Soils Technician, S. C. S., Tallahassee.
LIEFELD, T. A., Asst. Silviculturist, Southern Forest Experiment Station, U. S. D. A.,
Lake City.
LOGAN, J. H., County Agricultural Agent, Clearwater.
LOTT, DR. WREAL L., Soil Technologist, U. S. Sugar Corp., Clewiston.
LOWRY, M. W., Regional Soil Conservationist, S. C. S., Spartanburg, S. C.
LUCAS, GLENN H., Salesman, Wilson and Toomer Fertilizer Co., Leesburg.
LYNCH, S. J., Asst. Horticulturist, Sub-Tropical Experiment Station, Homestead.
McCLOUD, D. D., County Agricultural Agent, Perry.
McCONELL, L. S., Gardener, 2025 Brickell Ave., Miami.
McCORMICK, SAM H., Sec.-Treas., Miami Jockey Club, Hialeah.
McINTOSH, HENRY T., District Chairman, National Resources Planning Board, Albany,
Georgia.
McPECK, JOHN K., 328 So. Lakeview Drive, Sebring.
MALONE, J. W., County Agricultural Agent, Marianna.
MANATEE FRUIT CO., Palmetto.
MANDA, W. J., Orchid Grower, Okeechobee and Elizabeth Streets, West Palm Beach.
MANN, H. B., Southern Manager, Am. Potash Institute, Atlanta, Georgia.
MARCO, M. B., Asst. Soil Surveyor, Bur. of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Washington, D. C.
MATHEWS, A. L., Tech, and Economic Reports, 3 04 Chamber of Commerce Bldg., Orlando.
MATTHEWS, S. W., Staff Writer, Miami Daily News, Miami.
MERCER, L. R., Supt., B. F. Williamson Co., Gainesville.
MERZ, DR. ALBERT R., Chemist, Fertilizer Research Division, U. S. D .A., Washington, D. C.
MIDDLETON, DR. H. E., Sr. Soil Conservationist, Soil Conservation Service, East Falls
Church, Virginia.
MILLER, RALPH L., Entomologist, Fla. Agr. Supply Co., Orlando.
MINER, JAMES T., Farmer, Box 113, Boynton.
MOORE, K. C., County Agricultural Agent, Orlando.
MOORE, O. M., Truck Grower, Belle Glade.
MORAN, JAY W., Vice-President, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
MOSSBARGER, H. L., Florida Power and Light Company, Miami.
MOUNTS, M. U., Count Agricultural Agent, West Palm Beach.
NALL, W. C., Civil Engineer, U. S. Engineers, Moore Haven.
NEFT, JOSEPH, Gardener, Hobe Sound.
NELLER, DR. J. R., Biochemist in Charge, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
NELSON, G. M., Landscape Gardener, Melbourne.
NETTLES, W. T., District Agent, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
NEWELL, DR. WILMON, Provost for Agriculture, University of Florida, Gainesville
NEWINS, H. S., Director, School of Forestry, University of Florida, Gainesville.
NIELAND, L. T., Extension Farm Forester, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
NIKITIN, DR. A. A., Tennessee Copper Company, Copperhill, Tenn.
NORRIS, JAMES, Norris Grain Co., 1640 Board of Trade, Chicago, Ill.
NORRIS, R. E., County Agricultural Agent, Tavares.
OBYRNE, F. M., Waverly Growers Cooperative, Lake Wales.
OKELLEY, E. B., Gen. Agr. Agent, Atlantic Coast Line R. R., Jacksonville.
PANCOAST, THOMAS J., Pres. Miami Beach Improvement Company, Miami Beach
PATTERSON, R. Y., Civil Engineer, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
PEACOCK, A. J., Synthetic Nitrogen Products Corp., Box 95, Plant City.
PEECH, DR. MICHAEL, Soils Chemist, Citrus Exp. Station, Lake Alfred.
PETERS, F. C., INC., Truck Crops and Livestock, Goulds.
PETERS, JOHN S., Salesman, International Agr. Corp., Peters.
PHIPPS, JOHN H., Farmer, Box 707, Tallahassee.
PLANK, DONALD K., Forester, U. S. Engineers, Moore Haven.
PLUMMER, J. K., Director, Products Division, Tennessee Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia.
PQPENOE, DR. WILSON, Horticulturist, United Fruit Co., Guatemala City, Guatemala.
POWER, J. W., Convention Manager, 3 06 City Hall, Miami.
PREWITT, W. C., Agr. Supt. Western Division, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
PRINGLE, S. W., Nurseryman, Leesburg.
PRODUCERS SUPPLY, INC., Palmetto.
RAY, W. C., Farmer, Proprietor, Silver Springs, Silver Springs.
RENEGER, C. A.,, Soil Technologist, Babson Park.
REYNOLDS, B. T., Grove Manager, Auburndale.
RICH, FRANK H., Asst. Production Mgr., Florence Citrus Growers Association, Winter
Haven.
RICHARDSON, A. R., Real Estate, Tallahassee.
RICHARDSON, W. W., Secy., Simonton Ranch, Inc., Micanopy.
RILEY, J. F., Jr., Investments, Box 70, Palm Beach.
74

RITCHEY, GEO. E., Associate Agronomist, Bureau of Plant Industry, Fla. Agr. Expt.
Station, Gainesville.
ROBERTSON, ROSS E., Farmer, Belle Glade.
ROGERS, FRAZIER, Prof, of Agricultural Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville.
ROGERS, L. H., Associate Biochemist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., Gainesville.
ROHDE, GEORGE, Traveling Representative, Bausch and Lomb Optical Co., 1324 Eye St.,
N. W., Washington, D. C.
ROOD, RAY S., Gardener, Jupiter.
ROSS, DR. EDWARD, Chemist, Dr. Phillips Company, Orlando.
ROWE, R. L., Florist and Nurseryman, Drawer W, Melbourne.
RUMSEY, MRS. LEE W., Housewife, Belle Isle, Miami Beach.
SACHS, WARD H., Agronomist, E. I. duPont de Nemours Co., Box 2158, Orlando.
SAVAGE, C. B., Plant Pathologist, West Palm Beach.
SCOTT, ED, Clerk, Circuit Court, Collier County, Everglades.
SCOTT, E. P., Farm Management Specialist, Farm Security Administration, Box 5 79,
Gainesville.
SENN, DR. P. H., Head, Dept, of Agronomy, Agricultural College, University of Florida,
Gainesville.
SERVIS, J. D., Graduate Student in Agr. Chemistry, University of Florida, Gainesville.
SEXTON, W. E., Horticulturist, Dairyman, Farmer, Vero Beach.
SHANNON, C. BARRY, Publisher, Palm Beach.
SHAW, C. C., Salesman, Hector Supply Company, Miami.
SHEELY, WALTER J., Extension Beef Specialist, Agr. Ext. Service, Gainesville.
SHELTON, E. N., Tennessee Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia.
SHINN, CHAS. M., Manager, Growers Fertilizer Cooperative, Lake Alfred.
SHORT, C. R., Box 3 43, Clermont.
SIEPLEIN, DR. O. J., Research Chemist, Box 215, Coral Gables.
SIMPSON, DR. T. M., Dean, Graduate School, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
SINGLETON, GRAY, Agr. Agent, Federal Land Bank, Columbia, S. C.
SKINNER, B. C., Box 3 028, Dunedin.
SMITH, DR. F. B., Soil Microbiologist, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
SMITH, J. LEE, District Agricultural Agent, Gainesville.
SOULE, M. J., Nurseryman, 933 39th Ave. North, St. Petersburg.
SPARKMAN, J. K., Salesman, U. S. Phosphoric Products Corp., Box 3269, Tampa.
SPENCER, A. P., Vice-Director, Agr. Extension Service, Gainesville.
STABLER, DAVID K., Landscape Supt., Mountain Lake Corp., Lake Wales.
STAFFORD, W. M., Chief Fire Warden, Everglades Fire Control District, Lake Worth.
STAMBAUGH, SCOTT U., Horticulturist, Babson Park.
STAUTENBURG, FRANK, Gardener, Box 133, Coconut Grove.
STEIN, FRITZ, Farmer, Box 488, Belle Glade.
STEPHENS, MILES E., Soil Conservation Service, Spartanburg, S. C.
STETT, FRANK, Manager, Hobe Sound.
STEVENS, F. D., Sugar Cane Agronomist, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
STIRLING & SONS, FRANK, Horticulture, R. F. D. Route 1, Ft. Lauderdale.
STOKES, W. E., Head, Dept, of Agronomy, Florida Agr. Experiment Station, Gainesville.
STOREY, NORMAN C., Inventor and Machinist, 825 N. W. 72nd St., Miami.
STORROCK, JAMES D., Landscape Contractor, Box 23 48, Palm Beach.
SUGGS, GEO. W., District Mgr., Technical Service Bureau, The Barrett Company, 13?
Carnegie Way, Atlanta, Georgia.
SWENSON, A. F., Supt., C. C. Bolton Estate, Box 2586, Palm Beach.
SYNTHETIC NITROGEN PRODUCTS CORPORATION (Dr. Arthur M. Smith), 285 Mad
ison Ave., New York, N. Y.
TABER, G. L., Jr., Nurseryman, Glen Saint Mary.
TAIT, W. L., Int. Fruit Corporation, Winter Haven.
TALBERT, DALE, Grove Manager, Vero Beach.
TAYLOR, ARTHUR E., Soil Scientist, Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. D. A., Washington,
D. C.
TAYLOR, J. J., State Chemist, Dept, of Agriculture, Tallahassee.
TAYLOR, ROY, Gardener, Boca Grande
THERKILDSON, W. F., Editor, All Florida, Miami Herald, Miami.
THOMAS, WAYNE, Realtor, Plant City.
THOMPSON, RALPH P., Citrus Grower, Winter Haven.
THOMPSON, RUSSELL, Miami Beach.
THORNTON, R. P., Chemist, Thornton and Company, 1145 E. Cass Street, Tampp
THULLBERY, H. A., Production Mgr., Haines City Citrus Growers Association, Haines
City.
TIGERT, DR. JOHN J., President, University of Florida, Gainesville.
TOMASELLO, RUDOLPH P., Spraying and Fertilizer Service, 911 Begonia Road, W. Palm
Beach.
TOWNSEND, DR. G. R., Plant Pathologist, Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade.
TURNER, H. A., Landscape Superintendent, Boca Raton.
TURRENTINE, J. W., President, Am. Potash Institute, Inc., 1016 Investment Bldg.,
Washington, D. C.
VAN DOREN, H. W., Florist and Nurseryman, 2412 20th St., South, St. Petersburg.
VAN LANDINGHAM, E. M., Grower, Belle Glade.
VAUGHN, H. T., Chemist, U. S. Sugar Corporation, Clewiston.
VOLK, G. M., Chemist, Fla. Agr. Exp. Station, Gainesville.
WAKSMAN, DR. S. A., Prof, of Soil Microbiology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick,
New Jersey.
75

WALKER, DR. M.N., Plant Pathologist in Charge, Leesburg Field Station, Leesburg.
WALLACE, DONALD S., District Engineer, U. S. Geological Survey, Ocala.
WALLIS, W. TURNER, Consulting Engineer, National Resources Planning Board, West
Palm Beach.
WARD, W. F., Asst. Animal Husbandman in Charge, W. Central Florida Experiment
Station, Brooksville.
WARNER, J. D., Agronomist Acting in Charge, North Florida Experiment Station, Quincy.
WATKINS, MARSHALL O., Asst. County Agricultural Agent, Plant City.
WEAVER, RUDOLPH, Director, School of Architecture and Allied Arts, Univ. of Florida,
Gainesville.
WEDDING, CHAS. R., Nurseryman, St. Petersburg.
WEDGWORTH, MRS. RUTH S., Manager, Wedgworth Estate, Belle Glade.
WELLS, ARTHUR, Farmer, Belle Glade.
WELLS, HENRY K., Real Estate, Palm Beach.
WESEMEYER, FRED J., V. P. A. and W. Bulb Co., Ft. Myers.
WESTBROOK, GEO. F., Clermont.
WESTVELD, R. H., Prof, of Silviculture, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
WHIPP, C. LESLIE, Whipps Azalea Gardens, Callahan.
WHITAKER, J. W., Sales Manager, Swift and Company, Bartow.
WHITE, ALEC, County Agricultural Agent, Tampa.
WILCOX, C. B., Citrus Grower, 3 1 6 DeSoto Circle, Orlando.
WILCOX, J. MARK, Seybold Bldg., Miami.
WILCOX, MARK, Farmer, R. R. No. 3, Box 482, Orlando, (Bridgeton Pa.)
WILL, L. E., Garage Operator, Belle Glade.
WILLIAMSON, B. F., Chemist, Manufacturer and Farmer, Gainesville
WILLIAMSON, F. L., Grower, Clewiston.
C\* Head Prof- of Physics, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
WILLSON, GEO. C., Graduate Student in Soils, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville.
WILSON, JOHN R., Spraying and Insecticides, Box 6044, West Palm Beach.
WILSON, LEO H., Production Manager Domino Citrus Association, Box 48, Bradenton.
WILSON, R.A., Nurseryman, Jupiter.
WINTER GARDEN ORNAMENTAL NURSERY, INC., Wholesale Growers of Tropical Plants,
Winter Garden.
WIRT, EARL, Jr., Asst, in Horticulture, Florida Agr. Experiment Station, Gainesville.
WITT, A. C., Florist, Box 4-A, South Miami.
WOLF, NORMAN L., Grove Owner and Operator, Cocoa.
WOOD, J. H., Gardener, 4705 ^ Parker Ave., W. Palm Beach.
WOOD, GAR, Pres. Chemurgic Research Corporation, 813-14 Ingraham Bldg. Miami.
WRAY, FLOYD L., Citrus, Hollywood.
WRIGHT, STANLEY H., Coordinator, Southeastern Florida Joint Investigation, Box 1 188.
West Palm Beach.
YANCEY, F. D., Fruit Grower, Umatilla.
YOTHERS, W. W., Consulting Citriculturist, 45 7 Boone Street, Orlando.
YOUNG, DR. C. T., Banking and Investments, Box 948, Plant City.
YOUNG, T. W., Graduate Student, Dept, of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York.
ZIEGLER, L. W., Winter Haven.
ZIPPERER, J. O., Rex Beach Farms, Ft. Myers.
It will be greatly appreciated if members will send in corrections
or additions for the names and addresses in the above membership roll,
as we are anxious to have it as complete and correct as possible. We
believe it a worthwhile part of the record to have the occupation or
business connection of each member known to the whole group and
solicit the assistance of each individual to that end.
76

Constitution and By-Laws of the Soil Science Society
of Florida
Article 1.
NAME
The name of this organization shall be the Soil Science Society of Florida.
OBJECTIVES
Article II.
The objectives of this Society shall be to foster all phases of Soil Science,
both as to its development and application, namely, in the fields of research,
teaching and extension.
Article III.
MEMBERSHIP
Any person or organization interested in the objectives of the Society shall
be eligible to membership in the Society.
SECTIONS
Article IV.
The integration of the activity of the Society shall be limited to certain
functional committees until it becomes evident that sectionalization on the
basis of subject matter will serve a definite purpose in advancing the work.
Such committees will be appointed each year.
AFFILIATION
Article V.
This Society may become affiliated, as a State unit, with such National Soc-
ities as the Soil Science Society of America provided the requirements of
such affiliation are not such as to be at variance with the provisions of the
Constitution of the Florida Society.
OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY
Article VI.
The officers of the Society shall be a President, a Vice-President, a Secretary-
Treasurer, and an Executive Committee. The Executive Committee shall
consist of the President of the Society (Chairman), the Vice-President, the
Secretary-Treasurer, and the most recent past president.
Article VII.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
The President shall appoint a nominating committee of three members in ad
vance of the annual meeting. This committee shall nominate a candidate for
Vice-President, the Vice-President for the year automatically succeeding to the
presidency. Other nominations may be made from the floor. Election of the
Vice-President shall be by ballot. The term of office shall be for one year.
The Secretary-Treasurer shall be appointed by the Executive Committee.
DUTIES OF OFFICERS
Article VIII.
Section 1. The President shall be the Executive Officer of the Society. He
shall preside over the meetings of the Society and its Executive Committee.
He shall be responsible for the arrangement of the programs of the Society
with the help of the Executive Committee and such other assistance as he may
appoint or request.
77

He shall appoint such committees as may be deemed advisable by the Exec
utive Committee under Article IV of the Constitution or as may be requested
or directed from the floor by majority vote.
He shall continue to serve on the Executive Committee of the Society for one
year following his retirement from the presidency.
Section 2. The Vice-President shall be elected annually by ballot from the
slate prepared by the nominating Committee supplemented by any nominations
from the floor.
He shall act for the President in his absence and otherwise assist him with
the duties of that office.
He shall automatically succeed to the presidency of the Society at the expir
ation of his annual term.
Section 3. The Secretary-Treasurer shall be appointed by the Executive
Committee.
He shall keep the minutes of all regular meetings and the financial records
of the Society.
He shall pay the bills of the Society, following the approval of the President.
He shall act as Secretary and as Editor of the Executive Committee in its
function as an Editorial Board.
Section 4. The Executive Committee shall outline the program of activities
and formulate the policies of the Society.
It shall recommend functional committees for appointment under Article IV
of the Constitution.
It shall act on all matters arising between the regular meetings of the Society.
It shall act as the Editorial Board of the Society of which the Secretary-Treas
urer shall be the Editor.
TIME AND PLACE OF MEETING
Article IX.
The annual meeting of the Society or any joint meeting of the Society with
other societies shall be at a time and place determined or agreed upon by the
Executive Committee of the Society.
Article X.
AMENDMENTS
Amendments may be proposed (1 ) by the Executive Committee directly or
(2) by petition of any ten (10) members of the Society. The amendment
may be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members present at any annual
meeting, provided notice of same has been distributed to the membership of
the Society at least fifteen (15) days previous to the meeting at which it is
to be acted upon.
BY-LAWS
1. Dues. The annual dues for membership in the Society shall be one dollar
($1.00).
2. Expenditures. Bills for any expenditures made by the officers of the Society
in transaction of official business, after approval by the President of the
Society, shall be submitted to the Treasurer for payment.
3. Committees. Such standing and special committees may be appointed by the
President as seems desirable to carry on the work of the Society, as provided
by Article VIII, Section 1, of the Constitution.
4. Quorum. A quorum at the annual meeting or any other business meeting
which may be called shall consist of at least 20 per cent of the members.
5. Amendments. The by laws may be amended at any regular meeting of the
Society by a two-thirds vote of the members present.
Adopted in Organization Session
Hollywood, Florida
April 18, 1939.
78




977