Soil information is vital for a range of purposes; however, soils vary greatly over short distances, making accurate soil data difficult to obtain. Soil surveys were first carried out in the 1920s, and the first national soil map was produced in 1940. Several regional studies were done in the 1960s, with the national Land Type Survey completed in 2002. Subsequently, the transfer of soil data to digital format has allowed a wide range of interpretations, but many data are still not freely available as they are held by a number of different bodies. The need for soil data is rapidly expanding to a range of fields, including health, food security, hydrological modelling and climate change. Fortunately, advances have been made in fields such as digital soil mapping, which enables the soil surveyors to address the need. The South African Soil Science fraternity will have to adapt to the changing environment in order to comply with the growing demands for data. At a recent Soil Information Workshop, soil scientists from government, academia and industry met to concentrate efforts in meeting the current and future soil data needs. The priorities identified included: interdisciplinary collaboration; expansion of the current national soil database with advanced data acquisition, manipulation, interpretation and countrywide dissemination facilities; and policy and human capital development in newly emerging soil science and environmental fields. It is hoped that soil information can play a critical role in the establishment of a national Natural Agricultural Information System.

Creating a conceptual hydrological soil response map for the Stevenson Hamilton Research Supersite, Kruger National Park, South Africa

Soil information is critical in watershed-scale hydrological modelling; however, it is still debated which level of complexity the soil data should contain. In the present study, we have compared the effect of two levels of soil data on the hydrologic simulation of a mesoscale, urbanised watershed (630 km²) in central South Africa. The first level of soil data, land type (LT) data, is currently the best, readily available soil information that covers the whole of South Africa. In the LT database, the entire study area is covered by only two soil types. The second level of soil data (DSM) was created by means of digital soil mapping based on hydropedological principles. It resulted in six different soil types with different hydrological behaviour (e.g., interflow, recharge, responsive). The two levels of soil data were each included in the revised version of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT+). To compare the effects of different complexity of soil information on the simulated water balance, the outputs of the uncalibrated models were compared to the three nested gauging stations of the watershed. For the LT scenario, the simulation efficiencies calculated with the Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) for the three nested gauging stations (640 km², 550 km², 54 km²) of 0, 0.33 and −0.23 were achieved, respectively. Under the DSM scenario, KGE increased to 0.28, 0.44 and 0.43 indicating an immediate improvement of the simulation by integrating soil data with detailed information on hydrological behaviour. In the LT scenario, actual evapotranspiration (aET) was clearly underestimated compared to MODIS-derived aET, while surface runoff was overestimated. The DSM scenario resulted in higher simulated aET compared to LT and lower surface runoff. The higher simulation efficiency of DSM in the smaller headwater catchments can be attributed to the inclusion of the interflow soil type, which covers the governing runoff generation process better than the LT scenario. Our results indicate that simulations benefit from more detailed soil information, especially in smaller areas where fewer runoff generation processes dominate.