Farm ID | Ash thick-ness (mm) | Damage State based on thickness (Wilson et al. 2009)a | Damage state description | Damage state based on observations | Justification of assigned damage state | Damage state based on thickness (Jenkins et al. 2014) | Damage state description | Damage state based on observations | Justification of assigned damage state |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 300+ | >150mm category | New soil formation needs to occur (up to decades) | 25–150 category | Ash was incorporated into soil within months | 5 | Major rehabilitation required/retirement of land | 2 | No land was retired and very little rehabilitation work was undertaken |
B | 300+ | >150mm category | New soil formation needs to occur (up to decades) | 25–150 category | Ash was incorporated into soil within months | 5 | Major rehabilitation required/retirement of land | 2 | No land was retired and very little rehabilitation work was undertaken |
C | 50 | 25–150 category | Integration of tephra into soil in 1–5 years | 50–150 mm category | Recovery will be limited within the next growing season | 2–3 | Minor to major productivity loss (remediation required) | 3 | Losses were >50% across the region, however due to lack of resources very little remediation took place |
D | 30–45 | 25–150 category | Integration of tephra into soil in 1–5 years | 25–150 category | Forecast time to total recovery (~5 years) is within what is predicted for the area | 2–3 | Minor to major productivity loss (remediation required) | 3 | Losses were >50% across the region, however due to lack of resources very little remediation took place |
E | 50 | 25–150 category | Integration of tephra into soil in 1–5 years | 25–150 category | Forecast time to total recovery (~5 years) is within predictions | 2–3 | Minor to major productivity loss (remediation required) | 3 | Losses were >50% across the region, however due to lack of resources very little remediation took place |