Ground cover - humus, is it litter or bare-ground?

In some highly productive systems, forests and woodlands with dense sclerophyll understorey for example, you may come across a highly crumbly, dark brown, humus layer, of which you might be tempted to ask the question: "hallo, are you litter or are you bare-ground?". The answer I would propose is that it is neither, and both... i.e. it is "humus", the highly organic product of leaf litter decomposition, which has characteristics of soil (granular, brown, a medium for germination) and litter (not mineral, loose and light in texture, still undergoing decomposition).

The ground-cover indicator in BCM treats bare-ground fairly simply as a negative factor brought about disturbance, and is concerned with loose, bare mineral soil (unprotected by moss, lichen or microphytic crust) being exposed to the potential of erosion by wind or water, and as a substrate for weed invasion. In the case of dark brown crumbly organic humus however, while it may get washed away and provide a substrate for weed invasion, it is not usually a result of disturbance.

Without a separate humus layer category in the current BCM method to score it under, my preference would be to score it under litter, and make a comment in the comments column about how much of this is "ordinary litter" and how much is "humus-style" litter.

Do you think we should add a humus/organic layer category to the BCM scoresheets?