Environmental Geochemistry and Health

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 99–104 | Cite as

Experimental assessment of wind erosion after soil stabilization treatments at Eneabba, Western Australia

  • David T. Bell
  • Daniel J. Carter
  • Robert E. Hetherington


Wind tunnel experiments on rehabilitation surfaces at Eneabba, Western Australia evaluated the techniques used by Associated Minerals Consolidated Ltd. (AMC) and Allied Eneabba Ltd. (AEL) to stabilize regions being revegetated following heavy mineral sand mining.

Newly landscaped areas proved to be the most erodible, beginning to erode at 9 m sec−1 and producing a soil flux of 10 kg m−1 min−1 at 18 m sec−1 wind speeds. Sandier, more organically-rich, surfaces in the rehabilitation areas were somewhat less erodible with losses of only 2 kg m−1 min−1 at wind speeds of 18 m sec−1.

The mining companies use various nurse crops and top dressing mulch for surface stabilization. Rows of oats, sparse plantings of the grass cultivar “SUDAX” (Dekalb ST6) supplied by Westfarmers Ltd. and applications of Terolas, a cold, bituminous surface binding material supplied by Shell Co. of Australia Ltd., all proved successful in reducing wind erosion in this semi-arid region where more than 25% of summer days experience winds greater than 8 m sec−1.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bouyoucos, B.J. 1936. Directions for making mechanical analysis of soils by the hydrometer method.Soil Sci. 42, 225–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carter, D.J. 1985. Preventing wind erosion.West. Aust. Dep. Agric. Farmnote No. 36, 2 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Chepil, W.S., Siddoway, F.H., & Armburst, D.V. 1962. Climatic factor for estimating wind erodibility of farm fields.J. Soil Water Conserv. 17, 162–165.Google Scholar
  4. Chepil, W.S. & Woodruff, N.P. 1963. The physics of wind crosion and its control.Adv. Agron. 15, 211–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lyles, L., 1983. Erosive wind energy distributions and climatic factors for the West.J. Soil Water Conserv. 38, 106–109.Google Scholar
  6. Lyles, L. & Allison, B.E., 1980. Range grasses and their small grain equivalents for wind crosion control.J. Range Mgmt. 33, 143–146.Google Scholar
  7. —, 1981. Equivalent wind erosion protection from selected crop residues.Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engin. 24, 405–408.Google Scholar
  8. Rollin, E.M. 1983. The influence of wind speed and direction on the reduction of wind speed leeward of a medium porous hedge.Agric. Meterorol. 30, 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Skidmore, E.L. 1983. Wind erosion calculation: Revision of residual table.J. Soil Water Conserv. 38, 110–112.Google Scholar
  10. Wischmeier, W.H. & Mannering, J.V. 1970 Relation of soil properties to its erodibility.Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 33, 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Woodruff, N.P. & Siddoway, F.H., 1965. A wind erosion equationSoil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 29, 602–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Woodruff, N.P. & Armbrust, D.V. 1968. A montly climatic factor for the wind erosion equation.J. Soil Water Conserv. 23, 103–104.Google Scholar
  13. Zingg, A.W. 1951. A portable wind tunnel and dust collector developed to evaluate the erodibility of field surfaces.Agron. J. 43, 189–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zingg, A.W., Woodruff, N.P. & Engleton, C.I., 1952. Effect of wind-row orientation on crodibility of land in sorghum stubble.Agron. J. 44, 227–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science and Technology Letters 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • David T. Bell
    • 1
  • Daniel J. Carter
    • 2
  • Robert E. Hetherington
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BotanyUniversity of Western AustraliaNedlandsAustralia
  2. 2.Western Australia Department of AgricultureSouth PerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations