![clay tweeten clay tweeten](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7f/e7/4c/7fe74c10f191d9d5bef94bd0d4426559.jpg)
It is true that wind erosion preferentially removes soil nutrients, but there are imponderables even here. Modelling still has its problems, but it may be possible to overcome many of them soon. Direct measurement of these characteristics has many problems, largely because of huge variability in space and time at all scales. In the first part, simple sustainability audits are examined, as of soil depth and nutrients. This article explores the assessment of sustainability in fields subject to wind erosion. This implies that motivating residue management requires programs that pay even greater attention to reversible degradation, and therefore the overall farm management implications, rather than strictly to protect topsoil from irreversible degradation. Third, nutrient depletion is a more compelling motivator for adopting residue management than soil profile depth depletion. Second, optimal residue management is more variable with respect to soil type than to the erosion phase of the soil, implying that substantial gains to targeting are possible. Three principal findings result: First, due to differences in initial soil properties, susceptibility to degradation, sensitivity of yield to soil depth, and yield response to alternative management practices, dynamically optimal economic strategies cannot be inferred directly from physical results but are inferred from the associated economic implications. Our model is applied to degradation data from nine soils in the north central United States. Predictions of optimal management response to soil degradation are accomplished using a closed-loop model of fertilizer applications and residue management to control future stocks of soil nutrients and soil profile depth. We portray nutrient depletion as a reversible facet of soil degradation and soil profile depth depletion as an irreversible facet of soil degradation. A model is constructed that divides soil degradation into reversible and irreversible components. This paper provides a partial explanation for why farmers may adopt differing conservation strategies, even though they share similar preferences.
![clay tweeten clay tweeten](https://img0.etsystatic.com/040/1/9420698/il_340x270.631762270_418f.jpg)
Physical evidence, while necessary, is not sufficient to predict conservation actions by farmers in response to the threat of degradation.
![clay tweeten clay tweeten](https://img0.etsystatic.com/062/0/5841285/il_fullxfull.794016098_o25a.jpg)
Where private incentives leave off and public incentives start up is somewhat controversial, however. Because soil degradation has both on-site and off-site effects, public policies have often tried to increase rates of conservation over privately optimal rates. Physical scientists have presented a wealth of evidence regarding the effects of cropland soil degradation.