-
ATTRA is the national sustainable agriculture information service operated by the National Center forAppropriate Technology, through a grant from the Rural Business-Cooperative Service, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture. These organizations do not recommend or endorse products, companies, or individuals.NCAT has offices in Fayetteville, Arkansas (P.O. Box 3657, Fayetteville, AR 72702), Butte, Montana,and Davis, California.
By Barbara C. BellowsNCAT Agriculture SpecialistMarch 2003
SOIL SYSTEMS GUIDE
PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS:FARMLAND MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIES
Riparian areas include streams, streambanks, and wetlands adjacent to streams. These areas havea water table high enough to interact with plant roots and affect their growth throughout most of theyear. Plant species that thrive in riparian areas are adapted to wet and flooded conditions. They arealso adapted to regrow root systems in sedi-ments deposited through soil erosion(Schneider, 1998).
Healthy riparian areas are critically im-portant ecological zones. They provide: Water quality protection Structural support for streambanks Water capture and storage Flood control Stabilization of water flow in streams
and rivers Habitat for aquatic and terrestrial wild-
life Aesthetic and recreational benefits
Unfortunately, various land use prac-tices have degraded riparian areas, result-ing in impaired environmental conditions,decreased agronomic production, and a multiplicity of social costs. Both agricultural and non-agricul-tural land use practices are responsible for the degradation of riparian areas. These degrading landuse practices include:
Abstract: This publication is designed to help farmers, watershed managers, and environmentalists understand whathealthy riparian areas look like, how they operate, and why they are important for the environment and society. It alsoprovides information on the costs and benefits of riparian management and discusses how watershed residents can worktogether to protect this vital resource. Tables included in the publication are designed to help you evaluate riparianprotection strategies from the perspective of your local environment, surrounding land use practices, and land managementobjectives.
IntrIntrIntrIntrIntroductionoductionoductionoductionoduction
Photo by USDA NRCS
mailto:[email protected]?subject=Protecting Riparian Areas: Farmland Management Strategies
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 2
TTTTTable of Contentsable of Contentsable of Contentsable of Contentsable of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................ 1Upland Land Management and Riparian Health ............................... 3What do Riparian Areas Look Like?................................................ 5Water and Sediment Capture by Riparian Areas............................... 6 Table 1. Vegetation Indicators for Riparian Areas........................ 8Water Decontamination by Riparian Soils ....................................... 9 Table 2. Soil Indicators for Riparian Areas ............................... 10Riparian Areas and Habitat Preservation ....................................... 11 Table 3. Streambank and Channel Indicators............................ 12Land Management Practices to Protect Riparian Areas ................... 13 Table 4. Indicators of Aquatic and Riparian Wildlife ................. 14Community Watershed Collaboration to Protect Riparian Areas ...... 16Summary .................................................................................. 17References ................................................................................ 17 Appendix 1: Impacts of Local Ecology on Riparian ........................
Characteristics................................................................... 22 Table A.1. Effect of Stream Order on Natural Riparian ..................
Characteristics................................................................... 23 Table A.2. Effect of Rainfall and Temperature on Riparian..............
Characteristics................................................................... 24 Appendix 2: Guidelines for Riparian Area Revegetation ............. 27 Appendix 3: Limited Ability of Riparian Areas to Control Phosphorus
Movement into Streams...................................................... 29 Appendix 4: Recommended Buffer Widths ............................... 30 Appendix 5: Economic Costs and Benefits of Riparian Buffer ..........
Protection ......................................................................... 32 Table A.3. Incentive Programs for Riparian Protection .............. 34
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 3
Artificial stream widening and straightening Road and building construction close to
streams Replacement of wooded or grassy areas with
roads, houses, and parking lots resulting inincreased runoff into streams
Unrestricted grazing or loitering of livestockin or near streams
Crop production activities including plowing,planting, and fertilizer, manure, and pesticideapplications close to streams
This publication is designed to assist farm-ers, ranchers, watershed managers, homeowners,and community members in understanding theimportance of riparian areas and guide them inimplementing land management practices to im-prove riparian health. Tables included providetools to monitor the conditions of riparian areasduring land restoration processes.
Attached appendices provide detailed infor-mation on subjects addressed in this publi-cation.
Upland LUpland LUpland LUpland LUpland LandandandandandManagement andManagement andManagement andManagement andManagement andRiparian HealthRiparian HealthRiparian HealthRiparian HealthRiparian Health
Water flows from upland areas through ri-parian areas and eventually into streams.Healthy riparian areas are able to absorb, hold,and use much of the water that flows off fromhealthy upland areas. Healthy riparian areasare also able to chemically and biologically bindor detoxify many contaminants contained inthis water. However, if upland areas are de-graded or covered with roads, parking lots, androoftops that do not allow the water to seep intothe soil, even the healthiest riparian area willbe unable to absorb and filter large volumes ofwater, nutrients, and contaminants flowingthrough it. Therefore, the first step in riparianprotection is ensuring that land managementpractices across the watershed conserve soil andwater resources.
Water moves across the landscape in twoways: as groundwater flow and as runoff. Sub-surface or groundwater flow is water that hassoaked into the soil and travels undergroundthrough pores in the soil. Runoff is water thatmoves over the surface of the soil. Whengroundwater or runoff water moves, it absorbsnutrients or contaminants and transports theminto riparian areas and potentially into streams.Runoff water can also transport eroded soil par-ticles.
Groundwater flowGroundwater flowGroundwater flowGroundwater flowGroundwater flow. In most undisturbedwatersheds, a majority of the water flows intoriparian areas and streams as groundwaterrather than as runoff. As rain falls or snowmelts, leaves and other plant residues on the soilsurface catch this water. Pores created by grow-ing plants, decaying plant roots, and animalburrows help the water seep into the soil (Cohen,1997). Once it seeps into the soil, the resultinggroundwater moves relatively slowly under-ground through soil particles until it reaches ri-parian areas and associated streams.
RunoffRunoffRunoffRunoffRunoff is favored when rain falls faster thanthe ground can absorb it. Water cannot be effec-tively absorbed when soils: Are compacted at the surface Are bare, so that the impact of rain drops on
the soil forms a surface crust
Plants in riparian areas filter ground and surfacewater moving into streams.
(from Huel, 1998. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada)
Above ground vegetationtraps sediment andpollutants
Fertilizer andpesticide residue
Floodwater level
Streamwater level
Runoff reachesstream carrying littlesediment, pesticideand fertilizer residue,making it healthier forplant and animal life
Residue fromfertilizer andpesticides aretrapped byroot systems
Healthy streambank vegetation
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 4
Have pores that have become plugged byeroded sediments
Have a clay texture that does not allow forrapid water movement into the soil
Are hydrophobic or have a surface crust,typical of many arid or semi-arid soils (Fed-eral Interagency Stream Restoration WorkingGroup, 2001).Runoff is also heavy when the soil does not
have the capacity to hold additional rainwateror snowmelt entering the soil. Thisoccurs when: Soils have been replaced by im-
permeable surfaces such asroads, parking lots, or rooftopsand insufficient natural or arti-ficial wetlands are present tocapture water not able to be ab-sorbed by soil
Soils are rocky or have an impen-etrable stony layer close to thesurface
Soils are thin because the topsoilhas been eroded off
Soils have a compacted layer ofpan within their profile thatacts as a barrier to downwardwater movement
Groundwater levels are high Rain keeps falling on soils that
are already saturated
Stream flashing
When runoff is heavy, such as following anintense storm or a rapid snowmelt, streamlevels can rise rapidly, often to flood stage.This rise in water levels is often very shortterm, lasting only a day or two, after whichwater levels decrease dramatically. The rapidrise and fall of water levels caused by runoffis referred to as stream flashing.
Contaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by water..... Run-off water flowing over the soil surface can pickup and erode soil sediments. These sedimentsmay carry nutrients, pathogens, pesticides, andother contaminants, depending on the land-usepractices in the area they came from. Both runoff
water and groundwater can also absorb nutri-ents or become contaminated with pesticides orpathogens in the soil. Streams are polluted whencontaminated water is able to move directly intothem.
Impact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erosion on riparosion on riparosion on riparosion on riparosion on ripar-----ian areas.ian areas.ian areas.ian areas.ian areas. Under healthy watershed conditionswater infiltration across the landscape resultsin minimal runoff and erosion reaching ripar-ian areas. Healthy riparian areas have a dense
growth of vegetation that catches any erodedsediment and prevents it from entering streams.They also have a diversity of plants that facilitatewater infiltration and take up many nutrients car-ried into riparian areas by runoff and groundwa-ter. Riparian areas also have a unique soil envi-ronment that provides favorable conditions forthe chemical and biological degradation of manysoil contaminants.
However, when upland watershed condi-tions are degraded, heavy runoff can flow overor through riparian plants and move directlyinto river channels. Severe erosion in uplandareas can degrade riparian areas by buryingplants under sediments. Fine sediments broughtin by erosion can degrade stream habitat by fill-ing in stream pools, altering the shape of streamchannels, and covering rocky stream bottoms,thereby eliminating important food producing,shelter and spawning areas (Wohl and Caline,1996). Runoff and erosion also bring in seeds ofnon-native or non-riparian plant species. Inva-
Runoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedsediments into streamssediments into streamssediments into streamssediments into streamssediments into streams
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 5
sive and non water-loving plant species can re-duce habitat for native species and lower the wa-ter table by crowding out more functional andpalatable riparian species. They can also create afire risk by increasing fuel loads (Allen et al, 2000).As runoff and erosion from upland areas con-tinue to destroy the integrity of riparian areas,streamside areas loose their ability to buffer andprotect streams, resulting in damage to aquatichabitat, increased costs for treating drinking wa-ter, and loss of aesthetic appeal.
Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Water infiltration is enhanced by land-use prac-tices that provide coverage of the soil surfacewith vegetation or residues throughout the year.Conservation tillage, contour farming, covercropping, agroforestry, and rotational grazingare all practices that protect soil quality whilepromoting water flow into the soil. For moreinformation on these soil and water conserva-tion practices, please see the following ATTRApublications:
Sustainable Soil Management
Conservation Tillage
Pursuing Conservation Tillage for Organic CropProduction
Rye as a Cover Crop
Protecting Water Quality on Organic Farms
Sustainable Pasture Management
Rotational Grazing
Nutrient Cycling in Pastures
What do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasLook LikLook LikLook LikLook LikLook Like?e?e?e?e?
Healthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areas. Characteristics ofhealthy riparian areas differ across the countryand across the landscape. In mountainous orhilly areas, streams run through rocky gorgeswith scattered trees growing out of the thin soil.In prairie landscapes, streams flow throughthick, silty soil, with banks covered by reeds,sedges, and willows. Despite these local differ-ences, healthy riparian areas have certain simi-larities:
A thick growth of vegetation, representinga diversity of grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees,covers the streambanks and provides shadeover the stream
Except where streams cut through rocky ter-rain, land surrounding streambanks re-mains wet throughout most of the year
Streambanks are more vertical than flat-tened out
Streamflow levels vary only moderatelythroughout the year
Stream water is relatively clear but containsleaves, twigs, or logs from streambanks thatcreate pools and other habitat for fish andother aquatic organisms
A diversity of fish, aquatic life, mammals,and birds live in and around riparian areas
Appendix 1 describes regional differences inthe structures and functions of riparian areas.
Degraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areas. In contrast, de-graded riparian areas have some or all of thefollowing characteristics: Patchy or scrubby plant growth with bare
ground showing in many places Vegetation dominated by upland plants in-
cluding noxious weeds Soil that is compacted, shows rills or gullies,
or has bare trails and pathways along thestreambanks
Streambanks that are eroded, severely un-dercut, or sloughing
Streams that flood regularly in the springand become dry during the summer
Streamwater that is muddy or murky andmay contain toxic levels of various nutrientsor contaminants
Few mammals or birds living or feeding inthe area
Limited numbers and diversity of fish andother aquatic speciesThese characteristics of degraded riparian
areas reflect their inability to protect water qual-ity, stabilize water quantity, and provide criti-cal habitat for both land animals and aquaticspecies.
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/soilmgmt.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/consertill.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/omconservtill.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/omconservtill.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/rye.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/om-waterquality.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/sustpast.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/rotgraze.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/nutrientcycling.PDF
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 6
WWWWWater and Sedimentater and Sedimentater and Sedimentater and Sedimentater and SedimentCapture by RiparianCapture by RiparianCapture by RiparianCapture by RiparianCapture by Riparian
AreasAreasAreasAreasAreasRiparian areas protect water quality by cap-
turing, storing, and treating water that flowsthrough their soils. A thick growth of diversevegetation, plant residues covering the soil sur-face, and porous, non-compacted soil facilitatewater capture. High streambanks with highwater tables provide water storage capacity.Vigorously growing plants take up nutrientstransported into riparian areas, while active popu-lations of both aerobic and anaerobic soil organ-isms degrade many contaminants that flow intothese areas. Chemicals in soil minerals and soilorganic matter also capture or facilitate biologi-cal detoxification of contaminants. Understand-ing these components of healthy riparian areascan help guide land management practices thatprotect riparian areas and water quality.
Structure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetation. Healthyriparian vegetation captures water and facilitateswater infiltration into the soil. Riparian areas thatinclude a diversity of plant species are most ef-fective in slowing the flow of water and storing itfor future use. These species are not arranged ina random manner. Rather, they are organized ina natural structure consisting of three roughlyparallel ecosystem bands, each consisting of spe-cies adapted to survive in the specific moistureregime of that area and able to perform specificecological functions: The first band of vegetation, found at the edge
of the water, consists of deep-rooted sedgesand rushes.
The second band of vegetation, found in thewet ground near the edge of the bank, con-sists of shrubs, trees, moisture loving grasses,and water-tolerant broad-leaved plants (Huel,1998).
The drier third band of vegetation, foundwhere the riparian zone merges into the up-lands, includes a mixture of riparian andupland plant species (Huel, 1998).
Plants in the first band are water-loving andhave deep, strong roots that stabilize streambanksagainst erosion (Clark, 1998). Plants in the sec-ond and third bands catch water and facilitate itsabsorption. They also take up nutrients trans-ported into the area by runoff and groundwaterand provide habitat for terrestrial animals. If landmanagement practices reduce the riparian zonesto only one or two of these bands, some or all ofthe environmental and habitat benefits of theseareas will be lost. The first zone is both the mostecologically important and requires the greatestprotection against degradation.
The dominance of water-loving plant speciesin the first zone serves as an indicator of riparianhealth. These plants are critical for promotingwater recharge and increasing water table height(Martin and Chambers, 2001). It is not essentialfor native plant species to dominate in riparianareas for these areas to provide environmentalbenefits. But water-loving plants that providefunctions similar to native species need to bepresent. However, water-tolerant exotic species such as leafy spurge, purple loosestrife, orsalt cedar grow very aggressively and over-whelm species that are native to the area andmore palatable to wildlife and livestock. In thisway, exotic species decrease the ability of ripar-ian areas to maintain high water table levels, re-tain streambank stability, provide forage to live-stock, and support wildlife habitat (Huel, 1998).
Trees, brush, and grasses protectstreambanks against erosion and water
quality degradation
Phot
o by
USD
A N
RC
S
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 7
The importance of water-loving plants in riparian areas
In the past, land management programs implemented in some arid areas recommended clearingnative, water-loving plants from riparian areas in order to reduce water-use competition and en-courage the production of agronomic crops or forage grasses. However, the removal of theseplants eliminated many of the ecological benefits provided by riparian areas, including streamstabilization, shading, and wildlife habitat (NRC, 2002). As a result, farmers and ranchers alongthese unprotected streams lost land to streambank erosion and were faced with greater challengesin reducing non-point source pollution.
Streambank stabilizationStreambank stabilizationStreambank stabilizationStreambank stabilizationStreambank stabilization. A diversity of plants work together to hold streambank soils inplace and protect them from erosion and undercutting by floodwaters, transported woody debris, orice jams. The deep, penetrating roots of sedges, rushes, grasses, and other herbaceous plants providestructural support for streambanks, while the thicker, harder roots of woody plants protect streambanksagainst bank scouring by floods and ice jams (Winward, 2000).
When riparian areas restore themselves natu-rally following a fire, for instance woodyspecies are often the first plants to become es-tablished. These woody plants stabilize streamchannels against the forces of erosion while nur-turing the growth of water-loving grasses, sedges,rushes, and forbs (Elmore and Beschta, 2000).The herbaceous plants then stabilize streambankswith their thick, deep roots, while their stemstrap sediments carried by runoff water andstream-scouring floodwater.
An eroded streambank thatrecovered when it was protected
from grazing and allowed tobecome stabilized by vegetation
Photos by D. Redhege, Kerr Centerfor Sustainable Agriculture
The types of vegetation that naturally domi-nate in riparian areas differ across locations.Grassy vegetation is more important for hold-ing together streambanks developed from sedi-ments, while trees and shrubs dominate on thesteep, rocky banks of more rapidly moving andnarrower headwater streams (Sovell et al., 2000).However, water-tolerant or water-loving plantsare more effective for holding streambanks inplace than are plants more adapted to uplandconditions, because they have deeper and stron-
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 8
Tabl
e 1.
Veg
etat
ion
Indi
cato
rs fo
r Rip
aria
n A
reas
Indi
cato
r
Envi
ronm
enta
lFu
nctio
n of
Plan
ts
Plan
t Spe
cies
Dive
rsity
Dive
rsity
of
Plan
t Age
s
Plan
t Vig
or a
ndRe
prod
uctio
n
Pala
tabl
eVe
geta
tion
Plan
t and
Litt
erCo
ver
Plan
t Litt
erM
ovem
ent a
ndPl
ant L
odgi
ng
Wid
th o
fR
ipar
ian
Are
a
Hea
lthy
Rip
aria
n A
reas
ef
fect
ive
wat
er in
filtra
tion
ef
fect
ive
capt
ure
of s
edim
ents
st
ruct
ural
sup
port
of s
tream
bank
s
redu
ces
stre
am v
eloc
ity d
urin
g flo
ods
sh
ade
for r
educ
ing
wat
er lo
ss a
nd m
oder
atin
gte
mpe
ratu
res
ha
bita
t for
wild
life,
bird
s, a
nd a
quat
ic s
peci
es
pr
edom
inan
tly n
ativ
e, w
ater
-lovi
ng ri
paria
nve
geta
tion
co
mbi
natio
n of
sed
ges,
rus
hes,
gra
sses
,he
rbac
ous
plan
ts, s
hrub
s an
d tre
es
bo
th y
oung
and
mat
ure
trees
and
shr
ubs
are
pres
ent
he
alth
y pl
ant g
row
th a
nd r
epro
duct
ion
pl
ant g
row
th e
xcee
ds 8
0% o
f pot
entia
lpr
oduc
tion
di
vers
ity o
f pla
nt s
peci
es a
nd p
lant
age
spr
ovid
es p
alat
able
veg
etat
ion
thro
ugho
ut th
egr
owin
g se
ason
tre
es h
ave
an o
pen
or p
ark-
like
appe
aran
ce
fu
ll ve
geta
tion
cove
rage
thro
ugho
ut th
e ye
ar
litte
r la
yer
pres
ent p
artic
ular
ly d
urin
g w
inte
r an
dsp
ring
pr
ovid
es w
oody
deb
ris th
at s
erve
s as
she
lter f
orfis
h an
d ha
bita
t for
aqu
atic
inse
cts
un
iform
dis
tribu
tion
of li
tter
pl
ants
rem
ain
stan
ding
follo
win
g he
avy
rain
falls
or s
now
mel
ts
rip
aria
n ve
geta
tion
at le
ast t
wo
chan
nel w
idth
son
eac
h si
de o
f stre
am
Mod
erat
ely
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
ve
geta
tion
prov
ides
som
e bu
t not
all
envi
ronm
enta
l fun
ctio
ns
so
me
non-
nativ
e pl
ant s
peci
es a
ndno
xiou
s w
eeds
pr
esen
ce o
f som
e dr
ough
t-tol
eren
tve
geta
tion,
sim
ilar
to th
at in
adj
acen
tup
land
are
as
fe
w y
oung
tree
s an
d sh
rubs
pre
sent
so
me
dead
or
deca
dent
pla
nts
pres
ent
ca
pabi
lity
to p
rodu
ce s
eeds
or
tille
rs is
som
ewha
t lim
ited
pl
ant g
row
th is
30-
80%
of p
oten
tial
prod
uctio
n
m
oder
ate
decr
ease
in p
erce
ntag
e of
pala
ble
plan
t spe
cies
pre
sent
so
me
brow
sing
on
pala
tabl
e tre
esp
ecie
s
sp
arse
veg
etat
ion
cove
rage
, esp
ecia
llydu
ring
the
dry
seas
on
litte
r la
yer
thin
ner
than
exp
ecte
d fo
rlo
catio
n
redu
ced
amou
nt o
f woo
dy d
ebris
add
edto
stre
am fl
ow
on
ly s
mal
l siz
e lit
ter
is d
ispl
aced
sc
atte
red
conc
entra
tion
of li
tter
near
obst
ruct
ions
fla
tteni
ng o
f gra
sses
in is
olat
ed a
reas
na
tura
l veg
etat
ion
exte
nds
the
wid
th o
fha
lf th
e ch
anne
l on
eith
er s
ide
of s
tream
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
ve
geta
tion
pres
ent i
neffe
ctiv
e in
pro
vidi
ngm
ost e
nviro
nmen
tal f
unct
ions
of r
ipar
ian
area
s
on
ly n
on-n
ativ
e sp
ecie
s
noxi
ous
or in
vasi
ve w
eeds
pre
sent
sm
all n
umbe
r of
pla
nt s
peci
es
trees
and
shr
ubs
are
abse
nt
pres
ence
of p
redo
min
antly
dro
ught
-tole
rent
vege
tatio
n, s
imila
r to
that
in a
djac
ent u
plan
dar
eas
re
duce
d pl
ant e
stab
lishm
ent a
nd s
urvi
val
al
l tre
es a
re o
ld a
nd in
poo
r hea
lth
ca
pabi
lity
to p
rodu
ce s
eed
or ti
llers
isse
vere
ly li
mite
d
plan
t gro
wth
is p
oor,
less
than
30%
of
pote
ntia
l pro
duct
ion
gr
azin
g ha
s re
mov
ed a
ll of
the
pala
tabl
eve
geta
tion
pa
lata
ble
spec
ies
of s
hrub
s an
d tre
es a
rehe
avily
bro
wse
d
willo
ws
and
othe
r pa
lata
ble
tree
spec
ies
have
a m
ushr
oom
-like
app
eara
nce
ba
re s
oil o
ver a
larg
e pe
rcen
tage
of t
he s
oil
surfa
ce
litte
r la
yer
larg
ely
abse
nt
limite
d am
ount
of w
oody
deb
ris a
dded
tost
ream
flow
lit
ter
is c
once
ntra
ted
arou
nd r
ocks
, tre
etru
nks,
and
oth
er o
bstru
ctio
ns
plan
ts a
re fl
atte
ned
by h
eavy
flow
s of
runo
ffw
ater
follo
win
g ra
inst
orm
s or
sno
wm
elts
na
tura
l veg
etat
ion
less
than
a th
ird o
f wid
thof
the
chan
nel o
n ea
ch s
ide
of s
tream
Sour
ces:
Bel
sky
et a
l., 1
999;
Fed
eral
Inte
rage
ncy
Stre
am R
esto
ratio
n W
orki
ng G
roup
, 200
1; H
illard
, C. a
nd S
. Ree
dyk.
200
0; N
aim
an e
t al.,
199
2; H
uel,
1998
; Pric
hard
, 199
8; R
enw
ick
and
Eden
, 199
9;W
inw
ard,
200
0.
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 9
ger root systems. For example, Kentucky blue-grass (Poa pratensis) and redtop (Agrostisstolonifera) provide good livestock forage, buttheir root systems are not deep enough to stabi-lize streambank sediments (Winward, 2000).Thus, these plants often serve as indicators ofdisturbed or degraded riparian areas. Similarly,trees that are not water tolerant do not developas extensive root systems in riparian areas as dowater tolerant species. As a result, these treesare unable to effectively stabilize streambanksand are likely to be undercut and fall into streams.
For guidelines on how to revegetate degradedriparian areas, please see Appendix 2.
Table 1 provides a list of indicators that com-pare vegetation characteristics in healthy ripar-ian areas to those in degraded areas.
WWWWWater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanks.Healthy riparian areas that are well-vegetatedhave highly permeable soils and high streambanks. They have a water table that extendsunderground and outward from thestreambanks and provides a large amount ofgroundwater storage (Prichard, 1998). In con-trast, degraded riparian areas have a low wa-ter table, sloping banks, and wide, shallowstreams, with limited storage capacity.
A riparian area with a diversity of vegeta-tion is able to trap 80 to 90% of the sedimentstransported from fields (Naiman and Decamps,1997). The new sediments, along with lush plantgrowth, facilitates both water infiltration intoriparian soils and increased water storage. Asvegetation grows, its stems and roots collectmore soil, while its leaves shade the soil andprotect it against water loss through evapora-tion. The seasonal death and decomposition ofplants provides additional organic matter to thesoil and further facilitates water infiltration andstorage. Organic matter holds water like asponge and stimulates the growth of soil organ-isms involved in the formation soil aggregatesand enhancing soil porosity.
Streambank build-up. Sediment trapping byriparian vegetation increases the height ofstreambanks, particularly along low-gradient
channels (Platts, 1990, Ohmart, 1996). Watertables rise simultaneously in riparian areas asstreambanks build up, water absorption is in-creased, and water loss through evaporation de-creases. Under healthy riparian conditions, wa-ter tables rise until they reach the height ofplants root zone on the former flood plains(Elmore and Beschta, 2000). These riparian soilsremain wet throughout most of the year.
Water recharge. The large water storage ca-pacity of riparian areas buffers the movementof water from upland areas into streams. In-stead of allowing water to flow directly intostreams following a rainstorm or snowmelt,healthy riparian areas hold and store water.Throughout the year, this water seeps slowlyinto adjacent streams, providing water rechargeand moderating stream flow.
Flood control. The ability of the porous, well-aggregated streambank soils to store vast quan-tities of water also decreases the potential forflooding. In addition, plants growing in ripar-ian areas control flooding by daily taking up andtranspiring thousands of gallons of water peracre (Elmore and Beschta, 2000). If water levelsdo reach flood stage, streambank vegetation sta-bilizes streambanks and helps prevent streamsfrom widening or changing course.
Table 2 (next page) compares streambank andchannel conditions in healthy and degraded ri-parian areas.
WWWWWater Decontaminationater Decontaminationater Decontaminationater Decontaminationater Decontaminationby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soils
Riparian areas contain a combination of wetand dry soil zones that facilitate a variety of bio-logical and chemical reactions. These reactionsreduce the availability of some nutrients and de-crease the toxicity of some contaminants(Edwards, 2000). The presence of slowly decom-posing plant residues in these wet soils furtherfacilitates water purification processes. Someorganic matter particles have a high ability tochemically capture and hold many potential con-taminants, while others serve as sources of foodand energy for soil organisms involved in con-taminant detoxification (Cohen, 1997).
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 10
Tabl
e 2.
Soi
l Ind
icat
ors
for R
ipar
ian
Are
asIn
dica
tor
Org
anic
mat
ter
Dive
rse
mic
robi
alco
mm
unity
stru
ctur
e
Min
imal
com
pact
ion
Goo
din
filtr
atio
n
Lim
ited
runo
ff
Lim
ited
eros
ion
Hea
lthy
Rip
aria
n A
reas
s
oil c
over
ed b
y gr
owin
g pl
ants
and
pla
ntre
sidu
es th
roug
hout
the
year
o
rgan
ic m
atte
r ha
s ac
cum
ulat
ed in
the
soil
prof
ile
hig
h so
il bi
olog
ical
act
ivity
to
psoi
ls a
re d
eep
s
oils
are
wel
l agg
rega
ted
o
rgan
ic m
atte
r de
com
pose
s ra
pidl
y
effe
ctiv
e lo
ss o
f nitr
ogen
thro
ugh
deni
trific
atio
n
goo
d so
il ag
greg
atio
n by
mic
robi
al s
limes
so
il is
sof
t, hi
gh o
rgan
ic m
atte
r co
nten
t
good
wat
er in
filtra
tion
go
od s
oil a
ggre
gatio
n
heal
thy
plan
t gro
wth
ve
geta
tion
cove
rage
ove
r the
soi
l sur
face
g
ood
soil
aggr
egat
ion
r
elat
ivel
y th
ick
tops
oil
go
od w
ater
infil
tratio
n
dee
p to
psoi
l with
goo
d w
ater
hol
ding
cap
acity
h
igh
amou
nt o
f org
anic
mat
ter i
n so
il an
d go
odso
il ag
greg
atio
n
com
plet
e ve
geta
tion
cove
r ove
r the
soi
l sur
face
no
indi
catio
n of
soi
l mov
emen
t
stre
am is
not
mud
died
by
runo
ff w
ater
Mod
erat
ely
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
s
oil o
rgan
ic m
atte
r co
nten
t som
ewha
tre
duce
d
som
e lo
ss o
f top
soil
m
oder
ate
leve
ls o
f soi
l bio
logi
cal a
ctiv
ity
soi
l pat
ches
bar
e of
veg
etat
ion
re
lativ
ely
high
rem
oval
of r
esid
ues
from
soil
syst
em
mod
erat
e to
poo
r soi
l agg
rega
tion
m
oder
ate
deco
mpo
sitio
n of
org
anic
mat
ter
so
il is
som
ewha
t har
d, e
spec
ially
dur
ing
the
dry
seas
on
wat
er in
filtra
tion
is li
mite
d in
som
e ar
eas
pl
ants
hav
e di
fficu
lty g
ettin
g w
ater
and
nutri
ents
from
the
soil
so
me
loss
of v
eget
atio
n co
vera
ge
som
e ru
noff,
ero
sion
, or p
ondi
ng o
fw
ater
obs
erve
d
soi
l com
pact
ion
on s
urfa
ce o
r w
ithin
prof
ile
in
filtra
tion
is s
omew
hat r
estri
cted
w
ater
hol
ding
cap
acity
of s
oil i
sso
mew
hat
limite
d
som
e so
il co
mpa
ctio
n or
rel
ativ
ely
high
wat
er ta
ble
so
me
smal
l rills
pre
sent
w
ater
bec
omes
mud
dy o
nly
afte
r he
avy
rain
s
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
lo
w s
oil f
ertil
ity a
nd lo
w c
once
ntra
tion
ofor
gani
c m
atte
r
soi
l is
bare
in m
any
area
s
limite
d to
psoi
l
limite
d so
il bi
olog
ical
act
ivity
lim
ited
retu
rn o
f pla
nt r
esid
ues
to th
e so
ilsy
stem
so
ils a
re s
ticky
or
grai
ny, n
ot w
ell a
ggre
gate
d
p
eat b
uild
s up
in ri
paria
n ar
eas
beca
use
area
is to
o w
et o
r or
gani
c m
atte
r re
mai
nsun
deco
mpo
sed
beca
use
area
s ar
e to
o dr
y
inef
fect
ive
deni
trific
atio
n
poo
r soi
l agg
rega
tion
s
oil i
s ha
rd
littl
e or
no
soil
oggr
egat
ion
li
ttle
or n
o w
ater
infit
ratio
n
nu
mer
ous
area
s ba
re o
f veg
etat
ion
lo
ss o
f soi
l agg
rega
tion
s
oil i
s co
mpa
cted
ru
noff
and
eros
ion
obse
rved
eve
n fo
llow
ing
light
to
mod
erat
e st
orm
s
in
filtra
tion
is r
estri
cted
h
igh
soil
surfa
ce c
ompa
ctio
n
lim
ited
wat
er h
oldi
ng c
apac
ity o
f soi
l
ril
ls a
nd g
ullie
s pr
esen
t
soil
is s
cour
ed w
here
wat
er fl
ows
over
the
surfa
ce
soil
build
up
behi
nd r
ocks
s
tream
is m
uddi
ed b
y ru
noff
wat
er
Sour
ces:
Bel
sky
et a
l., 1
999;
Fed
eral
Inte
rage
ncy
Stre
am R
esto
ratio
n W
orki
ng G
roup
, 200
1; N
aim
an e
t al.,
199
2; P
richa
rd, 1
998;
Ren
wic
k an
d Ed
en, 1
999;
Win
war
d, 2
000.
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 11
The hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zone. Healthy riparian soilshave a unique ecological zone composed ofwater-saturated oxygen-poor soils adjacentto soils that are drier and oxygen-rich. Re-ferred to as the hyporheic zone, this transi-tion area between aerobic and anaerobic con-ditions promotes biological transformations,such as denitrification and pesticide detoxifi-cation, and chemical transformations that in-fluence the availability of phosphorus and iron(Cohen, 1997).
Denitrification Denitrification Denitrification Denitrification Denitrification occurs when soil organismsthat grow under aerobic conditions transformorganic nitrogen into nitrate, followed by thetransformation of nitrate into atmospheric ni-trogen by bacteria that thrive under anaerobicconditions. This process is important environ-mentally when the amount of nitrogen movingacross the watershed into riparian areas isgreater than the amount that can be used forriparian plant growth. The overapplication ofnitrogen-containing fertilizers and manure onagricultural and residential landscapes is theprimary source of nitrogen pollution of water-ways. The amount of nitrogen entering streamsis reduced when riparian areas are able to cap-ture and remove nitrogen from runoff water.Natural riparian forests can denitrify and re-lease 25 to 35 pounds of nitrogen per acre peryear (Cole, 1981).
Phosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availability. Overapplicationof fertilizer and manure can also overload thesoil with phosphorus. Iron, aluminum, andcalcium in the soil can bind excess phosphorus.In flooded soils, iron binds less phosphorus thanit does in drier, aerobic soils. This decreasedbinding ability increases the availability of phos-phorus both for plant uptake and for movementinto surface water (Green and Kaufman, 1989).Since riparian areas have a limited ability to holdexcess phosphorus, they are relatively ineffec-tive in protecting streams against poor phospho-rus management practices on upland areas.Thus, good upland management is necessary toprotect against phosphorus pollution.
For additional information on the ability of ri-parian areas to control phosphorus move-ment into streams, please see Appendix 3.
Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants. Ripar-ian soils have a high concentration of peat, a par-tially decomposed organic material formed un-der primarily anaerobic conditions. Under wet,anaerobic conditions organic materials decom-pose more slowly than under aerobic conditions,since many more decomposing soil organismsrequire oxygen than thrive without it. Peat is ahighly reactive material that has the ability to cap-ture and hold many chemicalsnutrients, pesti-cides, heavy metals, and other contaminantsthat flow off the uplands and into riparian areas(Cohen, 1997).
Other microorganisms found in the aerobicand anaerobic areas of the riparian zone are ableto degrade toxic contaminants such as pesti-cides. Habitat competition by other soil micro-organisms decreases populations of human andanimal pathogens, such as E. coli,cryptosporidium, or giardia, that may be trans-ported into streams from septic systems or ma-nure piles (Stehman et al., 1996).
Table 3 (next page) compares soil charac-teristics in healthy riparian areas to those in de-graded areas.
Riparian Areas andRiparian Areas andRiparian Areas andRiparian Areas andRiparian Areas andHabitat PreserHabitat PreserHabitat PreserHabitat PreserHabitat Preservationvationvationvationvation
Riparian areas provide food and habitat for adiversity of soil, aquatic, and terrestrial organ-isms. A multistoried plant canopy of annualand perennial grasses and forbs, as well as juve-nile and mature shrubs and trees, provides avaried aboveground habitat for birds and wild-life and a belowground habitat for burrowinganimals and soil organisms. Exposed roots andirregular streambanks provide breeding areasfor many aquatic species, as well as habitat foralgae and macroinvertebrates that are used asfood by fish and other aquatic life. In addition,overhanging branches of riparian trees andsloughed off residues of riparian plants provideaquatic life with shade and habitat.
Aquatic habitatAquatic habitatAquatic habitatAquatic habitatAquatic habitat. Healthy riparian areasprotect fish habitat by minimizing the movementof eroded sediments into streams. Heavy siltloads disrupt reproductive behavior and destroyfeeding and spawing areas for many aquaticspecies (Thompson, 1984). For example, troutrequire gravel for reproduction and egg laying,while various gamefish need relatively clear
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 12
Tabl
e 3.
Str
eam
bank
and
Cha
nnel
Indi
cato
rsIn
dica
tor
Stre
amba
nkSt
abili
ty
Stre
amC
hann
el S
hape
Freq
uenc
y of
Riffl
es
Rip
aria
n W
ater
Tabl
e
Cha
nnel
Alte
rnat
ion
Hea
lthy
Rip
aria
n A
reas
ban
ks a
re a
t ele
vatio
n of
act
ive
flood
pla
in
littl
e or
no
stre
amba
nk e
rosi
on
man
y st
rong
, fin
e ro
ots
hold
stre
amba
nk in
plac
e
ch
anne
l is
rela
tivel
y na
rrow
ba
nks
are
rela
tivel
y st
raig
ht w
ith d
eep
unde
rcut
that
pro
vide
s sh
ade
for
aqua
tic s
peci
es
stre
am h
as p
ools
and
mea
nder
s
rel
ativ
ely
frequ
ent o
ccur
renc
e of
riffl
es
dis
tanc
e be
twee
n rif
fles
is n
o m
ore
than
7tim
es th
e m
easu
rem
ent o
f the
wid
th o
f the
stre
am
w
ater
tabl
e re
mai
ns h
igh
and
stab
le th
roug
hout
the
year
w
ater
lovi
ng v
eget
atio
n pr
edom
inat
es
ripar
ian
area
pro
vide
s an
inte
rface
bet
wee
n w
etan
d dr
y en
viro
nmen
ts
s
tream
has
not
bee
n su
bjec
t to
chan
neliz
atio
n,st
ream
alte
ratio
n, o
r dr
edgi
ng
Mod
erat
ely
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
so
me
stre
amba
nk e
rosi
on
som
e de
ep r
oote
d rip
aria
n pl
ants
repl
aced
by
mor
e sh
allo
w ro
oted
or
woo
dy p
lant
spe
cies
ch
anne
l is
wid
er th
an u
nder
nat
ural
cond
ition
s
bank
s ar
e br
oken
dow
n in
isol
ated
are
as
som
e lo
ss o
f poo
ls a
nd m
eand
ers
o
ccas
sion
al r
iffle
s
bot
tom
con
tour
s pr
ovid
e so
me
aqua
ticha
bita
t
dis
tanc
e be
twee
n rif
fles
is n
o m
ore
than
20 ti
mes
the
mea
sure
men
t of t
he w
idth
of th
e st
ream
w
ater
tabl
e is
not
at b
ankf
ul le
vel
so
il su
rface
may
dry
out
dur
ing
the
dry
seas
on
som
e dr
ough
t tol
eren
t upl
and
plan
tspr
esen
t in
the
ripar
ian
zone
so
me
chan
neliz
atio
n pr
esen
t, us
ually
in
area
s of
brid
ges
or in
urb
an a
reas
evi
denc
e of
dre
dgin
g or
cha
nnel
izat
ion
havi
ng o
ccur
red
over
20
year
s ag
o
drai
nage
out
lets
from
agr
icul
tura
l lan
ds
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
s
tream
bank
s ar
e hi
gh b
ends
ero
ded
by fl
owin
g w
ater
pl
ant r
oots
eith
er n
ot p
rese
nt o
r uab
le to
hol
dba
nks
agai
nst
scou
ring
tre
es a
re fa
lling
into
stre
am
ch
anne
l is
shal
low
and
wid
e
bank
s ar
e la
id b
ack
ba
nks
are
tram
pled
whe
re li
vest
ock
ente
r th
ew
ater
to d
rink
or c
ross
the
stre
am
loss
of p
ools
and
mea
nder
s
w
ater
is g
ener
ally
flat
if
riffle
s ar
e pr
esen
t, th
ey a
re s
hallo
w a
ndpr
ovid
e po
or a
quat
ic h
abita
t
dist
ance
bet
wee
n rif
fles
is g
reat
er th
an 2
0tim
es th
e m
easu
rem
ent o
f the
wid
th o
f the
stre
am
w
ater
tabl
e is
low
or v
arie
s gr
eatly
thro
ugho
utth
e ye
ar
drou
ght t
oler
ant o
r upl
and
vege
tatio
n ha
sre
plac
ed ri
paria
n ve
geta
tion
w
ater
tabl
e is
too
low
to fa
cilit
ate
chem
ical
and
biol
ogic
al in
tera
ctio
ns b
etw
een
wet
and
dry
cond
ition
s
ex
tens
ive
chan
neliz
atio
n, e
spec
ially
in u
rban
area
s
bank
s sh
ored
with
gab
ion
or c
emen
t
inst
ream
hab
itat g
reat
ly a
ltere
d or
rem
oved
entir
ely
Sour
ces:
Bel
sky
et a
l., 1
999;
Fed
eral
Inte
rage
ncy
Stre
am R
esto
ratio
n W
orki
ng G
roup
, 200
1; H
uel,
1998
; Nai
man
et a
l., 1
992;
Pric
hard
, 199
8; R
enw
ick
and
Eden
, 199
9; W
inw
ard,
200
0.
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 13
water to see prey and detect visual clues used intheir social and reproductive behavior (Cohen,1997).
The ability of riparian areas to stabilizestream flow levels throughout the year is alsocritical to the survival of many fish and otheraquatic species. Fish need enough water instreams to navigate and find food. If a streambecomes polluted, decreasing water levels mayconcentrate pollutants to levels that are too toxicfor fish. High water levels caused by streamflashing can rapidly increase water tempera-tures, which can be fatal to some fish and otheraquatic organisms. Stable water levels providethe moderate water temperatures required forthe growth of fish and the aquatic organismsthat they use for food (Wenger, 1999; Cohen,1997).
Large woody debris that falls into streamstraps sediments and creates pools that provideprotected, shaded habitats for aquatic species(Stuart et al., 1994). For trout, vegetation coverprovides food and places to hide from preda-tors (Burgess, 1985). For many aquatic organ-isms, leaves, twigs, and insects falling from over-hanging trees are an important food source(Hillard and Reedyk, 2000). In naturally forestedareas, retaining at least 50% of the tree canopy iscritical for providing moderated temperatures re-quired for good fish habitat (Whitaker-Hoagland,1998).
TTTTTerererererrestrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat. Riparian ar-eas are the main source of moisture for plantsand wildlife within watersheds, especially inarid regions or during the dry season in moretemperate climates. Riparian areas with a highdensity and diversity of foliage, both verticallyand horizontally, can provide habitat and foodfor a diversity of birds and other terrestrial wild-life, including many endangered and threatenedspecies (NRCS/RCA,1996). Many animalsalso use these moist ar-eas as travel corridors be-tween feeding areas(Henry et al., 1999).
Many bird speciesdepend on riparian areasfor food, shelter, andnesting sites. Some birdspecies require riparianareas for nesting, al-though they may forage
for food outside of these areas. Other bird spe-cies prefer nesting in riparian areas even if theycan nest elsewhere. However, degradation ofriparian areas reduces populations of these spe-cies (Bureau of Land Management and Partnersin Flight, 2000).
Appendix 4 provides guidelines for adequatebuffer widths to meet various environmentalobjectives.
Riparian vegetation growth, soil fertility andporosity, water quality, and stream flow condi-tions all affect the ability of fish and wildlife tothrive in streams and their associated riparianareas. Table 4 compares habitat conditions pro-vided by healthy riparian areas to those of de-graded areas.
LLLLLand Managementand Managementand Managementand Managementand ManagementPractices to PrPractices to PrPractices to PrPractices to PrPractices to Protectotectotectotectotect
Riparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasKey components of riparian protection are
maintaining good soil and water conservationpractices across the landscape and preserving,as much as possible, the integrity of the threenatural riparian zones. Specific land manage-ment practices that protect riparian areas in-clude: Maintaining a vegetative cover over the soil
throughout the year Minimizing animal trampling or vehicle traf-
fic on wet soils Avoiding overuse of fertilizers or manure
that may be transported into riparian areas Avoiding applying or dis-posing of toxic chemicals onsoils Protecting against loss ofplant diversity and vitality inriparian areas Protecting against the es-tablishment of exotic or nonwater-loving species in riparianareas Avoiding practices that ar-tificially alter stream flow
Photo by USDA NRCS
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 14
Tabl
e 4.
Ind
icat
ors
of A
quat
ic a
nd R
ipar
ian
Wild
life
Indi
cato
r
Wat
er q
ualit
yan
d qu
antit
y
Wat
erTe
mpe
ratu
re
Stre
am P
ools
Sedi
men
tLo
ad
Nut
rient
and
Path
ogen
Con
cent
ratio
n
Wat
erfo
wl
Hab
itat
Hea
lthy
Rip
aria
n A
reas
ad
equa
te w
ater
sup
ply
and
quan
tity
thro
ugho
utth
e ye
ar
pres
ence
of m
acro
inve
rtebr
ate
indi
cato
rs o
fgo
od w
ater
qua
lity
such
as
cadd
is fl
ies
and
may
flies
w
ater
con
tain
s fe
w c
onta
min
ant s
uch
aspe
stic
ides
, he
avy
met
als,
or
exce
ss n
utrie
nts
st
ream
side
veg
etat
ion
cool
s st
ream
s
unde
rcut
stre
amba
nks
prov
ide
shad
e
pres
ence
of a
quat
ic s
peci
es u
sed
for f
ish
food
nu
mer
ous
both
dee
p an
d sh
allo
w s
tream
poo
ls
woo
dy d
ebris
pre
sent
to fo
rm p
ools
c
ompl
ex c
hann
el s
truct
ures
lo
w a
mou
nt o
f sed
imen
ts in
stre
ams
w
ater
is c
lear
or t
ea c
olor
ed
na
tura
l con
cent
ratio
ns o
f nut
rient
s an
dpa
thog
ens
from
wild
life
in a
rea
li
ttle
or n
o ev
iden
ce o
f liv
esto
ck a
cces
s to
stre
ams
na
tive
plan
t com
mun
ities
are
dom
inan
tve
geta
tion
la
nd u
se d
elay
ed u
ntil
chic
ks h
ave
left
the
nest
lan
d is
rest
ed fo
r sev
eral
yea
rs to
allo
w fo
rho
min
g, la
rger
clu
tche
s, a
nd e
arlie
r ne
stin
g
suffi
cien
t blo
cks
of la
nd a
re p
rote
cted
to p
rovi
deco
rrido
rs o
f mov
emen
t and
fora
ging
Mod
erat
ely
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
w
ater
tabl
es fl
uctu
ate
thro
ugho
ut th
eye
ar
som
e co
ntam
inan
ts p
rese
nt in
the
wat
er
so
me
redu
ctio
n in
stre
amsi
de v
eget
atio
n
decr
ease
in th
e av
aila
bilit
y of
aqu
atic
spec
ies
used
for f
ood
de
crea
se in
stre
am p
ools
w
oody
veg
etat
ion
repl
aced
by
herb
aceo
us v
eget
atio
n
s
edim
ent l
evel
s in
stre
ams
incr
easi
ng
nu
trien
t and
pat
hoge
n le
vels
som
ewha
tel
evat
ed
man
ure
pres
ent b
ut n
ot c
once
ntra
ted
on o
r ne
ar s
tream
bank
s
so
me
non-
nativ
e sp
ecie
s ar
e pr
esen
t
land
is u
sed
for g
razi
ng o
r oth
erag
ricul
tura
l use
s ea
ch y
ear
la
nd is
insu
ffici
ently
res
ted
to p
rovi
deve
geta
tion
cove
r for
nes
ting
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
stre
ams
dry
up d
urin
g th
e dr
y se
ason
pr
esen
ce o
f man
croi
nver
tebr
ate
indi
cato
rs o
fpo
or w
ater
qua
lity
w
ater
con
tain
s to
xic
leve
ls o
f sed
imen
ts,
pest
icid
es,
heav
y m
etal
s, o
r nu
trien
ts
exce
ssiv
e aq
uatic
wee
d gr
owth
in s
tream
s
st
ream
tem
pera
ture
s ar
e hi
gh
lack
of s
tream
side
veg
etat
ion
lo
w d
isso
love
d ox
ygen
leve
ls
cool
wat
er a
quat
ic s
peci
es r
epla
ced
by w
arm
wat
er s
peci
es
lack
of a
quat
ic s
peci
es to
pro
vide
food
for f
ish
lo
ss o
f stre
am p
ools
lo
w a
mou
nts
of w
oody
deb
ris d
ue to
loss
of
trees
ch
anne
l stra
ight
enin
g or
mod
ifica
tion
tosi
mpl
ify c
hann
el s
truct
ure
st
ream
mud
dy lo
okin
g be
caus
e of
sed
imen
tlo
ad
float
ing
alga
l mat
s or
scu
m m
ay b
e pr
esen
t
hi
gh c
once
ntra
tions
of n
utrie
ts a
nd p
atho
gens
in w
ater
ex
tens
ive
amou
nts
of m
anur
e on
ban
ks a
nd in
stre
ams
no
n-na
tive
spec
ies
are
dom
inan
t veg
etat
ion
lan
d is
gra
zed
or m
owed
whi
le w
ater
fow
l are
nest
ing
veg
etat
ion
regr
owth
doe
s no
t pro
vide
suf
ficie
ntco
ver f
or n
estin
g
cont
inue
d on
pag
e 15
cont
inue
d on
pag
e 15
cont
inue
d on
pag
e 15
cont
inue
d on
pag
e 15
cont
inue
d on
pag
e 15
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 15
Tabl
e 4.
Ind
icat
ors
of A
quat
ic a
nd R
ipar
ian
Wild
life
(con
td.)
Indi
cato
r
Fish
Hab
itat
Inse
ct a
ndIn
vert
ebra
teH
abita
t
Mam
mal
Div
ersi
ty
Mac
ro-
inve
rteb
rate
Div
ersi
ty
Bird
Div
ersi
ty
Fish
Div
ersi
ty
Hea
lthy
Rip
aria
n A
reas
fis
h co
ver p
rovi
ded
by w
oody
deb
ris,
over
hang
ing
vege
tatio
n, b
ank
cobb
les,
poo
ls,
riffle
s, a
nd u
nder
cut b
anks
w
ater
tem
pera
ture
s m
oder
ated
by
vege
tatio
nco
ver
m
inim
al s
oil l
oss
and
pollu
tion
g
ood
supp
ly o
f aqu
atic
inse
ct s
peci
es fo
r fis
hto
eat
ha
bita
t pro
vide
d by
woo
dy fi
ne d
ebris
,su
bmer
ged
logs
, lea
f pac
ks, u
nder
cut b
anks
and
cobb
les
tra
ils, t
rack
s, fe
edin
g ar
eas,
and
res
ting
area
sar
e pr
esen
t
pr
edom
inat
ely
pollu
tion
into
lere
nt s
peci
es s
uch
as c
addi
sflie
s, m
ayfli
es, s
tone
flies
and
riff
lebe
etle
s
pr
esen
ce o
f bird
nes
ts
spec
ies
that
are
obl
igat
e de
pend
ent o
n rip
aria
nar
eas
are
pres
ent,
for e
xam
ple
Com
mon
Yello
wth
rout
, Son
g Sp
arro
w, a
nd W
illow
Flyc
atch
er
pr
edom
inan
ce o
f nat
ive
spec
ies
po
llutio
n in
tole
rent
spe
cies
, su
ch a
s tro
ut,
smal
l mou
th b
ass
and
sunf
ish
are
pres
ent
Mod
erat
ely
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
de
crea
se in
the
type
s of
fish
cov
erav
aila
ble
so
me
soil
loss
and
pol
lutio
n
wat
er le
vels
are
uns
tabl
e
de
crea
se in
the
amou
nt o
f hab
itat s
ites
avai
labl
e
pr
edom
inan
tly m
oder
atel
y to
lere
ntsp
ecie
s su
ch a
s da
mse
l flie
s,dr
agon
flies
, aq
uatic
sow
bugs
, bl
ackf
ish
and
cray
fish
de
crea
sing
pre
senc
e of
obl
igat
e bi
rdsp
ecie
s p
rese
nce
of ri
paria
n de
pend
ent b
irdsp
ecie
s su
ch a
s go
ldfin
ch,
bank
swal
low,
gro
sbea
k, o
r red
-hea
ded
woo
dpec
ker
Deg
rade
d R
ipar
ian
Are
as
litt
le o
r no
fish
cove
r pro
vide
d
wat
er c
onta
min
ated
by
sedi
men
ts a
ndpo
llutio
n
stre
ams
are
ephe
mer
al
fe
w o
r no
hab
itat s
ites
pres
ent
if
mac
roin
verte
brat
es a
re p
rese
nt,
pred
omin
antly
pol
lutio
n to
lera
nt s
peci
es s
uch
as m
idge
s, c
rane
flies
, ho
rsef
lies,
leec
hes,
aqua
tic e
arth
wor
ms,
and
tubi
ficid
wor
ms
la
ck o
f bird
nes
t
if bi
rds
are
pres
ent,
spec
ies
are
sim
ilar
toup
land
are
as
na
tive
spec
ies
are
not p
rese
nt
pollu
tion
tole
rent
spe
cies
suc
h as
car
ppr
edom
inat
e
Sour
ces:
Bel
sky
et a
l., 1
999;
Bur
eau
of L
and
Man
agem
ent a
nd P
artn
ers
in F
light
, 200
0; F
eder
al In
tera
genc
y St
ream
Res
tora
tion
Wor
king
Gro
up, 2
001;
Hue
l, 19
98; M
osle
y et
al.,
199
8; P
richa
rd, 1
998;
Sove
ll et a
l., 2
000;
Win
war
d, 2
000.
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 16
Community WCommunity WCommunity WCommunity WCommunity WatershedatershedatershedatershedatershedCollaboration to PrCollaboration to PrCollaboration to PrCollaboration to PrCollaboration to Protectotectotectotectotect
Riparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian Areas
Watershed councils lay the cultural founda-tions for a lasting way of life. They establishthe tradition of responsible speech, of civildemocracy, and of making decisions basedon factual information and well-articulated val-ues. They embody the long-term perspec-tive of sustainability, seeking not quick fixesbut deeper understanding and new alterna-tives.
Alan T. During (quoted in Wood et al.,1997)
Farmers, ranchers, and conservationists of-ten become embroiled in debates over the use ofriparian areas. If you are a farmer or rancher,you may be concerned about the loss of accessto grazing land and watering areas as well ascosts associated with management practices,such as the installation and maintenance offences. If you are a conservationist or environ-mentalist, you may be concerned about the lossof habitat for birds, wildlife, and aquatic spe-cies that depend on this diverse and fragile eco-system. If you are a downstream water user,you are no doubt concerned about the contami-nation of drinking and recreational waters withnutrients, pathogens, and pesticides.
Pinpointing sources and causes of ripariandegradation and the associated degradation ofwater quality is very contentious. Farmers andranchers often assert that livestock grazing inriparian areas cause less damage than construc-tion activities, septic tanks, and industrial dis-charges. Conservationists often counter this as-sertion by contending that agriculture is the pri-mary source of nonpoint pollution in many ar-eas, and they maintain that excluding agricul-tural practices from riparian areas is the bestmethod for protecting wildlife habitat and wa-ter quality.
To work together in restoring riparian ar-eas, community members need to understandthat riparian areas are only protected if all landusers across the watershed work together. Get-ting this cooperation is often difficult since wa-tershed users can easily blame others for causing
water pollution and riparian degradation. Mean-while, those involved in implementing good wa-tershed and riparian management practices of-ten go unnoticed and under-compensated.
Why is this so? Most watershed and ripariandegradation is non-point source pollution, whichby definition means that it is difficult to identifyspecific land use practices responsible for thispollution. Secondly, good upland and ripariangrazing management practices in one part of thewatershed cannot, in most cases, compensate forpoor land management practices in other partsof the watershed. Thirdly, and possibly mostimportantly, land users who implement soil andwater conservation practices often are asked tobear the costs of implementing changes whileobtaining few of the benefits. This disparity be-tween those who pay and those who benefit of-ten discourages farmers and other landownersfrom implementing soil conservation and ripar-ian management practices.
For more information on the economic costsand benefits of riparian buffer protection,please see Appendix 5.
The Bureau of Land Management, the U.S.Forest Service, and the Natural Resources Con-servation Service understand that programs de-signed to promote soil and water conservationpractices are often contentious. In their jointletter announcing the initiation of a program tohelp restore riparian areas (PLF, 2002), the agen-cies state that riparian restoration:
will not happen by regulation, changes in thelaw, more money, or any of the normalbureaucratic approaches. It will only occurthrough the integration of ecological, eco-nomic, and social factors and participation ofaffected interests.
For watershed and riparian managementprograms to be effective, they should includethe following elements (Wood et al., 1997): Active involvement by community members
from across the watershed who represent abroad array of perspectives and problems
Collaborative identification of program ob-jectives, such as protecting high value re-sources and solving problems that mostthreaten the sustainability of the watershed
Education and outreach
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 17
Community access to and sharing of factualinformation on watershed economic, envi-ronmental, and social conditions
Willingness to discuss and address critical butoften contentious resource issues such aspopulation growth, overconsumption, en-dangered species, and pollution
Willingness to examine and implement long-term ecological solutions to watershed prob-lems rather than look to technologicalquick-fixes
Willingness of landowners and land man-agers to work together to develop a water-shed or regional level coordinated approachto watershed management that will addressupstream-downstream concerns and theneed for management practices to be coor-dinated throughout the watershed to pro-tect aquatic environments and provide con-tinuous corridors for wildlife movement
Baseline assessments and on-going monitor-ing of watershed and riparian conditions
A combination of positive incentives (eco-nomic, personal values, prestige) and disin-centives (regulations and policies) motivateinvolvement more than either one or theother alone (Alexander, 1993).
SummarSummarSummarSummarSummaryyyyyThere is much scientific literature to docu-
ment the importance of watershed and ripar-ian management practices to the preservationof water quality, riparian vegetation, and thewildlife of riparian and aquatic areas. How-ever, for farmers to be willing and able to ad-equately protect these vulnerable environments,these environmental benefits need to be balancedwith economic benefits that farmers, ranchers,and other landowners may obtain from chang-ing their land management practices. Down-stream water usersincluding people whodrink, cook, and bathe with water, people whouse lakes and streams to boat, swim, and fish,and people who gain property value from theproximity of their home to a lake or riveralsoneed to be willing to place a value on clean waterand protected riparian habitats. As all commu-nity members become aware of the multiple ben-efits provided by good watershed management,they can work together to develop a consensus
Allen, Mike, Cathy Walker, and Luke Pen.2000. Wetlands and Weeds. Water Notesfor Wetlands Management. Water andRivers Commission. Government ofWestern Australia. Accessed at:
Alexander, S.V. 1993. Effective educationprograms change behaviorLessonslearned from the Nonpoint Source Pro-gram. p. 337351. In: Riparian Ecosys-tems in the Humid U.S.: Functions, Valuesand Management. National Association ofConservation Districts. Washington, D.C.
Belsky, A.J., A. Matzke, and S. Uselman. 1999.Survey of livestock influences on streamand riparian ecosystems in the westernUnited States. Journal of Soil and WaterConservation. Vol. 54, No. 1. p. 419431.
Berton, V. 1998. Ten Years of SARE. Sustain-able Agiculture Research and EducationProgram, CREES, U.S. Department ofAgriculture. Washington, D.C. p. 8283.
Briggs, M. 1993. Evaluating degraded riparianecosystems to determine the potentialeffectiveness of revegetation. In: B.A.Roundy, E. D. McArthur, J.S. Haley, andD.K Mann. 1995. Proceedings: WildlandShrub and Arid Land Restoration Sympo-sium. General Technical Report INT-GTR-315. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, Intermountain ResearchStation, Ogden, UT.
Bureau of Land Management and Partners inFlight. 2000. Birds as indicators of ripar-ian vegetation condition in the westernU.S. The Aurora Project. Accessed at:.
Burgess, S.A. 1985. Some effects of streamhabitat improvement on the aquatic andriparian community of a small mountainstream. p. 223246. In: J.A. Gore (ed.)The restoration of rivers and streams.Butterworth Publishers, Boston, MA.
on a set of sustainable land management objec-tives.
ReferencesReferencesReferencesReferencesReferences
http://www.wrc.wa.gov.au/public/WaterNotes/pdf/1.pdfhttp://www.wrc.wa.gov.au/public/WaterNotes/pdf/1.pdfhttp://www.wrc.wa.gov.au/public/WaterNotes/pdf/1.pdfhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/monitor.htmlhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/monitor.html
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 18
Clark, E.A. 1998. Landscape variables affectinglivestock impacts on water quaity in thehumid temperate zone. Canadian Journalof Plant Sciences, Vol. 78. p. 181190.
Cohen, R. 1997. Fact Sheets: Functions andValues of Riparian Areas. MassachusettsDepartment of Fisheries, Wildlife andEnvironmental Law Enforcement.Acessed at: .
Cole, D.W. 1981. Nitrogen upatake and trans-location by forest ecosystems. p. 219232.In: F.E. Clark and T. Rosswall (eds.)Terrestrial Nitrogen Cycles. EcologicalBulletin. Vol. 33.
CRJC. 2001. Riparian Buffers for the Connecti-cut River Watershed. Connecticut RiverJoint Commission. Accessed at: .
Dillaha, T.A., J.H. Sherrard, D. Lee, S.Mostaghimi, and V.O. Shanholtz. 1988.Evaluation of vegetated filter strips as abest management practice for feedlots.Journal of the Water Pollution ControlFederation, Vol. 60. p. 12311238.
Edwards, R. 2000. The Hidden River in Ripar-ian Areas. p. 103104. In: Summit 2000:Washington Private Forests Forum.University of Washington, College ofForest Resources. Seattle, WA. Elec-tronic Proceedings. Accessed at: .
Elmore, W. 1992. Riparian responses to grazingpractices. In: R.J. Naiman (ed.) Water-shed Management: BalancingSustainability and Environmental Change.Springer-Verlag. New York.
Elmore, W., and R.L. Beschta. 2000. RiparianAreas: Perceptions in Management.Aurora Project. A production of theBureau of Land Management and theU.S. Department of Interior. Accessedat: .
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Work-ing Group. 2001. Stream Corridor Resto-ration: Principles, Processes, and Prac-
tices. Part 653 of the National EngineeringHandbook. USDA-Natural ResourcesConservation Service. Accessed at:.
Gebhardt, K.A., C. Bohn, S. Jensen, and W.S.Platts. 1989. Use of hydrology in riparianclassification. p. 5360. In: R.E.Gresswell, B.A. Barton, and J.L. Kershner(eds.) Practical Approaches to RiparianResource Management: An EducationWorkshop. U.S. Bureau of Land Man-agement, Billings, MT.
Green, D.M., and J.B. Kauffman. 1989. Nutri-ent cycling at the land-water interface: Theimportance of the riparian zone. In: R.E.Gresswell, B.A. Barton, and J.L. Kershner(eds.) Practical Approaches to RiparianResource Management: An EducationWorkshop. U.S. Bureau of Land Manage-ment. Billings, MT. p. 6168.
Gilliam, J.W. 1994. Riparian wetlands andwater quality. Journal of EnvironmentalQuality. Vol. 23. p. 896900.
Henery, A.C., Jr., D.A. Hosack, C.W. Johnson,D. Rol, and G. Bentrup. 1999. Conserva-tion corridors in the United States: Ben-efits and planning guidelines. Journal ofSoil and Water Conservation. Vol. 54, No.4. p. 645650.
Hillard, C., and S. Reedyk. 2000. RiparianArea Management. Water Quality Mat-ters. April. Agriculture and Agri-FoodCanada. Accessed at: .
Huel, D. 1998. Streambank Stewardship: ASaskatchewan Riparian Project.Saskatchewan Wetland ConservationCorporation. Regina,Saskatchewan.Accessed at: .
Lentz, R. 1998. Cattle, grass, and streams: Canthey exist together as a sustainable ecosys-tem? North Central Region SARE 1998Annual Report. Project FNC97-177. Ac-cessed at: .
http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/river/rivfstoc.htmhttp://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/river/rivfstoc.htmhttp://www.crjc.orghttp://www.crjc.orghttp://www.cfr.washington.edu/outreach/summit/proceedings.htmlhttp://www.cfr.washington.edu/outreach/summit/proceedings.htmlhttp://www.cfr.washington.edu/outreach/summit/proceedings.htmlhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/percepmn.htmlhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/percepmn.htmlhttp://www.usda.gov/stream_restoration/newtofc.htmhttp://www.usda.gov/stream_restoration/newtofc.htmhttp://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/water/facts/ripariane.pdfhttp://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/water/facts/ripariane.pdfhttp://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/water/facts/ripariane.pdfhttp://www.wetland.sk.ca /pdfs/landowner/streamstew_FULL .pdfhttp://www.wetland.sk.ca /pdfs/landowner/streamstew_FULL .pdfhttp://www.wetland.sk.ca /pdfs/landowner/streamstew_FULL .pdfhttp://www.sare.org/projects/san_db_viewer.asp?id=459http://www.sare.org/projects/san_db_viewer.asp?id=459
-
//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 19
Luginbuhl, J.M., J.T. Green, Jr., M.H. Poore,and A.P. Conrad. 2000. Use of goats tomanage vegetation in cattle pastures in theAppalachian region of North Carolina.Sheep and Goat Research Journal. Vol. 16,No. 3. p. 124130.
Macon, D. 2002. Grazing for Change: Rangeand Watershed Management SuccessStories in California. CaliforniaCattlemens Association, Sacramento, CA.
Martin, D.W., and J.C. Chambers. 2001. Restor-ing degraded riparian meadows: biomassand species responses. Journal of RangeManagement. Vol. 54, No. 3. p. 284291.
Mosley, M., R.D. Harmel, R. Blackwell, and T.Bidwell. 1998. Grazing and riparian areamanagement. p. 4753. In: M.S. Cooper(ed.) Riparian Area Management Hand-book. Oklahoma Cooperative ExtensionService, Division of Agricultural Servicesand Natural Resources at Oklahoma StateUniversity and the Oklahoma Conserva-tion Commission. Accessed at: .
Naiman, R.J., and H. Decamps. 1997. Theecology of interfaces: Riparian zones.Annual Review of Ecology and Systemat-ics. Vol. 28. p. 621658.
Naiman, R.J., T.J. Beechie, L.E. Brenda, D.R.Berg, P.A. Bisson, L.H. MacDonald, M.D.OCommor, P.L. Olson, and E.A. Steel.1992. Fundamental elements of ecologi-cally healthy watersheds in the PacificNorthwest Coastal ecoregion. p. 127188. In: R.J. Naiman (ed.) WatershedManagement: Balancing Sustainabilityand Environmental Change, Springer-Verlag. New York.
Nakao, M., and B. Sohngen. 2000. The effect ofsite quality on the costs of reducing soilerosion with riparian buffers. Journal ofSoil and Water Conservation. Vol. 55,No. 2. p. 231237.
National Research Council. 2002. RiparianAreas: Functions and Strategies forManagement. National Academy Press,Washington, D.C. Accessed at: .
NRCS. 1998. Riparian Herbaceous Cover.Natural