CBP/TRS 220/99
                        903-R-99-002
                         March 1999
          RIPARIAN
          FOREST
          BUFFERS
          LINKING LAND
          AND WAT^R
             ".UFA
            ,  .
            R--^io-;K>l Center Tor Environmental
             iniorrnation
            1050 Arch Street (3PM52)
            Piuladelphia,PA 19103
TheCh
               EPA Report Collection

               UeSgiEPAfe"oenIH Envif0nmen
               Philadelphia, PA 19103

-------
Regional Center for hn\ ironmenta! Information
        US EPA Region III
          1650 Arch St
       Philadelphia, PA 1Q103
                    Printed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                               for the Chesapeake Bay Program.
                                         March 1999

-------
                                                                          U.S. UFA Region III
                                                                          E^ionol Center for Environmental
                                                                           Information
                               TM-rnnnnr-TTAM   165° ^^ Street <3PM52)
                               INTRODUCTION   Raladdphia.. RV 19103
     Almost four centuries have passed since the
     first colonists arrived on the shores of the
     Chesapeake Bay, finding a vast forest cov-
ering the land from Virginia to New York.
These forests served as a living filter and regu-
lator of the Bay's environment. However, agri-
cultural expansion and the growth of our cities
and towns have brought dramatic changes to
the landscape.  Today, less  than 60% of the
watershed is forested, and this loss is  correlated
with declining water quality in the Bay and its
rivers. Of particular concern is the loss of ripar-
ian forests that border the more than 100,000
miles of streams and shoreline in the Bay water-
shed. Nearly 50%  of these streamside forests
have been converted to other land uses or de-
graded, and more continue to be lost.
   Research  has shown  that riparian forests
provide a wealth of beneficial ecological func-
tions which, in the Bay watershed, translate
downstream into a healthier Bay. In particular,
trees that grow along the shore help to filter
runoff and groundwater, removing  pollutants
like  nutrients, sediment,  and pesticides.
Streamside forests also reduce the downstream
impacts of floods and shade the stream,  thus
moderating water temperature and oxygen.
   Conserved and managed as buffers, riparian
vegetation can dramatically reduce the impacts
of land use activities. Although healthy stream-
side vegetation of any kind is desirable, forests
provide the greatest number of benefits and
highest potential for reaching the Bay's water
quality and living resource goals. In fact, reduc-
tions in  nutrients  and  sediment of 30-90%
can occur when runoff and groundwater  pass
through a riparian forest buffer.
   Lowering harmful concentrations of nitro-
gen, phosphorus and sediments from agricul-
tural and urban areas is a primary focus of the
Chesapeake  Bay  Program.  Finding ways to
reduce the amount of these nutrients that enter
the Bay and its rivers while enhancing habitat
critical to the Bay's living resources is essential.
Streamside forest buffers provide one common
sense solution.
  In 1607, Captain John
              ... there is little grass, but
   for that which grows in the marshes,
               country is
riparian area • the area of Land adjacent to a body
of water—stream, river, marsh, or shoreline; forms the
transition between the aquatic and terrestrial environment.
                                                                                INTRODUCTION    1

-------
LINKING  LAND AND WATER


A stream cannot be defined solely by what is found between its banks.

A stream and its riparian area function as one—linking land and water.

Likewise, these stream corridors form the "circulatory system" for the

Bay and help maintain its long-term health. Just as healthy streams

are critical to restoring the Bay, riparian forests help maintain life in

the streams. Riparian forests offer a tremendous diversity of habitat

and are home  to  many ecologically important  species  such  as

amphibians, reptiles, and waterfowl. They offer travel corridors and

nesting sites for  birds and suitable spawning habitats for trout, shad,

herring, alewife, and striped bass. Fallen trees create pools and shelter

for fish, insects and crustaceans.  Tree roots stabilize  stream  banks.

Leaves provide a food source for insects and other invertebrates, who in

turn are eaten by fish and birds. By anchoring  the  food web, providing

cooler, more oxygenated  water and creating pools and hiding cover, trees

really do help fish grow.
        0\v
                            Benefits of Riparian Forest Buffers
    Leaf Food
    Leaves fall into a stream and are
    trapped on woody debris (fallen
    trees and limbs) and rocks where
    they provide food and habitat for
    insects, amphibians, crustaceans
    and small fish which are critical to
    the aquatic food chain.
  FishWVildlife Habitat
  Wooded stream corridors provide
  the most diverse habitats for birds,
  fish and other wildlife. Fallen logs and
  woody debris provide cover for fish
  while preserving stream habitat
  over time.
  Nutrient Uptake
  Fertilizers and other pollutants that
  originate on land are taken up by
  tree roots. Nutrients are stored in
  leaves, limbs and roots instead of
  reaching the stream. Through a
  process called "denitrification",
  bacteria in the forest floor convert
  harmful nitrate to nitrogen gas,
  which is released into the air.
Canopy and Shade
The leaf canopy provides shade
that keeps the water cool, retains
more dissolved  oxygen and
encourages the growth of diatoms,
beneficial algae and aquatic insects.
The canopy captures rainfall and
improves air quality by filtering dust
from wind erosion, construction or
    machinery.
   Filtering Runoff
   Rain and sediment that run off
   the land can be slowed and filtered
   in the forest, settling out sediment,
   nutrients and pesticides before they
   reach streams. Forest infiltration and
   water storage can be 10-15 times
   higher than grass turf and 40 times
   higher than a plowed field.
2   INTROD UCTION

-------
INTRODUCTION   3

-------
            A   SCIENTIFIC    FOUNDATION
    The science of riparian buffers is not entirely new.
    Over the last twenty years, scientists have shown
    that forests may provide solutions to a myriad of
 environmental problems.  From cleaning the air and
 improving water quality to providing critical habitat
 and healthy soil, forests play a vital role in protecting
 and improving the overall health and resilience of a
 watershed.
   However, it is only recently that this knowledge has
 been applied to pollution control.
   Research studies have shown that riparian  forest
 buffers can be an effective last line of defense against
 activities we undertake in managing the land, such as
 crop production, grazing, construction and urban
                                   development. Because of their position in the land-
                                   scape, riparian forests act as effective natural buffers,
                                   interacting with the flow of surface and groundwater
                                   from upland areas.
                                     As a part of the Chesapeake Bay Riparian Forest Buffer
                                   Initiative, leading scientists were assembled to evaluate
                                   the state of our knowledge and the potential of riparian
                                   forest buffers. As a result of their efforts, the Bay Pro-
                                   gram published Water Quality Functions of Riparian For-
                                   est Buffer Systems in  the Chesapeake Bay  Watershed.
                                   Findings about  nutrient cycling and riparian buffer
                                   system effectiveness, like those shown below, were a
                                   part of this research report. The Initiative was built on
                                   this foundation of science.
    Waterborne
    Inputs and
    Outputs of
    Sediment and
    Nutrients
                    Precipitation
                 (dissolved, particulate)

              Surface runoff
            (dissolved, particulate)
                                                                        Flooding
                                                                        (dissolved,
                                                                       particulate)
        POTENTIAL  REDUCTION  OF  SEDIMENT  AND
      NUTRIENTS FOR  DIFFERENT  BUFFER  SYSTEMS

   Buffer        Buffer         Sediment       Nitrogen    Phosphorus
  Width (ft)       Type       Reduction (%)   Reduction (%) Reduction (%
     15
     30
     62
     76

     95
   Grass
   Grass
61.0

74.6
4.0
28.5
   Forest
89.8
Forest/Grass
Forest/Grass
96.0

97.4
22.7

74.3

75.3

80.1
24.2
70.0
78.5

77.2
4   SCIENTIFIC  FOU N DATION

-------
     THE   CHESAPEAKE    BAY    RIPARIAN
           FOREST   BUFFER   INITIATIVE
   The Initiative resulted from the efforts of concerned
   stakeholders, using emerging science and practical
   experience, in  a collaborative effort to enhance
riparian stewardship in the Bay's watershed. Led by
the Bay Program's  Forestry Workgroup, the Initiative
sought consensus on a set of measurable goals and
strategies to coordinate and enhance existing efforts,
and on new policies that  could improve communica-
tion, build partnerships among government agencies,
private landowners  and the public, and stimulate the
development of new incentives for action.
  Interest in riparian forest buffers is increasing nation-
ally, and the Bay Program and its partners have begun
what is considered the most aggressive riparian buffer
restoration and protection program in the country. Issues
related to riparian land use are often complicated ones.
However, the use of riparian forest buffers, in conjunc-
tion with other land use practices, is one of the simplest
and most valuable investments landowners and the pub-
lic can make toward sustaining the Bay in the future.
From the 1994 Chesapeake Executive Council
    Directive on Riparian Forest Buffers:
    "We now recognize that forests along
 waterways, also known as 'riparian forests,'
   are an important resource that protects
   water quality and provides habitat and
   food necessary  to support fish survival
 and reproduction. Used as buffers, riparian
forests provide a means of helping us achieve
our restoration goals  in the Bay's tributaries."
Representatives from Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of Columbia, Chesapeake Bay Commission, and Environmental
Protection Agency join in the planting of native trees as part of a forest buffer and greenway along the Susquehanna River in Harris-
burg, Pennsylvania during the 1996 Executive Council Meeting.
                       CHESAPEAKE BAY RIPARIAN  FOREST  BUFFER  INITIATIVE   5

-------
        DIRECTIVES  AND

    THE  PANEL   PROCESS

   In 1994, the Executive Council (EC) recognized that
riparian forest buffers are an important resource that
help achieve  both  nutrient  reduction  and  habitat
restoration goals. The EC provides governance of the
Bay Program and includes the Governors of Maryland,
Pennsylvania, and Virginia, the Mayor of the District of
Columbia,  the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection  Agency (representing federal agencies) and
the Chair of the Chesapeake Bay Commission (a  tri-
state legislative body) as its members. By issuing Direc-
tive 94-1, the EC called on the Bay Program to increase
its focus on riparian stewardship in the watershed.
   The EC directed the establishment of a Riparian For-
est Buffer Panel to develop future goals and policy rec-
ommendations for a watershed-wide effort to  protect,
maintain and restore riparian forest  buffers.  A diverse
31-member group was assembled representing federal,
state and local government; scientists; land managers;
and citizen, farming, forest industry, development and
environmental interests. Following a set of guiding prin-
ciples based on sound science  and sensitive to the prop-
erty rights and needs of individual landowners, the panel
sought recommendations  that were flexible and incen-
tive-based.  The Panel then met for 18  months, inviting
all stakeholders to help shape the effort and to build con-
sensus through a series of workshops and meetings.
   In October  1996, the EC adopted the recommenda-
tions of the Panel and called upon  each Bay Program
partner to take actions that would establish buffers of all
kinds, conserve existing forests, and increase efforts to
restore streams and riparian areas.

 GOALS:  A   KEY  TO  SUCCESS

   Common goals brought together  the many agencies
involved and united efforts on a watershed scale. The
EC set  several important new  goals:
   Goal #1: To assure, to the extent feasible, that all
   streams and shorelines  will be protected by a forested
   or other riparian buffer.
   Goal  #2:  To conserve existing  forests along all
   streams and shorelines.
   Goal #3: To increase  the use of all riparian buffers
   and  restore  riparian forests on 2,010 miles of stream
   and  shoreline  in  the watershed by 2010, targeting
   efforts where they will be of greatest value to water
   quality and  living resources.
   To accomplish each of these goals, the EC recom-
mended focused effort to address the following policy
recommendations:

 1. Enhance program coordination

 2. Promote private sector involvement

 3. Create and enhance incentives

 4. Support research, monitoring,  and technology
    transfer

 5. Promote education and information

   Coordinating committees gathered in each partici-
pating state and  among federal agencies to create
detailed, yet dynamic plans to meet the goals. Although
comprehensive, the plans are flexible enough to adjust
to a variety of landscapes and land uses. In urban areas,
the plans focus on conservation and on managing devel-
opment to preserve forested stream corridors. Where
riparian forests have been cleared for farming, the plans
focus on restoration and the opportunity to capture the
benefits for  buffering water quality.  Changes in agri-
cultural practices also provide opportunities for  dra-
matic improvements in stream condition and habitat.
On forest lands, the plans neither focus on conservation
nor restoration, but rather on the management of the
riparian forest to protect and enhance its value.
               GOAL  #1   •   USE RIPARIAN  BUFFERS
        "To assure, to the extent feasible, that all streams and shore
            will be protected by a forested or other riparian buffer."
       In stating this goal, the EC endorsed the universal need for
       ful riparian management and the value of buffers as a managi
       practice regardless of land use.
6   CHESAPEAKE  BAY  RIPARIAN  FOREST  BUFFER  INITIATIVE

-------
                   1994
1995
1996
1997
                                                                          1998
               MAY—The Chesapeake
               Bay Commission adopts
               Bay Program resolution
               to assess, evaluate and
               make policy recommen-
               dations to improve
               riparian forest mainte-
               nance and restoration.

              JULY—Agreement of
              Federal Agencies on
              Ecosystem Management
              m tfte Cftescpeofce Bay
              was signed am! includes
              support for a forest
              buffer policy.

              0CT0BQI—Chesapeake
              Executive Council signs
              Oheettwe
 FEBRUARY—The CBP
 Implementation Com-
 mittee approves the
 Forestry Workgroup rec-
 ommendations for
 organization of the
 Riparian Forest Buffer
 Panel

APRIL—Riparian Forest
 Buffer Panel meets.

JUNE—Riparian
Technical Support Team
forms,

SEPTEMBfR—Panel
hosts Agricultural
Issues Forum.
                   FEBRUARY—Panel hosts
                   Economics Forum.

                   MARCH—Panel hosts
                   Forestry/Public Land
                   Issues Forum.

                   MAY—First draft of
                   Panel Report.

                   JUNE/AUGUST—
                   Public meetings are
                   held with stakeholders.

                   JULY—Chesapeake Bay
                   Foundation announces
                   §oal of 1500 »ftes of
                   new riparian forest
                   buffers in the water-
                   shed by 200S
                   MARCH—Secretary of
                   Agriculture announces
                   national goal to estab-
                   lish two million miles
                   of conservation buffers
                   (including riparian
                   forests) by 2002.

                   APRIL—Riparian
                   Forest Buffer Plan
                   Coordinating Committee
                   begins implementation
                   planning.

                   MAY—Chesapeake Say
                   Riparian Handbook
                   published.

                   May—Forestry Worfc-
                   group hosts first
                   JANUARY—2500th copy
                   of the riparian forest
                   buffer video is mailed
                   (now in 30 states and
                   4 foreign countries).

                   APRIL—American
                   Forests announces
                   "Global ReLeaf for the
                   Chesapeake Bay".

                   JUNE—State and
                   Fetterat implementation
                   plans complete.
      GOAL  #2   •  CONSERVE RIPARIAN FORESTS
    "To conserve existing forests along all streams and shorelines."

There is no substitute for  conserving existing riparian forests as
buffers.  Without conservation,  net losses  of streamside  forest
buffers  will continue to occur.  Protecting the ecological function
and stability of a riparian system prevents the need for expensive
investments in  restoration of degraded streams. In addition, losses
of mature riparian forest value and function are rarely offset com-
pletely  by planting  on a  1:1 basis.  Conservation  is of primary
importance and the Initiative  builds on a variety of existing fed-
eral, state, and local regulatory programs which help protect exist-
ing riparian buffers.

Since existing buffers are at a risk of being lost through local devel-
opment,  much of what can  be  done to conserve them is most fea-
sible at  the local level. Local jurisdictions are on the "front line" in
making  decisions about land use planning and zoning guidance,
which can direct activities away from sensitive and valuable stream-
side areas.  Conserving riparian forests means building local support
for  riparian corridor protection and helping local  governments to
develop  and to  apply new conservation tools and incentives.
                               GOAL  #3 •  RESTORE RIPARIAN FORESTS

                         "To increase the use of all riparian forests on 2,010 miles of stream
                        and shoreline in the watershed by 2010, targeting efforts where they
                           will be of greatest value to water quality and living resources."

                        Beyond the urgency to  conserve existing riparian forests is the
                        need to undo many of the mistakes of the past.  Although not a
                        panacea, dramatic improvements can occur through simple replant-
                        ing  of a  riparian forest.  Restoring  riparian forest  buffers  in
                        degraded  areas  also can pay high dividends for stream habitat
                        improvement. In order to achieve 2010  miles of forested  stream
                        and shoreline, Maryland, Pennsylvania,  Virginia  and the federal
                        government committed to individual goals. Maryland and Pennsyl-
                        vania each will restore 600  miles, Virginia will restore 610 miles,
                        and 200 miles will be restored on federal lands and in the District
                        of Columbia. This represented a 3-fold increase in  existing restora-
                        tion efforts.  In  attempting  to  restore  missing or inadequate
                        buffers, agencies and community or watershed-based groups will
                        work with landowners to survey streams, identify priority needs
                        and develop projects.
                                          CHESAPEAKE  BAY  RIPARIAN  FOREST  BUFFER  INITIATIVE   7

-------
LOCAL  WATERSHED ACTION

   Ultimately, success will depend as much on cultivat-
ing a new "riparian stewardship ethic" among land-
owners and communities as it will on planting trees.
Considering that most of the land along the rivers and
streams in the basin is  divided  among  hundreds of
thousands of individual landowners  and private com-
munities, the effort strongly promotes creating volun-
tary incentives and raising public awareness.
   Local  watershed-based plans can identify partici-
pants, target problems and solutions more effectively,
and solidify commitments from landowners. Successful
volunteer projects already have proven that many small
efforts can add up to big improvements in stream and
watershed health.
      POLICY     RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATION
Enhance Program Coordination
and Accountability
"Establish mechanisms to streamline, enhance, and coordinate existing
programs related to buffers and riparian system conservation."
Riparian conservation  and restoration are  the responsibility of a
number of federal, state and local agencies and  are of interest to
numerous private organizations. Likewise, effectively working with
landowners, communities  and decision-makers requires  an under-
standing of relevant programs and a variety of technical skills and
resource information. Whether focusing on water quality, habitat,
bank stabilization or recreation, increased interaction will allow for
more consistency in buffer efforts.
   Improved coordination  at the federal, state and watershed level
can lead to more efficient use of resources, allowing for different
efforts to support each other. The intent of Recommendation One is
to have  Bay Program partners review,  evaluate and modify existing
approaches in order to simplify processes, enhance participation,
streamline implementation and ensure that they support the goals of
stream and riparian forest buffer  protection and conservation. It
encourages the development of strategies to effectively coordinate
the many programs involving riparian  buffers.
                        RIPARIAN COORDINATING COMMITTEES
                        In determining how to best meet the chal-
                        lenge and guide the development of strategies
                        to meet the EC goals, the states have formed
                        individual  coordinating  committees.  These
                        committees vary in size from a dozen to more
                        than 50 members.  They represent a diversity
                        of interests in each  state including  natural
                        resource  management;  agriculture;  forestry;
                        building  and  land development;  watershed
                        advocacy; hunting and fishing; education; fed-
                        eral, state and local government; business and
                        industry; landowners;  land trusts; and con-
                        servancies.  These committees have been valu-
                        able in  helping different  interests to work
                        together.
8  CHESAPEAKE BAY RIPARIAN  FOREST  BUFFER INITIATIVE

-------
                    2
RECOMMENDATION
Promote Private Sector Involvement

Two guiding principles of the Initiative are
encouraging voluntary participation and
increasing  partnerships.  Private sector
involvement is essential  to  expand  the
reach of riparian forest conservation and
restoration activity. The intent of this rec-
ommendation is to encourage partnership
efforts between business, non-governmen-
tal  organizations  and citizen groups  to
improve outreach and education, and to
increase funds available  for  stream and
buffer restoration projects.  It embraces the
participation of groups such as watershed
organizations, land trusts  and conservan-
cies. Businesses and private organizations
serve a valuable  role in working with
landowners and land managers to conduct
stream surveys, to plant riparian buffers, to
establish demonstration sites, to facilitate
training, and to build grass roots support
for Bay Program goals.
                "Build partnerships with the private sector to help support the promotion and
                implementation of riparian forest buffer retention and restoration activities."
                                             A C  T IONS   AND   INN  () V  A T  IONS
                                           "GLOBAL RELEAF" FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY
                                           American Forests (AF), the nation's oldest citizen conservation organi-
                                           zation, is an important partner in the effort to  restore  and protect
                                           forests in the Bay region. As part of its national tree-planting effort,
                                           AF initiated "Chesapeake ReLeaf." AF has committed  ^wltlcku fo,lsl,
                                           to generate enough private  sector support to plant
                                           one million trees in the Bay region by the year 2000,
                                           complimenting  the Bay Program's goal of restoring
                                           2,010 miles of streamside forests by the year 2010.

                                           HERCULES  BUILDS BUFFERS
                                           In Hopewell, Virginia, Hercules Inc.—a  cellulose derivatives manufac-
                                           turer—recently  was awarded a Businesses for the Bay Excellence Award
                                           for its pollution prevention efforts. In addition to having implemented
                                           activities designed to prevent pollution, Hercules  partnered with its
                                           community to  build riparian  buffers  and started a nursery to provide
                                           stock for riparian buffer planting.  It is the first private nursery planted
                                           in Virginia  for public streambank restoration  projects.  Businesses for
                                           the Bay is the Bay Program's voluntary pollution prevention program for
                                           businesses  in the Bay region.
RECOMMENDATION
Enhance Incentives
                    3
"Develop and promote an adequate array of incentives for landowners and developers to
encourage voluntary riparian buffer retention and restoration."
A successful  voluntary effort
depends on expanding the array
of   incentives   available   to
landowners,  developers  and
managers.  To accomplish this
recommendation, Bay Program
partners are working to identify
creative funding  sources,  to
develop and promote property,
income and  inheritance  tax
incentives and to strengthen
funding options and availabili-
ty. These efforts are intended to
encourage  broad participation
and to energize local  efforts.
Incentives  may  take  many
forms,  including small grants,
cost-share payments, tax reduc-
tions, recognition for landown-
er  cooperation,  payment  for
supplies  and  materials,  low
interest loans, easement pur-
chases, payments for land taken
out  of production, and provi-
sion of technical assistance.
                                  A C  T IONS    AND    I N N  O  V A T IONS
                                TAX BREAKS FOR VIRGINIA LANDOWNERS WITH BUFFERS
                                In 1998, legislation was adopted authorizing tax breaks for riparian buffer lands in
                                Virginia (HOUSE  BILL #1419).  Currently, Water Quality Improvement Act funds are
                                available to reimburse localities for revenue losses due to  buffer land tax breaks.

                                THE CONSERVATION RESERVE ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
                                The  Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP)  establishes a federal-state
                                partnership, targeting additional federal Conservation Reserve Program funds to pro-
                                vide enhanced incentives to farmers who restore wetlands and stream buffers on
                                environmentally sensitive lands.  Maryland's CREP commits to restore up to 70,000
                                acres of riparian  buffers and retain many of them through  conservation easements.
                                Maryland was the first state to gain approval for an enhancement program.  Federal
                                and  state funding for farmers may  exceed $200 million over a 15-year period. The
                                Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, and the US  Fish and Wildlife Service
                                have entered the partnership, promising to add additional  cost-share funds wherev-
                                er landowners plant trees or restore wetlands.  Pennsylvania and Virginia also have
                                proposed similar CREP programs.

                                PENNSYLVANIA GRANT PROGRAMS
                                The  Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection is funding riparian buffer
                                projects through two new small grant programs: the Pennsylvania Stream ReLeaf
                                Fund mini-grant  program, which is co-sponsored by American Forests and coordin-
                                ated by the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, and the  Watershed Restoration and
                                Assistance Program, which supports a variety of watershed-based projects.
                            CHESAPEAKE  BAY   RIPARIAN   FOREST  BUFFER  INITIATIVE

-------
POLICY  RECOMMENDATIONS  (continued)
RECOMMENDATION

Support, Research, Monitoring, and
Technology Transfer

Though significant research exists on riparian
buffers, there are many aspects of forest buffer
retention  and establishment  which require
additional study. Research into forest buffer
functions, species  adaptability, management
practices,  economics, and other issues will
strengthen  conservation  and  restoration
actions. Equally  important is  the  transfer of
new research findings to technical specialists,
land  managers, decision-makers, and public
groups.  The intent of Recommendation Four
is to  encourage Bay Program  participants to
monitor  riparian buffer  programs,  support
existing  research  efforts,  create  innovative
research opportunities, and utilize research and
monitoring information as an educational tool.
Establishing and monitoring  riparian  forest
buffer demonstration sites will be a key tool for
learning,  and teaching others,  about the use
and effectiveness of buffers.
                                                "Increase the level of scientific and technical knowledge of the function and
                                                management of riparian forest and other buffers, as well as their economic,
                                                social, ecological, and water quality values."
                                                ACTIONS   AND   INNOVATIONS
                                               TARGETING EFFORTS
                                               The Maryland Department of Natural Resources is using an interac-
                                               tive Integrated Watershed Analysis and Management System to rank
                                               unbuffered stream reaches by potential to reduce nutrient pollution.
                                               Its components include nutrient load, stream order, adjacent land
                                               uses and existing forest cover. This targeting system will help Mary-
                                               land establish and protect buffers in the locations where they can
                                               most effectively improve water quality and habitat and can support
                                               local watershed protection efforts.

                                               SCIENCE AND EDUCATION  — KEY ROLE FOR  FEDERAL AGENCIES
                                               Federal agencies are instrumental in gathering, evaluating  and com-
                                               municating scientific and inventory information on riparian  forest
                                               buffers and in providing technical tools for public outreach, educa-
                                               tion and training.  The USDA Forest Service, Cooperative  Extension
                                               Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service  have developed  numerous
                                               informational and outreach  documents, videos,  training programs,
                                               brochures and fact sheets useful in communications.  Federal agen-
                                               cies also  have established  demonstration projects and developed
                                               technical guidance such as the Chesapeake Bay Riparian Handbook.
RECOMMENDATION
Promote Education and Information
                                             "Encourage Bay signatories to implement education and outreach
                                             programs about the benefits of riparian forest buffers and other stream
                                             protection measures."
 In the long run, riparian stewardship will depend on the
 action of  citizens  and  communities, landowners and
 managers, and the many individuals that influence deci-
 sions that affect the conservation or restoration of our
 riparian areas. People are motivated when they under-
 stand the benefits provided by riparian forest buffers and
 how they  can take action to improve streams  in their
 watershed. Public awareness stimulates volunteer efforts,
 enlists financial resources for riparian buffer projects,
 and builds political support. Many efforts are under way
 at the state and local levels to promote riparian conser-
 vation and tree planting. The intent of this recommen-
 dation is to  support  existing efforts and to create new
 tools and  programs useful for education and outreach.
 Bay Program partners will develop educational curric-
 ulum for teachers, as well as outreach tools and profes-
 sional  training  programs  for  local  governments,
 landowners and developers. They also will highlight suc-
 cessful projects through various information and media
 efforts, using project visibility as another means to raise
 public  awareness about the value of riparian  forest
 buffers in  watershed protection.
                                                         ACTIONS   AND   INNOVATIONS
                                                        BUFFER TRAINING VIA SATELLITE LINKS STATES
                                                        The Maryland Cooperative Extension Service, USDA Forest
                                                        Service and the Bay Program sponsored technical train-
                                                        ing to resource managers in a satellite broadcast format
                                                        in 1998. The two-day training included on-site instruc-
                                                        tion  and field  exercises.  Using  interactive satellite
                                                        broadcast technology, more than 15 states were able to
                                                        participate.  The training was held simultaneously at 45
                                                        sites  and reached more than 1000  individuals.

                                                        BUFFER "TOOLKIT"
                                                        The Pennsylvania Stream ReLeaf Kit is a practical guide
                                                        for grassroots organizations. This user-friendly manual is
                                                        intended to stimulate interest in  streamside reforesta-
                                                        tion projects. It presents useful materials to  help volun-
                                                        teers develop  a  buffer  planting  project, including
                                                        indigenous plant lists, sample planting schemes, varying
                                                        forest buffer  designs, a listing of nurseries with riparian
                                                        stock, and  maintenance tips to  keep the  vegetation
                                                        healthy once the  project is complete.
 10   CHESAPEAKE  BAY  RIPARIAN  FOREST  BUFFER  INITIATIVE

-------
      A  COMMITMENT  TO  RIPARIAN  STEWARDSHIP
In June 1998, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the
District of Columbia, with the federal agencies, com-
pleted individual  plans  for  implementation of  the
Initiative. The plans map out how the goals will be met
while being responsive to  the unique needs  of each
state. Together, they comprise a watershed-based ripar-
ian buffer strategy.

        Maryland Stream ReLeaf Plan

        Maryland's Stream ReLeaf Plan is a perform-
        ance-based strategy outlining goals, objectives,
actions and performance measures  for restoring and
conserving riparian buffers.  Maryland builds on a
number of its existing regulatory programs to achieve
the goal of conserving forests. Hallmarks of the effort
include a  watershed approach, voluntary participation
with incentives, monitoring the success of buffer plant-
ing efforts, and building new private partnerships.
  Maryland's plan involves working with  Tributary
Teams—watershed-based groups of local stakeholders
in ten basins covering the state—and other watershed
organizations to develop local efforts  and commitments
for buffer  conservation and restoration.

        Pennsylvania Stream ReLeaf:
        A Plan for Restoring and Conserving
        Buffers Along Pennsylvania Streams

Extending efforts  statewide,  the Pennsylvania plan
focuses on local community and watershed initiatives to
accomplish streamside buffer restoration and conserva-
tion.  State agencies will provide education, technical
assistance and funding to watershed and conservation
groups and to local governments through ongoing and
new  programs.  Enhancing outreach, education  and
incentives are important parts of the plan. It serves as
a guide,  listing sources of assistance available from
both  government  agencies and  private non-profit
organizations.
  As the  state's lead agency in implementing the ini-
tiative, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection is  guided by  a  multi-agency  steering
committee and supported by its Bureau of Watershed
Conservation and  the Pennsylvania Department  of
Conservation  and Natural  Resources'  Bureau  of
Forestry.
        Commonwealth of Virginia Riparian
        Buffer Implementation Plan

The Virginia plan describes a strategy for meeting each
of the five policy recommendations of the  Riparian
Forest Buffer Panel.  It targets state assistance to sup-
port private landowners and participation of local gov-
ernments as keys  to the success of the initiative.  The
plan extends the initiative to a state-wide effort. Actions
to evaluate new incentives, integrate riparian buffers
into current state programs, build links with private
industry, and enhance landowner and local government
outreach efforts will help to broaden the use of riparian
forest buffers. A state Riparian Advisory Committee has
been formed, and each year the progress of the plan will
be evaluated and strategies revised as needed to ensure
goals are achieved. A comprehensive assessment of the
plan will be conducted every three years.
               Federal Agencies/
               District of Columbia Plans
Federal lands and facilities comprise less than 5% of the
Bay's watershed, but they contain valuable stream and
shoreline resources. In addition, a majority of riparian
areas in the District of Columbia are on federal lands.
Most federal lands in the watershed are managed by one
of four  entities:  the USDA Forest  Service, the
Department of Defense, the National Park Service  or
the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
   Each of the major  land  management agencies has
prepared a separate implementation plan targeted to its
needs. These  plans ensure that land and facility man-
agement guidelines will contain provisions to afford
maximum protection of streams and streamside forests.
The  Forest Service and Department of Defense have
identified  specific areas for replanting  riparian forest
buffers.
   Federal agencies will enhance the delivery of their
many incentive programs for private landowners. The
Bay Program's Federal Agencies Committee will track
accomplishments.
   The District of Columbia also will work to reduce
the impacts of developed areas on streams and riparian
areas and will work with Maryland and the federal
agencies  in targeted  watersheds  like  the Anacostia
River.
                         CHESAPEAKE  BAY  RIPARIAN  FOREST  BUFFER INITIATIVE    11

-------
           MONITORING    AND    TRACKING
                       Measuring    Success
      Monitoring and continuous data collection are cru-
      cial elements of the Initiative. Monitoring efforts
      often are needed at the site, stream reach, small
watershed, or landscape-level.  Monitoring helps us to
learn about the success of conservation and restoration
strategies and to determine their effectiveness in meet-
ing specific water quality and habitat goals.
   Monitoring and tracking the progress of the Initiative
serves not only to keep a record of new riparian buffer
miles restored, but  to provide valuable information for
improving the Initiative's overall performance. Tracking
also supplies the data crucial to Bay Program indicators
which illustrate bottom-line environmental  results in
the Bay restoration effort and provide a unique picture
of the general health of the Bay and its watershed.
   To successfully evaluate progress toward meeting the
Initiative's goals, the current condition of riparian areas
needed assessment. A Riparian Forest Buffer Inventory
was completed for the Bay watershed in 1997. The
      inventory used the EPA's Environmental Monitoring
      Assessment Program land cover data (1989-1991) and
      included an accuracy assessment protocol using aerial
      photography to verify its reliability. This Geographic
      Information System (GIS) technology was used to assess
      the status of riparian areas and to provide a baseline for
      information on riparian forest buffers in the watershed
      for the states and federal agencies.
         The inventory provides riparian forest statistics for
      the Bay states and sub-watersheds within the basin.
         For tracking trends, the Bay Program representatives
      defined conservation of riparian forest buffers as "a con-
      servation width of at least 100 feet on each side . . . recom-
      mended for retention of existing riparian forests. Individual
      jurisdictions may choose to apply different widths in specific sit-
      uations or to meet predetermined local needs." Future assess-
      ments  of riparian forests using this spatial analysis
      technology will  be conducted at regular intervals.
                                Environmental Indicator
               Riparian Forest Buffer Conservation and Restoration
        Status of Bay Basin
         Streambanks and
         Shorelines: 1990s
       Source: Chesapeake Bay Riparian Forest
       Buffer inventory (9/1/96) and CBP Data
        Center (6/22/98). There are a total of
      approximately 199,000 miles of streambank
        and shoreline in the Bay watershed.
  Riparian Forest
Buffer Restoration
                                     2000-

                                     1800-
                                  -o
                                  £
                                  £  1500 1
                                  0)
                                  52  1200-
                                  o;   900 -|

                                  'm
                                  =   600 -|
                                  3
                                  °   300-
  Year 2010 Goal:
    2,010 miles
1996   1997  1998*

•Through September 30, 1998
Source: Chesapeake Bay Program.
GOAL: Conserve existing
forest along all streams
and shorelines and
restore riparian forests on
2,010 miles of stream and
shoreline in the
watershed by  2010,
targeting efforts where
they will be of greatest
value to water quality and
living resources.

STATUS: As of 1990,
approximately 59% of
riparian areas in the basin
were forested. Between
1996 and September 1998,
218 miles of  riparian
forest were restored.
 12  MONITORING AND  TRACKING:  MEASURING  SUCCESS

-------
   However, a width for res-
toration was set at 35 feet or
greater  measured from  the
top of the bank to the outer
edge of the restoration plant-
ing.  A  forest buffer of this
width would meet minimum
nutrient and aquatic system
improvement  needs while
ensuring wide  application.
Therefore,  restored buffers
are tracked by counting each
completed project.
   The Bay states, District of
Columbia, and the partici-
pating federal agencies have
developed individual track-
ing systems based on uni-
form guidelines and criteria
set by  the Bay Program
(below). Each state implementation plan includes track-
ing forms used to collect pertinent information about
restoration projects, and  each provides instructions for
filing them. The forms are collected twice a year by
                                                BASELINE  SUMMARY
State
DC
DE
MO
NY
PA
VA
WV
CB
Stream Miles
51 (.05%)
1,091 (1%)
16,756 (14.9%)
8,015 ( 7.1%)
47,585 (42.2%)
34,381 (30.5%)
4,956 ( 4.4%)
112,835
Buffers 100'
Both Sides
11 (21.6%)
572 (52.4%)
8,032 (47.9%)
3,744 (46.7%)
26,938 (56.6%)
17,857 (51.9%)
2,582 (52.1%)
59,737 (53.0%)
Buffers 100'
One Side
12 (25.5%)
638 (58.5%)
9,050 (54.0%)
4,353 (54.3%)
30,450 (64.0%)
20,065 (58.4%)
2,913 (58.8%)
67,482 (59.8%)
Buffers <100'
One SideW
38 (74.5%)
453 (41.5%)
7,706 (46.0%)
3,662 (45.7%)
17,135 (36.0%)
14,316 (41.6%)
2,042 (41.2%)
45,352 (40.2%)
                            (a) The total length of stream and shoreline distance in each Bay state.
                            (b) The extent of stream length that has riparian forest cover at least 100 feet wide on both sides of the waterway.
                            (c) The extent of stream and shoreline that has less than 100 feet of forest cover. This figure plus the extent of buffer on
                              one side equals 100% of total stream miles.
                                                   those overseeing the implementation of the plans and
                                                   include restoration project location, mileage, site and
                                                   planting information,  and geographic referencing for
                                                   adaptability into GIS systems.
                             CHESAPEAKE   BAY  PROGRAM
            RIPARIAN  FOREST   BUFFER  TRACKING   GUIDANCE
                               Criteria and Guidance
                  Restoration
                Conservation

       Riparian Forest Buffer
                 Composition
            Stream Definition
                              Buffer widths of 50-100 feet will be promoted as the appropriate width for
                              optimizing a range of multiple objectives for water quality and fish habitat
                              improvement. The width included for tracking purposes to meet the 2010
                              restoration goal will be 35 feet or greater.
                              Conservation of existing forested streamside areas should result in buffers at
                              least 100 feet wide.
                              The buffer must contain at least two species of native, noninvasive woody
                              trees and shrubs, or a combination of each. Natural regeneration is acceptable
                              where nearby trees native to the area can provide a natural source of seeds,
                              and where invasive plant species can be controlled.
                              All intermittent and perennial channels, excluding man-made ditches,
                              constitute a stream. Free-flowing stream and 1st and 2nd order streams are
                              highest priority. Buffers along lake and pond shores and those established
                              around wetlands also will be counted toward the 2,010 mile goal.
Measurement and Averaging  Progress will be measured in terms of streambank or shoreline miles.
                              Riparian forest buffer averaging is allowable as long as the stream does
                              not meander outside the buffer zone.
                                MONITORING  AND  TRACKING:  MEASURING  SUCCESS    13

-------

                              set*
  ting, management, and landowner objective.

  Zone lismanagedforthestream.lt
  stretches upland from the streambank. Its
  primary purpose is 10 stabilize the stream
  bank and provide a source of food and habitat
  for aquatic organisms. This zone provides the
  greatest benefits along smaller streams where
  it provides maximum control of light and
  temperature conditions, holds the; soil in
      , and in many cases, removes nutrients.
        2, directly landward from Zone 1,
  is managed to remove, store and transform
  nutrients, sediments and other pollutants
  which are carried to the stream in ground
  water and surface runoff. Pollution runoff
  may be reduced by 30-90% depending on site
  conditions. Although it can vary, the width of
  Zone 2 is critical to the removal of nutrients.

  Zone 3 is the outer edge of the buffer. It
  contains control measures—typically grass
  filter strips—which slow runoff and filter
  sediments. Zone 3 helps prevent runoff from
  eroding channels into the buffer and helps
  protect the integrity of Zones 1 and 2.
                                              RIPARIAN
                                                     FOREST
                                               BUFFERS:
                                              A   Closer  Look
Ground Water
14  RIPARIAN  FOREST  BUFFERS:  A  CLOSER  LOOK

-------
    The Chesapeake Bay Riparian Forest Buffer Panel
adopted the following definition for riparian forest buffers:
   "An area of trees, usually accompanied by shrubs and
 other vegetation that is adjacent to a body of water which
  is managed to maintain the integrity of stream channels
   and shorelines, to reduce the impact of upland sources
     of pollution by trapping, filtering, and converting
      sediments, nutrients, and other chemicals, and
       to supply food, cover, and thermal protection
               to fish and other wildlife."
Relationship of Riparian Functions and
        Minimum Buffer Widths



<,
<*


^
^
^v
*~ Wat?
* Bank sta
Wildlife habitat ^



r temperature moderation
ibilization and aquatic food web
0  25  50    100    150     200
       Minimum Buffer width (feet)
Zone 1
Undisturbed
Forest


Maturing trees
provide detritus to
the stream
Help maintain lower
water temperature
vital to fish habitat
Provide stream-
bank stability


Streambottom/Channel
• Debris hold detritus for processing by aquatic
fauna and provide cover and cooling shade
for fish and other stream dwellers


Zone 1
Undisturbed
Forest

Zone 2
Managed Forest


Zone 3
Grass
(If Needed)


Pasture

Management
• Tree removal is
generally permitted
only for streambank
stability

• Periodic harvesting is acceptable
in Zone 2 to remove nutrients
sequestered in tree stems and
branches and to maintain
nutrient uptake through
vigorous tree growth

• Penodic harvest of
vegetative regrowth
and redistribution
of sediment
build up

• Fencing, designed
watering facilities
and proper grazing
use are practiced
                                              RIPARIAN  FOREST BUFFERS: A  CLOSER  LOOK   15

-------
           PRIORITIES  FOR  BUFFER  LOCATION

          To be most effective, riparian forest buffers should be planned
          and implemented on a watershed scale. Although most agree
       that riparian forest buffers have some value in any setting, there are
           some important considerations when establishing priorities.
      Habitat—Riparian forests are essential for some fish and wildlife. Targeting for
      habitat enhancement may be very different than for water quality.
      Stream Size—More than 70% of all stream miles are small headwater streams
      (order 1-2). These may be priority areas for reducing nutrients. Watersheds with
      high stream density also are likely to benefit most.


      Continuous Buffers—Establishing continuous riparian forest buffers in the landscape
      is given a higher priority than establishing wider but fragmented buffers. Continuity
      is important for stream shading, water quality and wildlife corridors.


      Geography—Research has shown that the ability of forest buffers to remove pollutants
      like nitrogen  is determined by physiographic features. For example, pollutant
      removal efficiency may be highest in areas where soils and geology increase the
      total amount  of water passing through the riparian area.
      Degree of Degradation—Streams in areas without forests, such as pastures, may
      benefit the most, while buffers on highly-altered urban streams may not be able
      to provide high levels of pollution control.


      Land Use—The way the land is used influences the design, width, and type of
      vegetation used to establish a buffer.
16  RIPARIAN FOREST BUFFERS:  A CLOSER LOOK

-------
                 NEED    MORE   INFORMATION?
RIPARIAN   FOREST
BUFFER  INITIATIVE

To find out more about the status of the Riparian
Forest Buffer Initiative in your area or to see how
you can get involved, please contact the riparian
forest buffer coordinator in your state:

CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
  Chesapeake Bay Program
  410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109
  Annapolis, MD 21403
  (410) 267-5700
  1 800 YOUR BAY

MARYLAND
  Maryland Stream ReLeaf
  Maryland Department of Natural Resources
  Resource Management Service
  580 Taylor Avenue, C-4
  Annapolis, MD 21401
  (410) 260-8100
  Assisted By:
  Maryland Department of Natural Resources
  Forest Service
  580 Taylor Avenue, E-l
  Annapolis, MD 21401
  (410) 260-8531

PENNSYLVANIA
  Pennsylvania Stream ReLeaf
  Bureau of Watershed Conservation
  Pennsylvania Department of
  Environmental Protection
  EO. Box 8555
  Harrisburg, PA 17105-8555
  (717) 787-5259
  Assisted By:
  Pennsylvania Department of
  Conservation and Natural Resources
  Bureau of Forestry
  EO. Box 8552
  Harrisburg, PA 17105-852
  (717) 787-2106

VIRGINIA
  Virginia Riparian Implementation Plan
  VA Department of Forestry
  EO. Box 3758
  Charlottesville, VA 22903
  (804) 977-6555

FEDERAL  AGENCIES
AND  DISTRICT  OF COLUMBIA
  Federal Agencies Committee
  Chesapeake Bay Program
  410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109
  Annapolis, MD 21403
  (410) 267-5700
  1 800 YOUR BAY
USEFUL  WEB   SITES


Riparian Buffer Zone Information
www.deal.unl.edu/agnic/


Riparian Forest Buffers in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
www.chesapeakebay.net/facts/forests/ripfor.htm


Chesapeake Bay Riparian Forest Buffer Initiative
www.chesapeakebay.net/facts/forests/ripinit.htm
(for the federal agency/District of Columbia plan)


MD Department of Natural Resources Forest Service
www. dnr.state.md.us/forests
www.dnr.state.md.us :80/forests/streamreleaf.html
(for the Maryland StreamReLeaf Plan)


PA Bureau of Forestry and Department of Environmental Protection
www.dcnr.state.pa.us/forestry/forestry.htm
www.dep.state.pa.us/See&hear/streamreleaf/Stream_Releaf.htm
(choose Stream ReLeaf—for PA's Plan)


VA Department of Forestry
www.state.vipnet.org/dof/index.html
www.state.vipnet.org/dof/riparian.htm (Riparian Forest Buffers)


Society of American Foresters
www.safnet.org


Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
www.acb-online.org


USDA Forest Service
www.fs.fed.us

-------
    CHESAPEAKE   BAY   PROGRAM

The Chesapeake Bay  Program  is a unique regional partnership
leading  and directing restoration of the Chesapeake Bay since
1983. The Chesapeake Bay Program partners include the states
of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia; the District of Colum-
bia;  the Chesapeake  Bay  Commission,  a  tri-state legislative
body; the  US  Environmental  Protection Agency  (EPA), which
represents  the federal government; and participating citizen
advisory groups.

Since its  inception,  the  Chesapeake  Bay Program's  highest
priority  has been the restoration of the  Bay's living resources—
its finfish, shellfish,  Bay  grasses,  and other  aquatic  life and
wildlife. Improvements include fisheries  and habitat restoration,
recovery of Bay grasses,  nutrient  reductions,  and significant
advances in estuarine science.
                Chesapeake Bay Program

               US Environmental Protection Agency
                Chesapeake Bay Program Office
                 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109
                     Annapolis, MD 21403
                       (410) 267-5700
                       1-800-YOUR BAY
                    www.chesapeakebay.net

-------