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
------- |