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 ------- |