protecting riparian areas: farmland management strategies

ATTRA is the national sustainable agriculture information service operated by the National Center forAppropriate Technology, through a grant from the Rural Business-Cooperative Service, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture. These organizations do not recommend or endorse products, companies, or individuals.NCAT has offices in Fayetteville, Arkansas (P.O. Box 3657, Fayetteville, AR 72702), Butte, Montana,and Davis, California.

By Barbara C. BellowsNCAT Agriculture SpecialistMarch 2003

SOIL SYSTEMS GUIDE

PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS:FARMLAND MANAGEMENT

STRATEGIES

Riparian areas include streams, streambanks, and wetlands adjacent to streams. These areas havea water table high enough to interact with plant roots and affect their growth throughout most of theyear. Plant species that thrive in riparian areas are adapted to wet and flooded conditions. They arealso adapted to regrow root systems in sedi-ments deposited through soil erosion(Schneider, 1998).

Healthy riparian areas are critically im-portant ecological zones. They provide: Water quality protection Structural support for streambanks Water capture and storage Flood control Stabilization of water flow in streams

and rivers Habitat for aquatic and terrestrial wild-

life Aesthetic and recreational benefits

Unfortunately, various land use prac-tices have degraded riparian areas, result-ing in impaired environmental conditions,decreased agronomic production, and a multiplicity of social costs. Both agricultural and non-agricul-tural land use practices are responsible for the degradation of riparian areas. These degrading landuse practices include:

Abstract: This publication is designed to help farmers, watershed managers, and environmentalists understand whathealthy riparian areas look like, how they operate, and why they are important for the environment and society. It alsoprovides information on the costs and benefits of riparian management and discusses how watershed residents can worktogether to protect this vital resource. Tables included in the publication are designed to help you evaluate riparianprotection strategies from the perspective of your local environment, surrounding land use practices, and land managementobjectives.

IntrIntrIntrIntrIntroductionoductionoductionoductionoduction

Photo by USDA NRCS

mailto:[email protected]?subject=Protecting Riparian Areas: Farmland Management Strategies

//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESPAGE 2

TTTTTable of Contentsable of Contentsable of Contentsable of Contentsable of Contents

Introduction ................................................................................ 1Upland Land Management and Riparian Health ............................... 3What do Riparian Areas Look Like?................................................ 5Water and Sediment Capture by Riparian Areas............................... 6 Table 1. Vegetation Indicators for Riparian Areas........................ 8Water Decontamination by Riparian Soils ....................................... 9 Table 2. Soil Indicators for Riparian Areas ............................... 10Riparian Areas and Habitat Preservation ....................................... 11 Table 3. Streambank and Channel Indicators............................ 12Land Management Practices to Protect Riparian Areas ................... 13 Table 4. Indicators of Aquatic and Riparian Wildlife ................. 14Community Watershed Collaboration to Protect Riparian Areas ...... 16Summary .................................................................................. 17References ................................................................................ 17 Appendix 1: Impacts of Local Ecology on Riparian ........................

Characteristics................................................................... 22 Table A.1. Effect of Stream Order on Natural Riparian ..................

Characteristics................................................................... 23 Table A.2. Effect of Rainfall and Temperature on Riparian..............

Characteristics................................................................... 24 Appendix 2: Guidelines for Riparian Area Revegetation ............. 27 Appendix 3: Limited Ability of Riparian Areas to Control Phosphorus

Movement into Streams...................................................... 29 Appendix 4: Recommended Buffer Widths ............................... 30 Appendix 5: Economic Costs and Benefits of Riparian Buffer ..........

Protection ......................................................................... 32 Table A.3. Incentive Programs for Riparian Protection .............. 34

//PROTECTING RIPARIAN AREAS: FARMLAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PAGE 3

Artificial stream widening and straightening Road and building construction close to

streams Replacement of wooded or grassy areas with

roads, houses, and parking lots resulting inincreased runoff into streams

Unrestricted grazing or loitering of livestockin or near streams

Crop production activities including plowing,planting, and fertilizer, manure, and pesticideapplications close to streams

This publication is designed to assist farm-ers, ranchers, watershed managers, homeowners,and community members in understanding theimportance of riparian areas and guide them inimplementing land management practices to im-prove riparian health. Tables included providetools to monitor the conditions of riparian areasduring land restoration processes.

Attached appendices provide detailed infor-mation on subjects addressed in this publi-cation.

Upland LUpland LUpland LUpland LUpland LandandandandandManagement andManagement andManagement andManagement andManagement andRiparian HealthRiparian HealthRiparian HealthRiparian HealthRiparian Health

Water flows from upland areas through ri-parian areas and eventually into streams.Healthy riparian areas are able to absorb, hold,and use much of the water that flows off fromhealthy upland areas. Healthy riparian areasare also able to chemically and biologically bindor detoxify many contaminants contained inthis water. However, if upland areas are de-graded or covered with roads, parking lots, androoftops that do not allow the water to seep intothe soil, even the healthiest riparian area willbe unable to absorb and filter large volumes ofwater, nutrients, and contaminants flowingthrough it. Therefore, the first step in riparianprotection is ensuring that land managementpractices across the watershed conserve soil andwater resources.

Water moves across the landscape in twoways: as groundwater flow and as runoff. Sub-surface or groundwater flow is water that hassoaked into the soil and travels undergroundthrough pores in the soil. Runoff is water thatmoves over the surface of the soil. Whengroundwater or runoff water moves, it absorbsnutrients or contaminants and transports theminto riparian areas and potentially into streams.Runoff water can also transport eroded soil par-ticles.

Groundwater flowGroundwater flowGroundwater flowGroundwater flowGroundwater flow. In most undisturbedwatersheds, a majority of the water flows intoriparian areas and streams as groundwaterrather than as runoff. As rain falls or snowmelts, leaves and other plant residues on the soilsurface catch this water. Pores created by grow-ing plants, decaying plant roots, and animalburrows help the water seep into the soil (Cohen,1997). Once it seeps into the soil, the resultinggroundwater moves relatively slowly under-ground through soil particles until it reaches ri-parian areas and associated streams.

RunoffRunoffRunoffRunoffRunoff is favored when rain falls faster thanthe ground can absorb it. Water cannot be effec-tively absorbed when soils: Are compacted at the surface Are bare, so that the impact of rain drops on

the soil forms a surface crust

Plants in riparian areas filter ground and surfacewater moving into streams.

(from Huel, 1998. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada)

Above ground vegetationtraps sediment andpollutants

Fertilizer andpesticide residue

Floodwater level

Streamwater level

Runoff reachesstream carrying littlesediment, pesticideand fertilizer residue,making it healthier forplant and animal life

Residue fromfertilizer andpesticides aretrapped byroot systems

Healthy streambank vegetation


Have pores that have become plugged byeroded sediments

Have a clay texture that does not allow forrapid water movement into the soil

Are hydrophobic or have a surface crust,typical of many arid or semi-arid soils (Fed-eral Interagency Stream Restoration WorkingGroup, 2001).Runoff is also heavy when the soil does not

have the capacity to hold additional rainwateror snowmelt entering the soil. Thisoccurs when: Soils have been replaced by im-

permeable surfaces such asroads, parking lots, or rooftopsand insufficient natural or arti-ficial wetlands are present tocapture water not able to be ab-sorbed by soil

Soils are rocky or have an impen-etrable stony layer close to thesurface

Soils are thin because the topsoilhas been eroded off

Soils have a compacted layer ofpan within their profile thatacts as a barrier to downwardwater movement

Groundwater levels are high Rain keeps falling on soils that

are already saturated

Stream flashing

When runoff is heavy, such as following anintense storm or a rapid snowmelt, streamlevels can rise rapidly, often to flood stage.This rise in water levels is often very shortterm, lasting only a day or two, after whichwater levels decrease dramatically. The rapidrise and fall of water levels caused by runoffis referred to as stream flashing.

Contaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by waterContaminant movement by water..... Run-off water flowing over the soil surface can pickup and erode soil sediments. These sedimentsmay carry nutrients, pathogens, pesticides, andother contaminants, depending on the land-usepractices in the area they came from. Both runoff

water and groundwater can also absorb nutri-ents or become contaminated with pesticides orpathogens in the soil. Streams are polluted whencontaminated water is able to move directly intothem.

Impact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erImpact of runoff and erosion on riparosion on riparosion on riparosion on riparosion on ripar-----ian areas.ian areas.ian areas.ian areas.ian areas. Under healthy watershed conditionswater infiltration across the landscape resultsin minimal runoff and erosion reaching ripar-ian areas. Healthy riparian areas have a dense

growth of vegetation that catches any erodedsediment and prevents it from entering streams.They also have a diversity of plants that facilitatewater infiltration and take up many nutrients car-ried into riparian areas by runoff and groundwa-ter. Riparian areas also have a unique soil envi-ronment that provides favorable conditions forthe chemical and biological degradation of manysoil contaminants.

However, when upland watershed condi-tions are degraded, heavy runoff can flow overor through riparian plants and move directlyinto river channels. Severe erosion in uplandareas can degrade riparian areas by buryingplants under sediments. Fine sediments broughtin by erosion can degrade stream habitat by fill-ing in stream pools, altering the shape of streamchannels, and covering rocky stream bottoms,thereby eliminating important food producing,shelter and spawning areas (Wohl and Caline,1996). Runoff and erosion also bring in seeds ofnon-native or non-riparian plant species. Inva-

Runoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedRunoff from poorly vegetated areas carries erodedsediments into streamssediments into streamssediments into streamssediments into streamssediments into streams


sive and non water-loving plant species can re-duce habitat for native species and lower the wa-ter table by crowding out more functional andpalatable riparian species. They can also create afire risk by increasing fuel loads (Allen et al, 2000).As runoff and erosion from upland areas con-tinue to destroy the integrity of riparian areas,streamside areas loose their ability to buffer andprotect streams, resulting in damage to aquatichabitat, increased costs for treating drinking wa-ter, and loss of aesthetic appeal.

Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Soil and water conservation practices.Water infiltration is enhanced by land-use prac-tices that provide coverage of the soil surfacewith vegetation or residues throughout the year.Conservation tillage, contour farming, covercropping, agroforestry, and rotational grazingare all practices that protect soil quality whilepromoting water flow into the soil. For moreinformation on these soil and water conserva-tion practices, please see the following ATTRApublications:

Sustainable Soil Management

Conservation Tillage

Pursuing Conservation Tillage for Organic CropProduction

Rye as a Cover Crop

Protecting Water Quality on Organic Farms

Sustainable Pasture Management

Rotational Grazing

Nutrient Cycling in Pastures

What do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasWhat do Riparian AreasLook LikLook LikLook LikLook LikLook Like?e?e?e?e?

Healthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areasHealthy riparian areas. Characteristics ofhealthy riparian areas differ across the countryand across the landscape. In mountainous orhilly areas, streams run through rocky gorgeswith scattered trees growing out of the thin soil.In prairie landscapes, streams flow throughthick, silty soil, with banks covered by reeds,sedges, and willows. Despite these local differ-ences, healthy riparian areas have certain simi-larities:

A thick growth of vegetation, representinga diversity of grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees,covers the streambanks and provides shadeover the stream

Except where streams cut through rocky ter-rain, land surrounding streambanks re-mains wet throughout most of the year

Streambanks are more vertical than flat-tened out

Streamflow levels vary only moderatelythroughout the year

Stream water is relatively clear but containsleaves, twigs, or logs from streambanks thatcreate pools and other habitat for fish andother aquatic organisms

A diversity of fish, aquatic life, mammals,and birds live in and around riparian areas

Appendix 1 describes regional differences inthe structures and functions of riparian areas.

Degraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areasDegraded riparian areas. In contrast, de-graded riparian areas have some or all of thefollowing characteristics: Patchy or scrubby plant growth with bare

ground showing in many places Vegetation dominated by upland plants in-

cluding noxious weeds Soil that is compacted, shows rills or gullies,

or has bare trails and pathways along thestreambanks

Streambanks that are eroded, severely un-dercut, or sloughing

Streams that flood regularly in the springand become dry during the summer

Streamwater that is muddy or murky andmay contain toxic levels of various nutrientsor contaminants

Few mammals or birds living or feeding inthe area

Limited numbers and diversity of fish andother aquatic speciesThese characteristics of degraded riparian

areas reflect their inability to protect water qual-ity, stabilize water quantity, and provide criti-cal habitat for both land animals and aquaticspecies.

http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/soilmgmt.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/consertill.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/omconservtill.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/omconservtill.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/rye.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/om-waterquality.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/sustpast.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/rotgraze.pdfhttp://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/nutrientcycling.PDF


WWWWWater and Sedimentater and Sedimentater and Sedimentater and Sedimentater and SedimentCapture by RiparianCapture by RiparianCapture by RiparianCapture by RiparianCapture by Riparian

AreasAreasAreasAreasAreasRiparian areas protect water quality by cap-

turing, storing, and treating water that flowsthrough their soils. A thick growth of diversevegetation, plant residues covering the soil sur-face, and porous, non-compacted soil facilitatewater capture. High streambanks with highwater tables provide water storage capacity.Vigorously growing plants take up nutrientstransported into riparian areas, while active popu-lations of both aerobic and anaerobic soil organ-isms degrade many contaminants that flow intothese areas. Chemicals in soil minerals and soilorganic matter also capture or facilitate biologi-cal detoxification of contaminants. Understand-ing these components of healthy riparian areascan help guide land management practices thatprotect riparian areas and water quality.

Structure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetationStructure of riparian vegetation. Healthyriparian vegetation captures water and facilitateswater infiltration into the soil. Riparian areas thatinclude a diversity of plant species are most ef-fective in slowing the flow of water and storing itfor future use. These species are not arranged ina random manner. Rather, they are organized ina natural structure consisting of three roughlyparallel ecosystem bands, each consisting of spe-cies adapted to survive in the specific moistureregime of that area and able to perform specificecological functions: The first band of vegetation, found at the edge

of the water, consists of deep-rooted sedgesand rushes.

The second band of vegetation, found in thewet ground near the edge of the bank, con-sists of shrubs, trees, moisture loving grasses,and water-tolerant broad-leaved plants (Huel,1998).

The drier third band of vegetation, foundwhere the riparian zone merges into the up-lands, includes a mixture of riparian andupland plant species (Huel, 1998).

Plants in the first band are water-loving andhave deep, strong roots that stabilize streambanksagainst erosion (Clark, 1998). Plants in the sec-ond and third bands catch water and facilitate itsabsorption. They also take up nutrients trans-ported into the area by runoff and groundwaterand provide habitat for terrestrial animals. If landmanagement practices reduce the riparian zonesto only one or two of these bands, some or all ofthe environmental and habitat benefits of theseareas will be lost. The first zone is both the mostecologically important and requires the greatestprotection against degradation.

The dominance of water-loving plant speciesin the first zone serves as an indicator of riparianhealth. These plants are critical for promotingwater recharge and increasing water table height(Martin and Chambers, 2001). It is not essentialfor native plant species to dominate in riparianareas for these areas to provide environmentalbenefits. But water-loving plants that providefunctions similar to native species need to bepresent. However, water-tolerant exotic species such as leafy spurge, purple loosestrife, orsalt cedar grow very aggressively and over-whelm species that are native to the area andmore palatable to wildlife and livestock. In thisway, exotic species decrease the ability of ripar-ian areas to maintain high water table levels, re-tain streambank stability, provide forage to live-stock, and support wildlife habitat (Huel, 1998).

Trees, brush, and grasses protectstreambanks against erosion and water

quality degradation

Phot

o by

USD

A N

RC

S


The importance of water-loving plants in riparian areas

In the past, land management programs implemented in some arid areas recommended clearingnative, water-loving plants from riparian areas in order to reduce water-use competition and en-courage the production of agronomic crops or forage grasses. However, the removal of theseplants eliminated many of the ecological benefits provided by riparian areas, including streamstabilization, shading, and wildlife habitat (NRC, 2002). As a result, farmers and ranchers alongthese unprotected streams lost land to streambank erosion and were faced with greater challengesin reducing non-point source pollution.

Streambank stabilizationStreambank stabilizationStreambank stabilizationStreambank stabilizationStreambank stabilization. A diversity of plants work together to hold streambank soils inplace and protect them from erosion and undercutting by floodwaters, transported woody debris, orice jams. The deep, penetrating roots of sedges, rushes, grasses, and other herbaceous plants providestructural support for streambanks, while the thicker, harder roots of woody plants protect streambanksagainst bank scouring by floods and ice jams (Winward, 2000).

When riparian areas restore themselves natu-rally following a fire, for instance woodyspecies are often the first plants to become es-tablished. These woody plants stabilize streamchannels against the forces of erosion while nur-turing the growth of water-loving grasses, sedges,rushes, and forbs (Elmore and Beschta, 2000).The herbaceous plants then stabilize streambankswith their thick, deep roots, while their stemstrap sediments carried by runoff water andstream-scouring floodwater.

An eroded streambank thatrecovered when it was protected

from grazing and allowed tobecome stabilized by vegetation

Photos by D. Redhege, Kerr Centerfor Sustainable Agriculture

The types of vegetation that naturally domi-nate in riparian areas differ across locations.Grassy vegetation is more important for hold-ing together streambanks developed from sedi-ments, while trees and shrubs dominate on thesteep, rocky banks of more rapidly moving andnarrower headwater streams (Sovell et al., 2000).However, water-tolerant or water-loving plantsare more effective for holding streambanks inplace than are plants more adapted to uplandconditions, because they have deeper and stron-


Tabl

e 1.

Veg

etat

ion

Indi

cato

rs fo

r Rip

aria

n A

reas

Indi

cato

r

Envi

ronm

enta

lFu

nctio

n of

Plan

ts

Plan

t Spe

cies

Dive

rsity

Dive

rsity

of

Plan

t Age

s

Plan

t Vig

or a

ndRe

prod

uctio

n

Pala

tabl

eVe

geta

tion

Plan

t and

Litt

erCo

ver

Plan

t Litt

erM

ovem

ent a

ndPl

ant L

odgi

ng

Wid

th o

fR

ipar

ian

Are

a

Hea

lthy

Rip

aria

n A

reas

ef

fect

ive

wat

er in

filtra

tion

ef

fect

ive

capt

ure

of s

edim

ents

st

ruct

ural

sup

port

of s

tream

bank

s

redu

ces

stre

am v

eloc

ity d

urin

g flo

ods

sh

ade

for r

educ

ing

wat

er lo

ss a

nd m

oder

atin

gte

mpe

ratu

res

ha

bita

t for

wild

life,

bird

s, a

nd a

quat

ic s

peci

es

pr

edom

inan

tly n

ativ

e, w

ater

-lovi

ng ri

paria

nve

geta

tion

co

mbi

natio

n of

sed

ges,

rus

hes,

gra

sses

,he

rbac

ous

plan

ts, s

hrub

s an

d tre

es

bo

th y

oung

and

mat

ure

trees

and

shr

ubs

are

pres

ent

he

alth

y pl

ant g

row

th a

nd r

epro

duct

ion

pl

ant g

row

th e

xcee

ds 8

0% o

f pot

entia

lpr

oduc

tion

di

vers

ity o

f pla

nt s

peci

es a

nd p

lant

age

spr

ovid

es p

alat

able

veg

etat

ion

thro

ugho

ut th

egr

owin

g se

ason

tre

es h

ave

an o

pen

or p

ark-

like

appe

aran

ce

fu

ll ve

geta

tion

cove

rage

thro

ugho

ut th

e ye

ar

litte

r la

yer

pres

ent p

artic

ular

ly d

urin

g w

inte

r an

dsp

ring

pr

ovid

es w

oody

deb

ris th

at s

erve

s as

she

lter f

orfis

h an

d ha

bita

t for

aqu

atic

inse

cts

un

iform

dis

tribu

tion

of li

tter

pl

ants

rem

ain

stan

ding

follo

win

g he

avy

rain

falls

or s

now

mel

ts

rip

aria

n ve

geta

tion

at le

ast t

wo

chan

nel w

idth

son

eac

h si

de o

f stre

am

Mod

erat

ely

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

ve

geta

tion

prov

ides

som

e bu

t not

all

envi

ronm

enta

l fun

ctio

ns

so

me

non-

nativ

e pl

ant s

peci

es a

ndno

xiou

s w

eeds

pr

esen

ce o

f som

e dr

ough

t-tol

eren

tve

geta

tion,

sim

ilar

to th

at in

adj

acen

tup

land

are

as

fe

w y

oung

tree

s an

d sh

rubs

pre

sent

so

me

dead

or

deca

dent

pla

nts

pres

ent

ca

pabi

lity

to p

rodu

ce s

eeds

or

tille

rs is

som

ewha

t lim

ited

pl

ant g

row

th is

30-

80%

of p

oten

tial

prod

uctio

n

m

oder

ate

decr

ease

in p

erce

ntag

e of

pala

ble

plan

t spe

cies

pre

sent

so

me

brow

sing

on

pala

tabl

e tre

esp

ecie

s

sp

arse

veg

etat

ion

cove

rage

, esp

ecia

llydu

ring

the

dry

seas

on

litte

r la

yer

thin

ner

than

exp

ecte

d fo

rlo

catio

n

redu

ced

amou

nt o

f woo

dy d

ebris

add

edto

stre

am fl

ow

on

ly s

mal

l siz

e lit

ter

is d

ispl

aced

sc

atte

red

conc

entra

tion

of li

tter

near

obst

ruct

ions

fla

tteni

ng o

f gra

sses

in is

olat

ed a

reas

na

tura

l veg

etat

ion

exte

nds

the

wid

th o

fha

lf th

e ch

anne

l on

eith

er s

ide

of s

tream

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

ve

geta

tion

pres

ent i

neffe

ctiv

e in

pro

vidi

ngm

ost e

nviro

nmen

tal f

unct

ions

of r

ipar

ian

area

s

on

ly n

on-n

ativ

e sp

ecie

s

noxi

ous

or in

vasi

ve w

eeds

pre

sent

sm

all n

umbe

r of

pla

nt s

peci

es

trees

and

shr

ubs

are

abse

nt

pres

ence

of p

redo

min

antly

dro

ught

-tole

rent

vege

tatio

n, s

imila

r to

that

in a

djac

ent u

plan

dar

eas

re

duce

d pl

ant e

stab

lishm

ent a

nd s

urvi

val

al

l tre

es a

re o

ld a

nd in

poo

r hea

lth

ca

pabi

lity

to p

rodu

ce s

eed

or ti

llers

isse

vere

ly li

mite

d

plan

t gro

wth

is p

oor,

less

than

30%

of

pote

ntia

l pro

duct

ion

gr

azin

g ha

s re

mov

ed a

ll of

the

pala

tabl

eve

geta

tion

pa

lata

ble

spec

ies

of s

hrub

s an

d tre

es a

rehe

avily

bro

wse

d

willo

ws

and

othe

r pa

lata

ble

tree

spec

ies

have

a m

ushr

oom

-like

app

eara

nce

ba

re s

oil o

ver a

larg

e pe

rcen

tage

of t

he s

oil

surfa

ce

litte

r la

yer

larg

ely

abse

nt

limite

d am

ount

of w

oody

deb

ris a

dded

tost

ream

flow

lit

ter

is c

once

ntra

ted

arou

nd r

ocks

, tre

etru

nks,

and

oth

er o

bstru

ctio

ns

plan

ts a

re fl

atte

ned

by h

eavy

flow

s of

runo

ffw

ater

follo

win

g ra

inst

orm

s or

sno

wm

elts

na

tura

l veg

etat

ion

less

than

a th

ird o

f wid

thof

the

chan

nel o

n ea

ch s

ide

of s

tream

Sour

ces:

Bel

sky

et a

l., 1

999;

Fed

eral

Inte

rage

ncy

Stre

am R

esto

ratio

n W

orki

ng G

roup

, 200

1; H

illard

, C. a

nd S

. Ree

dyk.

200

0; N

aim

an e

t al.,

199

2; H

uel,

1998

; Pric

hard

, 199

8; R

enw

ick

and

Eden

, 199

9;W

inw

ard,

200

0.


ger root systems. For example, Kentucky blue-grass (Poa pratensis) and redtop (Agrostisstolonifera) provide good livestock forage, buttheir root systems are not deep enough to stabi-lize streambank sediments (Winward, 2000).Thus, these plants often serve as indicators ofdisturbed or degraded riparian areas. Similarly,trees that are not water tolerant do not developas extensive root systems in riparian areas as dowater tolerant species. As a result, these treesare unable to effectively stabilize streambanksand are likely to be undercut and fall into streams.

For guidelines on how to revegetate degradedriparian areas, please see Appendix 2.

Table 1 provides a list of indicators that com-pare vegetation characteristics in healthy ripar-ian areas to those in degraded areas.

WWWWWater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanksater storage within streambanks.Healthy riparian areas that are well-vegetatedhave highly permeable soils and high streambanks. They have a water table that extendsunderground and outward from thestreambanks and provides a large amount ofgroundwater storage (Prichard, 1998). In con-trast, degraded riparian areas have a low wa-ter table, sloping banks, and wide, shallowstreams, with limited storage capacity.

A riparian area with a diversity of vegeta-tion is able to trap 80 to 90% of the sedimentstransported from fields (Naiman and Decamps,1997). The new sediments, along with lush plantgrowth, facilitates both water infiltration intoriparian soils and increased water storage. Asvegetation grows, its stems and roots collectmore soil, while its leaves shade the soil andprotect it against water loss through evapora-tion. The seasonal death and decomposition ofplants provides additional organic matter to thesoil and further facilitates water infiltration andstorage. Organic matter holds water like asponge and stimulates the growth of soil organ-isms involved in the formation soil aggregatesand enhancing soil porosity.

Streambank build-up. Sediment trapping byriparian vegetation increases the height ofstreambanks, particularly along low-gradient

channels (Platts, 1990, Ohmart, 1996). Watertables rise simultaneously in riparian areas asstreambanks build up, water absorption is in-creased, and water loss through evaporation de-creases. Under healthy riparian conditions, wa-ter tables rise until they reach the height ofplants root zone on the former flood plains(Elmore and Beschta, 2000). These riparian soilsremain wet throughout most of the year.

Water recharge. The large water storage ca-pacity of riparian areas buffers the movementof water from upland areas into streams. In-stead of allowing water to flow directly intostreams following a rainstorm or snowmelt,healthy riparian areas hold and store water.Throughout the year, this water seeps slowlyinto adjacent streams, providing water rechargeand moderating stream flow.

Flood control. The ability of the porous, well-aggregated streambank soils to store vast quan-tities of water also decreases the potential forflooding. In addition, plants growing in ripar-ian areas control flooding by daily taking up andtranspiring thousands of gallons of water peracre (Elmore and Beschta, 2000). If water levelsdo reach flood stage, streambank vegetation sta-bilizes streambanks and helps prevent streamsfrom widening or changing course.

Table 2 (next page) compares streambank andchannel conditions in healthy and degraded ri-parian areas.

WWWWWater Decontaminationater Decontaminationater Decontaminationater Decontaminationater Decontaminationby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soilsby Riparian Soils

Riparian areas contain a combination of wetand dry soil zones that facilitate a variety of bio-logical and chemical reactions. These reactionsreduce the availability of some nutrients and de-crease the toxicity of some contaminants(Edwards, 2000). The presence of slowly decom-posing plant residues in these wet soils furtherfacilitates water purification processes. Someorganic matter particles have a high ability tochemically capture and hold many potential con-taminants, while others serve as sources of foodand energy for soil organisms involved in con-taminant detoxification (Cohen, 1997).


Tabl

e 2.

Soi

l Ind

icat

ors

for R

ipar

ian

Are

asIn

dica

tor

Org

anic

mat

ter

Dive

rse

mic

robi

alco

mm

unity

stru

ctur

e

Min

imal

com

pact

ion

Goo

din

filtr

atio

n

Lim

ited

runo

ff

Lim

ited

eros

ion

Hea

lthy

Rip

aria

n A

reas

s

oil c

over

ed b

y gr

owin

g pl

ants

and

pla

ntre

sidu

es th

roug

hout

the

year

o

rgan

ic m

atte

r ha

s ac

cum

ulat

ed in

the

soil

prof

ile

hig

h so

il bi

olog

ical

act

ivity

to

psoi

ls a

re d

eep

s

oils

are

wel

l agg

rega

ted

o

rgan

ic m

atte

r de

com

pose

s ra

pidl

y

effe

ctiv

e lo

ss o

f nitr

ogen

thro

ugh

deni

trific

atio

n

goo

d so

il ag

greg

atio

n by

mic

robi

al s

limes

so

il is

sof

t, hi

gh o

rgan

ic m

atte

r co

nten

t

good

wat

er in

filtra

tion

go

od s

oil a

ggre

gatio

n

heal

thy

plan

t gro

wth

ve

geta

tion

cove

rage

ove

r the

soi

l sur

face

g

ood

soil

aggr

egat

ion

r

elat

ivel

y th

ick

tops

oil

go

od w

ater

infil

tratio

n

dee

p to

psoi

l with

goo

d w

ater

hol

ding

cap

acity

h

igh

amou

nt o

f org

anic

mat

ter i

n so

il an

d go

odso

il ag

greg

atio

n

com

plet

e ve

geta

tion

cove

r ove

r the

soi

l sur

face

no

indi

catio

n of

soi

l mov

emen

t

stre

am is

not

mud

died

by

runo

ff w

ater

Mod

erat

ely

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

s

oil o

rgan

ic m

atte

r co

nten

t som

ewha

tre

duce

d

som

e lo

ss o

f top

soil

m

oder

ate

leve

ls o

f soi

l bio

logi

cal a

ctiv

ity

soi

l pat

ches

bar

e of

veg

etat

ion

re

lativ

ely

high

rem

oval

of r

esid

ues

from

soil

syst

em

mod

erat

e to

poo

r soi

l agg

rega

tion

m

oder

ate

deco

mpo

sitio

n of

org

anic

mat

ter

so

il is

som

ewha

t har

d, e

spec

ially

dur

ing

the

dry

seas

on

wat

er in

filtra

tion

is li

mite

d in

som

e ar

eas

pl

ants

hav

e di

fficu

lty g

ettin

g w

ater

and

nutri

ents

from

the

soil

so

me

loss

of v

eget

atio

n co

vera

ge

som

e ru

noff,

ero

sion

, or p

ondi

ng o

fw

ater

obs

erve

d

soi

l com

pact

ion

on s

urfa

ce o

r w

ithin

prof

ile

in

filtra

tion

is s

omew

hat r

estri

cted

w

ater

hol

ding

cap

acity

of s

oil i

sso

mew

hat

limite

d

som

e so

il co

mpa

ctio

n or

rel

ativ

ely

high

wat

er ta

ble

so

me

smal

l rills

pre

sent

w

ater

bec

omes

mud

dy o

nly

afte

r he

avy

rain

s

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

lo

w s

oil f

ertil

ity a

nd lo

w c

once

ntra

tion

ofor

gani

c m

atte

r

soi

l is

bare

in m

any

area

s

limite

d to

psoi

l

limite

d so

il bi

olog

ical

act

ivity

lim

ited

retu

rn o

f pla

nt r

esid

ues

to th

e so

ilsy

stem

so

ils a

re s

ticky

or

grai

ny, n

ot w

ell a

ggre

gate

d

p

eat b

uild

s up

in ri

paria

n ar

eas

beca

use

area

is to

o w

et o

r or

gani

c m

atte

r re

mai

nsun

deco

mpo

sed

beca

use

area

s ar

e to

o dr

y

inef

fect

ive

deni

trific

atio

n

poo

r soi

l agg

rega

tion

s

oil i

s ha

rd

littl

e or

no

soil

oggr

egat

ion

li

ttle

or n

o w

ater

infit

ratio

n

nu

mer

ous

area

s ba

re o

f veg

etat

ion

lo

ss o

f soi

l agg

rega

tion

s

oil i

s co

mpa

cted

ru

noff

and

eros

ion

obse

rved

eve

n fo

llow

ing

light

to

mod

erat

e st

orm

s

in

filtra

tion

is r

estri

cted

h

igh

soil

surfa

ce c

ompa

ctio

n

lim

ited

wat

er h

oldi

ng c

apac

ity o

f soi

l

ril

ls a

nd g

ullie

s pr

esen

t

soil

is s

cour

ed w

here

wat

er fl

ows

over

the

surfa

ce

soil

build

up

behi

nd r

ocks

s

tream

is m

uddi

ed b

y ru

noff

wat

er

Sour

ces:

Bel

sky

et a

l., 1

999;

Fed

eral

Inte

rage

ncy

Stre

am R

esto

ratio

n W

orki

ng G

roup

, 200

1; N

aim

an e

t al.,

199

2; P

richa

rd, 1

998;

Ren

wic

k an

d Ed

en, 1

999;

Win

war

d, 2

000.


The hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zoneThe hyporheic zone. Healthy riparian soilshave a unique ecological zone composed ofwater-saturated oxygen-poor soils adjacentto soils that are drier and oxygen-rich. Re-ferred to as the hyporheic zone, this transi-tion area between aerobic and anaerobic con-ditions promotes biological transformations,such as denitrification and pesticide detoxifi-cation, and chemical transformations that in-fluence the availability of phosphorus and iron(Cohen, 1997).

Denitrification Denitrification Denitrification Denitrification Denitrification occurs when soil organismsthat grow under aerobic conditions transformorganic nitrogen into nitrate, followed by thetransformation of nitrate into atmospheric ni-trogen by bacteria that thrive under anaerobicconditions. This process is important environ-mentally when the amount of nitrogen movingacross the watershed into riparian areas isgreater than the amount that can be used forriparian plant growth. The overapplication ofnitrogen-containing fertilizers and manure onagricultural and residential landscapes is theprimary source of nitrogen pollution of water-ways. The amount of nitrogen entering streamsis reduced when riparian areas are able to cap-ture and remove nitrogen from runoff water.Natural riparian forests can denitrify and re-lease 25 to 35 pounds of nitrogen per acre peryear (Cole, 1981).

Phosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availabilityPhosphorus availability. Overapplicationof fertilizer and manure can also overload thesoil with phosphorus. Iron, aluminum, andcalcium in the soil can bind excess phosphorus.In flooded soils, iron binds less phosphorus thanit does in drier, aerobic soils. This decreasedbinding ability increases the availability of phos-phorus both for plant uptake and for movementinto surface water (Green and Kaufman, 1989).Since riparian areas have a limited ability to holdexcess phosphorus, they are relatively ineffec-tive in protecting streams against poor phospho-rus management practices on upland areas.Thus, good upland management is necessary toprotect against phosphorus pollution.

For additional information on the ability of ri-parian areas to control phosphorus move-ment into streams, please see Appendix 3.

Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants.Detoxification of contaminants. Ripar-ian soils have a high concentration of peat, a par-tially decomposed organic material formed un-der primarily anaerobic conditions. Under wet,anaerobic conditions organic materials decom-pose more slowly than under aerobic conditions,since many more decomposing soil organismsrequire oxygen than thrive without it. Peat is ahighly reactive material that has the ability to cap-ture and hold many chemicalsnutrients, pesti-cides, heavy metals, and other contaminantsthat flow off the uplands and into riparian areas(Cohen, 1997).

Other microorganisms found in the aerobicand anaerobic areas of the riparian zone are ableto degrade toxic contaminants such as pesti-cides. Habitat competition by other soil micro-organisms decreases populations of human andanimal pathogens, such as E. coli,cryptosporidium, or giardia, that may be trans-ported into streams from septic systems or ma-nure piles (Stehman et al., 1996).

Table 3 (next page) compares soil charac-teristics in healthy riparian areas to those in de-graded areas.

Riparian Areas andRiparian Areas andRiparian Areas andRiparian Areas andRiparian Areas andHabitat PreserHabitat PreserHabitat PreserHabitat PreserHabitat Preservationvationvationvationvation

Riparian areas provide food and habitat for adiversity of soil, aquatic, and terrestrial organ-isms. A multistoried plant canopy of annualand perennial grasses and forbs, as well as juve-nile and mature shrubs and trees, provides avaried aboveground habitat for birds and wild-life and a belowground habitat for burrowinganimals and soil organisms. Exposed roots andirregular streambanks provide breeding areasfor many aquatic species, as well as habitat foralgae and macroinvertebrates that are used asfood by fish and other aquatic life. In addition,overhanging branches of riparian trees andsloughed off residues of riparian plants provideaquatic life with shade and habitat.

Aquatic habitatAquatic habitatAquatic habitatAquatic habitatAquatic habitat. Healthy riparian areasprotect fish habitat by minimizing the movementof eroded sediments into streams. Heavy siltloads disrupt reproductive behavior and destroyfeeding and spawing areas for many aquaticspecies (Thompson, 1984). For example, troutrequire gravel for reproduction and egg laying,while various gamefish need relatively clear


Tabl

e 3.

Str

eam

bank

and

Cha

nnel

Indi

cato

rsIn

dica

tor

Stre

amba

nkSt

abili

ty

Stre

amC

hann

el S

hape

Freq

uenc

y of

Riffl

es

Rip

aria

n W

ater

Tabl

e

Cha

nnel

Alte

rnat

ion

Hea

lthy

Rip

aria

n A

reas

ban

ks a

re a

t ele

vatio

n of

act

ive

flood

pla

in

littl

e or

no

stre

amba

nk e

rosi

on

man

y st

rong

, fin

e ro

ots

hold

stre

amba

nk in

plac

e

ch

anne

l is

rela

tivel

y na

rrow

ba

nks

are

rela

tivel

y st

raig

ht w

ith d

eep

unde

rcut

that

pro

vide

s sh

ade

for

aqua

tic s

peci

es

stre

am h

as p

ools

and

mea

nder

s

rel

ativ

ely

frequ

ent o

ccur

renc

e of

riffl

es

dis

tanc

e be

twee

n rif

fles

is n

o m

ore

than

7tim

es th

e m

easu

rem

ent o

f the

wid

th o

f the

stre

am

w

ater

tabl

e re

mai

ns h

igh

and

stab

le th

roug

hout

the

year

w

ater

lovi

ng v

eget

atio

n pr

edom

inat

es

ripar

ian

area

pro

vide

s an

inte

rface

bet

wee

n w

etan

d dr

y en

viro

nmen

ts

s

tream

has

not

bee

n su

bjec

t to

chan

neliz

atio

n,st

ream

alte

ratio

n, o

r dr

edgi

ng

Mod

erat

ely

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

so

me

stre

amba

nk e

rosi

on

som

e de

ep r

oote

d rip

aria

n pl

ants

repl

aced

by

mor

e sh

allo

w ro

oted

or

woo

dy p

lant

spe

cies

ch

anne

l is

wid

er th

an u

nder

nat

ural

cond

ition

s

bank

s ar

e br

oken

dow

n in

isol

ated

are

as

som

e lo

ss o

f poo

ls a

nd m

eand

ers

o

ccas

sion

al r

iffle

s

bot

tom

con

tour

s pr

ovid

e so

me

aqua

ticha

bita

t

dis

tanc

e be

twee

n rif

fles

is n

o m

ore

than

20 ti

mes

the

mea

sure

men

t of t

he w

idth

of th

e st

ream

w

ater

tabl

e is

not

at b

ankf

ul le

vel

so

il su

rface

may

dry

out

dur

ing

the

dry

seas

on

som

e dr

ough

t tol

eren

t upl

and

plan

tspr

esen

t in

the

ripar

ian

zone

so

me

chan

neliz

atio

n pr

esen

t, us

ually

in

area

s of

brid

ges

or in

urb

an a

reas

evi

denc

e of

dre

dgin

g or

cha

nnel

izat

ion

havi

ng o

ccur

red

over

20

year

s ag

o

drai

nage

out

lets

from

agr

icul

tura

l lan

ds

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

s

tream

bank

s ar

e hi

gh b

ends

ero

ded

by fl

owin

g w

ater

pl

ant r

oots

eith

er n

ot p

rese

nt o

r uab

le to

hol

dba

nks

agai

nst

scou

ring

tre

es a

re fa

lling

into

stre

am

ch

anne

l is

shal

low

and

wid

e

bank

s ar

e la

id b

ack

ba

nks

are

tram

pled

whe

re li

vest

ock

ente

r th

ew

ater

to d

rink

or c

ross

the

stre

am

loss

of p

ools

and

mea

nder

s

w

ater

is g

ener

ally

flat

if

riffle

s ar

e pr

esen

t, th

ey a

re s

hallo

w a

ndpr

ovid

e po

or a

quat

ic h

abita

t

dist

ance

bet

wee

n rif

fles

is g

reat

er th

an 2

0tim

es th

e m

easu

rem

ent o

f the

wid

th o

f the

stre

am

w

ater

tabl

e is

low

or v

arie

s gr

eatly

thro

ugho

utth

e ye

ar

drou

ght t

oler

ant o

r upl

and

vege

tatio

n ha

sre

plac

ed ri

paria

n ve

geta

tion

w

ater

tabl

e is

too

low

to fa

cilit

ate

chem

ical

and

biol

ogic

al in

tera

ctio

ns b

etw

een

wet

and

dry

cond

ition

s

ex

tens

ive

chan

neliz

atio

n, e

spec

ially

in u

rban

area

s

bank

s sh

ored

with

gab

ion

or c

emen

t

inst

ream

hab

itat g

reat

ly a

ltere

d or

rem

oved

entir

ely

Sour

ces:

Bel

sky

et a

l., 1

999;

Fed

eral

Inte

rage

ncy

Stre

am R

esto

ratio

n W

orki

ng G

roup

, 200

1; H

uel,

1998

; Nai

man

et a

l., 1

992;

Pric

hard

, 199

8; R

enw

ick

and

Eden

, 199

9; W

inw

ard,

200

0.


water to see prey and detect visual clues used intheir social and reproductive behavior (Cohen,1997).

The ability of riparian areas to stabilizestream flow levels throughout the year is alsocritical to the survival of many fish and otheraquatic species. Fish need enough water instreams to navigate and find food. If a streambecomes polluted, decreasing water levels mayconcentrate pollutants to levels that are too toxicfor fish. High water levels caused by streamflashing can rapidly increase water tempera-tures, which can be fatal to some fish and otheraquatic organisms. Stable water levels providethe moderate water temperatures required forthe growth of fish and the aquatic organismsthat they use for food (Wenger, 1999; Cohen,1997).

Large woody debris that falls into streamstraps sediments and creates pools that provideprotected, shaded habitats for aquatic species(Stuart et al., 1994). For trout, vegetation coverprovides food and places to hide from preda-tors (Burgess, 1985). For many aquatic organ-isms, leaves, twigs, and insects falling from over-hanging trees are an important food source(Hillard and Reedyk, 2000). In naturally forestedareas, retaining at least 50% of the tree canopy iscritical for providing moderated temperatures re-quired for good fish habitat (Whitaker-Hoagland,1998).

TTTTTerererererrestrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat.restrial wildlife habitat. Riparian ar-eas are the main source of moisture for plantsand wildlife within watersheds, especially inarid regions or during the dry season in moretemperate climates. Riparian areas with a highdensity and diversity of foliage, both verticallyand horizontally, can provide habitat and foodfor a diversity of birds and other terrestrial wild-life, including many endangered and threatenedspecies (NRCS/RCA,1996). Many animalsalso use these moist ar-eas as travel corridors be-tween feeding areas(Henry et al., 1999).

Many bird speciesdepend on riparian areasfor food, shelter, andnesting sites. Some birdspecies require riparianareas for nesting, al-though they may forage

for food outside of these areas. Other bird spe-cies prefer nesting in riparian areas even if theycan nest elsewhere. However, degradation ofriparian areas reduces populations of these spe-cies (Bureau of Land Management and Partnersin Flight, 2000).

Appendix 4 provides guidelines for adequatebuffer widths to meet various environmentalobjectives.

Riparian vegetation growth, soil fertility andporosity, water quality, and stream flow condi-tions all affect the ability of fish and wildlife tothrive in streams and their associated riparianareas. Table 4 compares habitat conditions pro-vided by healthy riparian areas to those of de-graded areas.

LLLLLand Managementand Managementand Managementand Managementand ManagementPractices to PrPractices to PrPractices to PrPractices to PrPractices to Protectotectotectotectotect

Riparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasKey components of riparian protection are

maintaining good soil and water conservationpractices across the landscape and preserving,as much as possible, the integrity of the threenatural riparian zones. Specific land manage-ment practices that protect riparian areas in-clude: Maintaining a vegetative cover over the soil

throughout the year Minimizing animal trampling or vehicle traf-

fic on wet soils Avoiding overuse of fertilizers or manure

that may be transported into riparian areas Avoiding applying or dis-posing of toxic chemicals onsoils Protecting against loss ofplant diversity and vitality inriparian areas Protecting against the es-tablishment of exotic or nonwater-loving species in riparianareas Avoiding practices that ar-tificially alter stream flow

Photo by USDA NRCS


Tabl

e 4.

Ind

icat

ors

of A

quat

ic a

nd R

ipar

ian

Wild

life

Indi

cato

r

Wat

er q

ualit

yan

d qu

antit

y

Wat

erTe

mpe

ratu

re

Stre

am P

ools

Sedi

men

tLo

ad

Nut

rient

and

Path

ogen

Con

cent

ratio

n

Wat

erfo

wl

Hab

itat

Hea

lthy

Rip

aria

n A

reas

ad

equa

te w

ater

sup

ply

and

quan

tity

thro

ugho

utth

e ye

ar

pres

ence

of m

acro

inve

rtebr

ate

indi

cato

rs o

fgo

od w

ater

qua

lity

such

as

cadd

is fl

ies

and

may

flies

w

ater

con

tain

s fe

w c

onta

min

ant s

uch

aspe

stic

ides

, he

avy

met

als,

or

exce

ss n

utrie

nts

st

ream

side

veg

etat

ion

cool

s st

ream

s

unde

rcut

stre

amba

nks

prov

ide

shad

e

pres

ence

of a

quat

ic s

peci

es u

sed

for f

ish

food

nu

mer

ous

both

dee

p an

d sh

allo

w s

tream

poo

ls

woo

dy d

ebris

pre

sent

to fo

rm p

ools

c

ompl

ex c

hann

el s

truct

ures

lo

w a

mou

nt o

f sed

imen

ts in

stre

ams

w

ater

is c

lear

or t

ea c

olor

ed

na

tura

l con

cent

ratio

ns o

f nut

rient

s an

dpa

thog

ens

from

wild

life

in a

rea

li

ttle

or n

o ev

iden

ce o

f liv

esto

ck a

cces

s to

stre

ams

na

tive

plan

t com

mun

ities

are

dom

inan

tve

geta

tion

la

nd u

se d

elay

ed u

ntil

chic

ks h

ave

left

the

nest

lan

d is

rest

ed fo

r sev

eral

yea

rs to

allo

w fo

rho

min

g, la

rger

clu

tche

s, a

nd e

arlie

r ne

stin

g

suffi

cien

t blo

cks

of la

nd a

re p

rote

cted

to p

rovi

deco

rrido

rs o

f mov

emen

t and

fora

ging

Mod

erat

ely

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

w

ater

tabl

es fl

uctu

ate

thro

ugho

ut th

eye

ar

som

e co

ntam

inan

ts p

rese

nt in

the

wat

er

so

me

redu

ctio

n in

stre

amsi

de v

eget

atio

n

decr

ease

in th

e av

aila

bilit

y of

aqu

atic

spec

ies

used

for f

ood

de

crea

se in

stre

am p

ools

w

oody

veg

etat

ion

repl

aced

by

herb

aceo

us v

eget

atio

n

s

edim

ent l

evel

s in

stre

ams

incr

easi

ng

nu

trien

t and

pat

hoge

n le

vels

som

ewha

tel

evat

ed

man

ure

pres

ent b

ut n

ot c

once

ntra

ted

on o

r ne

ar s

tream

bank

s

so

me

non-

nativ

e sp

ecie

s ar

e pr

esen

t

land

is u

sed

for g

razi

ng o

r oth

erag

ricul

tura

l use

s ea

ch y

ear

la

nd is

insu

ffici

ently

res

ted

to p

rovi

deve

geta

tion

cove

r for

nes

ting

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

stre

ams

dry

up d

urin

g th

e dr

y se

ason

pr

esen

ce o

f man

croi

nver

tebr

ate

indi

cato

rs o

fpo

or w

ater

qua

lity

w

ater

con

tain

s to

xic

leve

ls o

f sed

imen

ts,

pest

icid

es,

heav

y m

etal

s, o

r nu

trien

ts

exce

ssiv

e aq

uatic

wee

d gr

owth

in s

tream

s

st

ream

tem

pera

ture

s ar

e hi

gh

lack

of s

tream

side

veg

etat

ion

lo

w d

isso

love

d ox

ygen

leve

ls

cool

wat

er a

quat

ic s

peci

es r

epla

ced

by w

arm

wat

er s

peci

es

lack

of a

quat

ic s

peci

es to

pro

vide

food

for f

ish

lo

ss o

f stre

am p

ools

lo

w a

mou

nts

of w

oody

deb

ris d

ue to

loss

of

trees

ch

anne

l stra

ight

enin

g or

mod

ifica

tion

tosi

mpl

ify c

hann

el s

truct

ure

st

ream

mud

dy lo

okin

g be

caus

e of

sed

imen

tlo

ad

float

ing

alga

l mat

s or

scu

m m

ay b

e pr

esen

t

hi

gh c

once

ntra

tions

of n

utrie

ts a

nd p

atho

gens

in w

ater

ex

tens

ive

amou

nts

of m

anur

e on

ban

ks a

nd in

stre

ams

no

n-na

tive

spec

ies

are

dom

inan

t veg

etat

ion

lan

d is

gra

zed

or m

owed

whi

le w

ater

fow

l are

nest

ing

veg

etat

ion

regr

owth

doe

s no

t pro

vide

suf

ficie

ntco

ver f

or n

estin

g

cont

inue

d on

pag

e 15

cont

inue

d on

pag

e 15

cont

inue

d on

pag

e 15

cont

inue

d on

pag

e 15

cont

inue

d on

pag

e 15


Tabl

e 4.

Ind

icat

ors

of A

quat

ic a

nd R

ipar

ian

Wild

life

(con

td.)

Indi

cato

r

Fish

Hab

itat

Inse

ct a

ndIn

vert

ebra

teH

abita

t

Mam

mal

Div

ersi

ty

Mac

ro-

inve

rteb

rate

Div

ersi

ty

Bird

Div

ersi

ty

Fish

Div

ersi

ty

Hea

lthy

Rip

aria

n A

reas

fis

h co

ver p

rovi

ded

by w

oody

deb

ris,

over

hang

ing

vege

tatio

n, b

ank

cobb

les,

poo

ls,

riffle

s, a

nd u

nder

cut b

anks

w

ater

tem

pera

ture

s m

oder

ated

by

vege

tatio

nco

ver

m

inim

al s

oil l

oss

and

pollu

tion

g

ood

supp

ly o

f aqu

atic

inse

ct s

peci

es fo

r fis

hto

eat

ha

bita

t pro

vide

d by

woo

dy fi

ne d

ebris

,su

bmer

ged

logs

, lea

f pac

ks, u

nder

cut b

anks

and

cobb

les

tra

ils, t

rack

s, fe

edin

g ar

eas,

and

res

ting

area

sar

e pr

esen

t

pr

edom

inat

ely

pollu

tion

into

lere

nt s

peci

es s

uch

as c

addi

sflie

s, m

ayfli

es, s

tone

flies

and

riff

lebe

etle

s

pr

esen

ce o

f bird

nes

ts

spec

ies

that

are

obl

igat

e de

pend

ent o

n rip

aria

nar

eas

are

pres

ent,

for e

xam

ple

Com

mon

Yello

wth

rout

, Son

g Sp

arro

w, a

nd W

illow

Flyc

atch

er

pr

edom

inan

ce o

f nat

ive

spec

ies

po

llutio

n in

tole

rent

spe

cies

, su

ch a

s tro

ut,

smal

l mou

th b

ass

and

sunf

ish

are

pres

ent

Mod

erat

ely

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

de

crea

se in

the

type

s of

fish

cov

erav

aila

ble

so

me

soil

loss

and

pol

lutio

n

wat

er le

vels

are

uns

tabl

e

de

crea

se in

the

amou

nt o

f hab

itat s

ites

avai

labl

e

pr

edom

inan

tly m

oder

atel

y to

lere

ntsp

ecie

s su

ch a

s da

mse

l flie

s,dr

agon

flies

, aq

uatic

sow

bugs

, bl

ackf

ish

and

cray

fish

de

crea

sing

pre

senc

e of

obl

igat

e bi

rdsp

ecie

s p

rese

nce

of ri

paria

n de

pend

ent b

irdsp

ecie

s su

ch a

s go

ldfin

ch,

bank

swal

low,

gro

sbea

k, o

r red

-hea

ded

woo

dpec

ker

Deg

rade

d R

ipar

ian

Are

as

litt

le o

r no

fish

cove

r pro

vide

d

wat

er c

onta

min

ated

by

sedi

men

ts a

ndpo

llutio

n

stre

ams

are

ephe

mer

al

fe

w o

r no

hab

itat s

ites

pres

ent

if

mac

roin

verte

brat

es a

re p

rese

nt,

pred

omin

antly

pol

lutio

n to

lera

nt s

peci

es s

uch

as m

idge

s, c

rane

flies

, ho

rsef

lies,

leec

hes,

aqua

tic e

arth

wor

ms,

and

tubi

ficid

wor

ms

la

ck o

f bird

nes

t

if bi

rds

are

pres

ent,

spec

ies

are

sim

ilar

toup

land

are

as

na

tive

spec

ies

are

not p

rese

nt

pollu

tion

tole

rent

spe

cies

suc

h as

car

ppr

edom

inat

e

Sour

ces:

Bel

sky

et a

l., 1

999;

Bur

eau

of L

and

Man

agem

ent a

nd P

artn

ers

in F

light

, 200

0; F

eder

al In

tera

genc

y St

ream

Res

tora

tion

Wor

king

Gro

up, 2

001;

Hue

l, 19

98; M

osle

y et

al.,

199

8; P

richa

rd, 1

998;

Sove

ll et a

l., 2

000;

Win

war

d, 2

000.


Community WCommunity WCommunity WCommunity WCommunity WatershedatershedatershedatershedatershedCollaboration to PrCollaboration to PrCollaboration to PrCollaboration to PrCollaboration to Protectotectotectotectotect

Riparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian AreasRiparian Areas

Watershed councils lay the cultural founda-tions for a lasting way of life. They establishthe tradition of responsible speech, of civildemocracy, and of making decisions basedon factual information and well-articulated val-ues. They embody the long-term perspec-tive of sustainability, seeking not quick fixesbut deeper understanding and new alterna-tives.

Alan T. During (quoted in Wood et al.,1997)

Farmers, ranchers, and conservationists of-ten become embroiled in debates over the use ofriparian areas. If you are a farmer or rancher,you may be concerned about the loss of accessto grazing land and watering areas as well ascosts associated with management practices,such as the installation and maintenance offences. If you are a conservationist or environ-mentalist, you may be concerned about the lossof habitat for birds, wildlife, and aquatic spe-cies that depend on this diverse and fragile eco-system. If you are a downstream water user,you are no doubt concerned about the contami-nation of drinking and recreational waters withnutrients, pathogens, and pesticides.

Pinpointing sources and causes of ripariandegradation and the associated degradation ofwater quality is very contentious. Farmers andranchers often assert that livestock grazing inriparian areas cause less damage than construc-tion activities, septic tanks, and industrial dis-charges. Conservationists often counter this as-sertion by contending that agriculture is the pri-mary source of nonpoint pollution in many ar-eas, and they maintain that excluding agricul-tural practices from riparian areas is the bestmethod for protecting wildlife habitat and wa-ter quality.

To work together in restoring riparian ar-eas, community members need to understandthat riparian areas are only protected if all landusers across the watershed work together. Get-ting this cooperation is often difficult since wa-tershed users can easily blame others for causing

water pollution and riparian degradation. Mean-while, those involved in implementing good wa-tershed and riparian management practices of-ten go unnoticed and under-compensated.

Why is this so? Most watershed and ripariandegradation is non-point source pollution, whichby definition means that it is difficult to identifyspecific land use practices responsible for thispollution. Secondly, good upland and ripariangrazing management practices in one part of thewatershed cannot, in most cases, compensate forpoor land management practices in other partsof the watershed. Thirdly, and possibly mostimportantly, land users who implement soil andwater conservation practices often are asked tobear the costs of implementing changes whileobtaining few of the benefits. This disparity be-tween those who pay and those who benefit of-ten discourages farmers and other landownersfrom implementing soil conservation and ripar-ian management practices.

For more information on the economic costsand benefits of riparian buffer protection,please see Appendix 5.

The Bureau of Land Management, the U.S.Forest Service, and the Natural Resources Con-servation Service understand that programs de-signed to promote soil and water conservationpractices are often contentious. In their jointletter announcing the initiation of a program tohelp restore riparian areas (PLF, 2002), the agen-cies state that riparian restoration:

will not happen by regulation, changes in thelaw, more money, or any of the normalbureaucratic approaches. It will only occurthrough the integration of ecological, eco-nomic, and social factors and participation ofaffected interests.

For watershed and riparian managementprograms to be effective, they should includethe following elements (Wood et al., 1997): Active involvement by community members

from across the watershed who represent abroad array of perspectives and problems

Collaborative identification of program ob-jectives, such as protecting high value re-sources and solving problems that mostthreaten the sustainability of the watershed

Education and outreach


Community access to and sharing of factualinformation on watershed economic, envi-ronmental, and social conditions

Willingness to discuss and address critical butoften contentious resource issues such aspopulation growth, overconsumption, en-dangered species, and pollution

Willingness to examine and implement long-term ecological solutions to watershed prob-lems rather than look to technologicalquick-fixes

Willingness of landowners and land man-agers to work together to develop a water-shed or regional level coordinated approachto watershed management that will addressupstream-downstream concerns and theneed for management practices to be coor-dinated throughout the watershed to pro-tect aquatic environments and provide con-tinuous corridors for wildlife movement

Baseline assessments and on-going monitor-ing of watershed and riparian conditions

A combination of positive incentives (eco-nomic, personal values, prestige) and disin-centives (regulations and policies) motivateinvolvement more than either one or theother alone (Alexander, 1993).

SummarSummarSummarSummarSummaryyyyyThere is much scientific literature to docu-

ment the importance of watershed and ripar-ian management practices to the preservationof water quality, riparian vegetation, and thewildlife of riparian and aquatic areas. How-ever, for farmers to be willing and able to ad-equately protect these vulnerable environments,these environmental benefits need to be balancedwith economic benefits that farmers, ranchers,and other landowners may obtain from chang-ing their land management practices. Down-stream water usersincluding people whodrink, cook, and bathe with water, people whouse lakes and streams to boat, swim, and fish,and people who gain property value from theproximity of their home to a lake or riveralsoneed to be willing to place a value on clean waterand protected riparian habitats. As all commu-nity members become aware of the multiple ben-efits provided by good watershed management,they can work together to develop a consensus

Allen, Mike, Cathy Walker, and Luke Pen.2000. Wetlands and Weeds. Water Notesfor Wetlands Management. Water andRivers Commission. Government ofWestern Australia. Accessed at:

Alexander, S.V. 1993. Effective educationprograms change behaviorLessonslearned from the Nonpoint Source Pro-gram. p. 337351. In: Riparian Ecosys-tems in the Humid U.S.: Functions, Valuesand Management. National Association ofConservation Districts. Washington, D.C.

Belsky, A.J., A. Matzke, and S. Uselman. 1999.Survey of livestock influences on streamand riparian ecosystems in the westernUnited States. Journal of Soil and WaterConservation. Vol. 54, No. 1. p. 419431.

Berton, V. 1998. Ten Years of SARE. Sustain-able Agiculture Research and EducationProgram, CREES, U.S. Department ofAgriculture. Washington, D.C. p. 8283.

Briggs, M. 1993. Evaluating degraded riparianecosystems to determine the potentialeffectiveness of revegetation. In: B.A.Roundy, E. D. McArthur, J.S. Haley, andD.K Mann. 1995. Proceedings: WildlandShrub and Arid Land Restoration Sympo-sium. General Technical Report INT-GTR-315. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, Intermountain ResearchStation, Ogden, UT.

Bureau of Land Management and Partners inFlight. 2000. Birds as indicators of ripar-ian vegetation condition in the westernU.S. The Aurora Project. Accessed at:.

Burgess, S.A. 1985. Some effects of streamhabitat improvement on the aquatic andriparian community of a small mountainstream. p. 223246. In: J.A. Gore (ed.)The restoration of rivers and streams.Butterworth Publishers, Boston, MA.

on a set of sustainable land management objec-tives.

ReferencesReferencesReferencesReferencesReferences

http://www.wrc.wa.gov.au/public/WaterNotes/pdf/1.pdfhttp://www.wrc.wa.gov.au/public/WaterNotes/pdf/1.pdfhttp://www.wrc.wa.gov.au/public/WaterNotes/pdf/1.pdfhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/monitor.htmlhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/monitor.html


Clark, E.A. 1998. Landscape variables affectinglivestock impacts on water quaity in thehumid temperate zone. Canadian Journalof Plant Sciences, Vol. 78. p. 181190.

Cohen, R. 1997. Fact Sheets: Functions andValues of Riparian Areas. MassachusettsDepartment of Fisheries, Wildlife andEnvironmental Law Enforcement.Acessed at: .

Cole, D.W. 1981. Nitrogen upatake and trans-location by forest ecosystems. p. 219232.In: F.E. Clark and T. Rosswall (eds.)Terrestrial Nitrogen Cycles. EcologicalBulletin. Vol. 33.

CRJC. 2001. Riparian Buffers for the Connecti-cut River Watershed. Connecticut RiverJoint Commission. Accessed at: .

Dillaha, T.A., J.H. Sherrard, D. Lee, S.Mostaghimi, and V.O. Shanholtz. 1988.Evaluation of vegetated filter strips as abest management practice for feedlots.Journal of the Water Pollution ControlFederation, Vol. 60. p. 12311238.

Edwards, R. 2000. The Hidden River in Ripar-ian Areas. p. 103104. In: Summit 2000:Washington Private Forests Forum.University of Washington, College ofForest Resources. Seattle, WA. Elec-tronic Proceedings. Accessed at: .

Elmore, W. 1992. Riparian responses to grazingpractices. In: R.J. Naiman (ed.) Water-shed Management: BalancingSustainability and Environmental Change.Springer-Verlag. New York.

Elmore, W., and R.L. Beschta. 2000. RiparianAreas: Perceptions in Management.Aurora Project. A production of theBureau of Land Management and theU.S. Department of Interior. Accessedat: .

Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Work-ing Group. 2001. Stream Corridor Resto-ration: Principles, Processes, and Prac-

tices. Part 653 of the National EngineeringHandbook. USDA-Natural ResourcesConservation Service. Accessed at:.

Gebhardt, K.A., C. Bohn, S. Jensen, and W.S.Platts. 1989. Use of hydrology in riparianclassification. p. 5360. In: R.E.Gresswell, B.A. Barton, and J.L. Kershner(eds.) Practical Approaches to RiparianResource Management: An EducationWorkshop. U.S. Bureau of Land Man-agement, Billings, MT.

Green, D.M., and J.B. Kauffman. 1989. Nutri-ent cycling at the land-water interface: Theimportance of the riparian zone. In: R.E.Gresswell, B.A. Barton, and J.L. Kershner(eds.) Practical Approaches to RiparianResource Management: An EducationWorkshop. U.S. Bureau of Land Manage-ment. Billings, MT. p. 6168.

Gilliam, J.W. 1994. Riparian wetlands andwater quality. Journal of EnvironmentalQuality. Vol. 23. p. 896900.

Henery, A.C., Jr., D.A. Hosack, C.W. Johnson,D. Rol, and G. Bentrup. 1999. Conserva-tion corridors in the United States: Ben-efits and planning guidelines. Journal ofSoil and Water Conservation. Vol. 54, No.4. p. 645650.

Hillard, C., and S. Reedyk. 2000. RiparianArea Management. Water Quality Mat-ters. April. Agriculture and Agri-FoodCanada. Accessed at: .

Huel, D. 1998. Streambank Stewardship: ASaskatchewan Riparian Project.Saskatchewan Wetland ConservationCorporation. Regina,Saskatchewan.Accessed at: .

Lentz, R. 1998. Cattle, grass, and streams: Canthey exist together as a sustainable ecosys-tem? North Central Region SARE 1998Annual Report. Project FNC97-177. Ac-cessed at: .

http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/river/rivfstoc.htmhttp://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/river/rivfstoc.htmhttp://www.crjc.orghttp://www.crjc.orghttp://www.cfr.washington.edu/outreach/summit/proceedings.htmlhttp://www.cfr.washington.edu/outreach/summit/proceedings.htmlhttp://www.cfr.washington.edu/outreach/summit/proceedings.htmlhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/percepmn.htmlhttp://www.mtnvisions.com/Aurora/percepmn.htmlhttp://www.usda.gov/stream_restoration/newtofc.htmhttp://www.usda.gov/stream_restoration/newtofc.htmhttp://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/water/facts/ripariane.pdfhttp://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/water/facts/ripariane.pdfhttp://www.agr.gc.ca/pfra/water/facts/ripariane.pdfhttp://www.wetland.sk.ca /pdfs/landowner/streamstew_FULL .pdfhttp://www.wetland.sk.ca /pdfs/landowner/streamstew_FULL .pdfhttp://www.wetland.sk.ca /pdfs/landowner/streamstew_FULL .pdfhttp://www.sare.org/projects/san_db_viewer.asp?id=459http://www.sare.org/projects/san_db_viewer.asp?id=459


Luginbuhl, J.M., J.T. Green, Jr., M.H. Poore,and A.P. Conrad. 2000. Use of goats tomanage vegetation in cattle pastures in theAppalachian region of North Carolina.Sheep and Goat Research Journal. Vol. 16,No. 3. p. 124130.

Macon, D. 2002. Grazing for Change: Rangeand Watershed Management SuccessStories in California. CaliforniaCattlemens Association, Sacramento, CA.

Martin, D.W., and J.C. Chambers. 2001. Restor-ing degraded riparian meadows: biomassand species responses. Journal of RangeManagement. Vol. 54, No. 3. p. 284291.

Mosley, M., R.D. Harmel, R. Blackwell, and T.Bidwell. 1998. Grazing and riparian areamanagement. p. 4753. In: M.S. Cooper(ed.) Riparian Area Management Hand-book. Oklahoma Cooperative ExtensionService, Division of Agricultural Servicesand Natural Resources at Oklahoma StateUniversity and the Oklahoma Conserva-tion Commission. Accessed at: .

Naiman, R.J., and H. Decamps. 1997. Theecology of interfaces: Riparian zones.Annual Review of Ecology and Systemat-ics. Vol. 28. p. 621658.

Naiman, R.J., T.J. Beechie, L.E. Brenda, D.R.Berg, P.A. Bisson, L.H. MacDonald, M.D.OCommor, P.L. Olson, and E.A. Steel.1992. Fundamental elements of ecologi-cally healthy watersheds in the PacificNorthwest Coastal ecoregion. p. 127188. In: R.J. Naiman (ed.) WatershedManagement: Balancing Sustainabilityand Environmental Change, Springer-Verlag. New York.

Nakao, M., and B. Sohngen. 2000. The effect ofsite quality on the costs of reducing soilerosion with riparian buffers. Journal ofSoil and Water Conservation. Vol. 55,No. 2. p. 231237.

National Research Council. 2002. RiparianAreas: Functions and Strategies forManagement. National Academy Press,Washington, D.C. Accessed at: .

NRCS. 1998. Riparian Herbaceous Cover.Natural