Setting Priorities for Research on Pollution Reduction Functions of Agricultural Buffers

The success of buffer installation initiatives and programs to reduce nonpoint source pollution of streams on agricultural lands will depend the ability of local planners to locate and design buffers for specific circumstances with substantial and predictable results. Current predictive capabilities are inadequate, and major sources of uncertainty remain. An assessment of these uncertainties cautions that there is greater risk of overestimating buffer impact than underestimating it. Priorities for future research are proposed that will lead more quickly to major advances in predictive capabilities. Highest priority is given for work on the surface runoff filtration function, which is almost universally important to the amount of pollution reduction expected from buffer installation and for which there remain major sources of uncertainty for predicting level of impact. Foremost uncertainties surround the extent and consequences of runoff flow concentration and pollutant accumulation. Other buffer functions, including filtration of groundwater nitrate and stabilization of channel erosion sources of sediments, may be important in some regions. However, uncertainty surrounds our ability to identify and quantify the extent of site conditions where buffer installation can substantially reduce stream pollution in these ways. Deficiencies in predictive models reflect gaps in experimental information as well as technology to account for spatial heterogeneity of pollutant sources, pathways, and buffer capabilities across watersheds. Since completion of a comprehensive watershed-scale buffer model is probably far off, immediate needs call for simpler techniques to gage the probable impacts of buffer installation at local scales.     

INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT OF IN‐FIELD,EDGE‐OF‐FIELD,AND AFTER‐FIELD BUFFERS1

This review summarizes how conservation benefits are maximized when in‐field and edge‐of‐field buffers are integrated with each other and with other conservation practices such as residue management and grade control structures. Buffers improve both surface and subsurface water quality. Soils under permanent buffer vegetation generally have higher organic carbon concentrations, higher infiltration capacities, and more active microbial populations than similar soils under annual cropping. Sediment can be trapped with rather narrow buffers, but extensive buffers are better at transforming dissolved pollutants. Buffers improve surface runoff water quality most efficiently when flows through them are slow, shallow, and diffuse. Vegetative barriers ‐ narrow strips of dense, erect grass ‐ can slow and spread concentrated runoff. Subsurface processing is best on shallow soils that provide increased hydrologic contact between the ground water plume and buffer vegetation. Vegetated ditches and constructed wetlands can act as “after‐field” conservation buffers, processing pollutants that escape from fields. For these buffers to function efficiently, it is critical that in‐field and edge‐of‐field practices limit peak runoff rate and sediment yield in order to maximize contact time with buffer vegetation and minimize the need for cleanout excavation that destroys vegetation and its processing capacity.     

Agroforestry buffers for nonpoint source pollution reductions from agricultural watersheds

Despite increased attention and demand for the adoption of agroforestry practices throughout the world, rigorous long-term scientific studies confirming environmental benefits from the use of agroforestry practices are limited. The objective was to examine nonpoint-source pollution (NPSP) reduction as influenced by agroforestry buffers in watersheds under grazing and row crop management. The grazing study consists of six watersheds in the Central Mississippi Valley wooded slopes and the row crop study site consists of three watersheds in a paired watershed design in Central Claypan areas. Runoff water samples were analyzed for sediment, total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP) for the 2004 to 2008 period. Results indicate that agroforestry and grass buffers on grazed and row crop management sites significantly reduce runoff, sediment, TN, and TP losses to streams. Buffers in association with grazing and row crop management reduced runoff by 49 and 19%, respectively, during the study period as compared with respective control treatments. Average sediment loss for grazing and row crop management systems was 13.8 and 17.9 kg ha yr, respectively. On average, grass and agroforestry buffers reduced sediment, TN, and TP losses by 32, 42, and 46% compared with the control treatments. Buffers were more effective in the grazing management practice than row crop management practice. These differences could in part be attributed to the differences in soils, management, and landscape features. Results from this study strongly indicate that agroforestry and grass buffers can be designed to improve water quality while minimizing the amount of land taken out of production.     

EFFECTS OF A DAIRY LOAFING LOT-BUFFER STRIP ON STREAM WATER QUALITY1

ABSTRACT: A loafing or sacrifice lot is an area located outside of the free stall barn, where a dairy herd spends several hours per day. Sacrifice lots are usually denuded of vegetation and have high concentrations of manure and urine that can contribute significant amounts of sediment, nutrients, and pathogens to nearby surface waters. In this study, stream water quality impacted by direct runoff from a sacrifice lot was monitored for a period of 20 months. Ambient stream water quality was monitored by grab sampling upstream and downstream of the sacrifice lot. During runoff events, stream water quality downstream of the sacrifice lot was monitored with an automatic sampler. Laboratory analyses were conducted for total suspended solids and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus compounds). A grass filter strip (GFS) was installed as a buffer downslope of the sacrifice lot 10 months into the study period. The impact of the buffer strip on the standardized pollutant concentrations and loads was evaluated using the non-parametric Wilcoxon test. The Wilcoxon test indicated that there was no significant difference (α= 0.05) in the standardized yield of sediment and dissolved pollutants before and after the GFS installation, except for phosphate-phosphorus and filtered total phosphorus concentrations, and sediment-bound total phosphorus and total kjeldahl nitrogen loads that decreased significantly. However, load decrease could have been partially caused by the smaller rainfall volumes after the GFS installation as compared to the existing condition.     

Sediment retention in rangeland riparian buffers

Controlling nonpoint-source sediment pollution is a common goal of riparian management, but there is little quantitative information about factors affecting performance of rangeland riparian buffers. This study evaluated the influence of vegetation characteristics, buffer width, slope, and stubble height on sediment retention in a Montana foothills meadow. Three vegetation types (sedge wetland, rush transition, bunchgrass upland) were compared using twenty-six 6- x 2-m plots spanning 2 to 20% slopes. Plots were clipped moderately (10-15 cm stubble) or severely (2-5 cm stubble). Sediment (silt + fine sand) was added to simulated overland runoff 6, 2, or 1 m above the bottom of each plot. Runoff was sampled at 15-s to > 5-min intervals until sediment concentrations approached background levels. Sediment retention was affected strongly by buffer width and moderately by vegetation type and slope, but was not affected by stubble height. Mean sediment retention ranged from 63 to > 99% for different combinations of buffer width and vegetation type, with 94 to 99% retention in 6-m-wide buffers regardless of vegetation type or slope. Results suggest that rangeland riparian buffers should be at least 6 m wide, with dense vegetation, to be effective and reliable. Narrower widths, steep slopes, and sparse vegetation increase risk of sediment delivery to streams. Vegetation characteristics such as biomass, cover, or density are more appropriate than stubble height for judging capacity to remove sediment from overland runoff, though stubble height may indirectly indicate livestock impacts that can affect buffer performance.     

Major factors influencing the efficacy of vegetated buffers on sediment trapping: a review and analysis

Sediment is a major agricultural pollutant threatening water quality. Vegetated buffers, including vegetative filter strips, riparian buffers, and grassed waterways, are best management practices (BMPs) installed in many areas to filter sediments from tailwaters, and deter sediment transport to water bodies. Along with reducing sediment transport, the filters also help trap sediment bound nutrients and pesticides. The objectives of this study were: (i) to review vegetated buffer efficacy on sediment trapping, and (ii) to develop statistical models to investigate the major factors influencing sediment trapping. A range of sediment trapping efficacies was found in a review of over 80 representative BMP experiments. A synthesis of the literature regarding the effects of vegetated buffers on sediment trapping is needed. The meta-analysis results based on the limited data showed that buffer width and slope are two major factors influencing BMPs efficacy of vegetated buffers on sediment trapping. Regardless of the area ratio of buffer to agricultural field, a 10 m buffer and a 9% slope optimized the sediment trapping capability of vegetated buffers.     

Riparian buffer strips as a multifunctional management tool in agricultural landscapes: introduction

Catchment riparian areas are considered key zones to target mitigation measures aimed at interrupting the movement of diffuse substances from agricultural land to surface waters. Hence, unfertilized buffer strips have become a widely studied and implemented "edge of field" mitigation measure assumed to provide an effective physical barrier against nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and sediment transfer. To ease the legislative process, these buffers are often narrow mandatory strips along streams and rivers, across different riparian soil water conditions, between bordering land uses of differing pollution burdens, and without prescribed buffer management. It would be easy to criticize such regulation for not providing the opportunity for riparian ecosystems to maximize their provision for a wider range of ecosystem goods and services. The scientific basis for judging the best course of action in designing and placing buffers to enhance their multifunctionality has slowly increased over the last five years. This collection of papers aims to add to this body of knowledge by giving examples of studies related to riparian buffer management and assessment throughout Europe. This introductory paper summarizes discussion sessions and 13 selected papers from a workshop held in Ballater, UK, highlighting research on riparian buffers brought together under the EU COST Action 869 knowledge exchange program. The themes addressed are (i) evidence of catchment- to national-scale effectiveness, (ii) ecological functioning linking terrestrial and aquatic habitats, (iii) modeling tools for assessment of effectiveness and costs, and (iv) process understanding enabling management and manipulation to enhance pollutant retention in buffers. The combined understanding led us to consider four principle key questions to challenge buffer strip research and policy.     

Water Quality Functions of Riparian Forest Buffers in Chesapeake Bay Watersheds

/ Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, USA, have agreed to reduce nutrient loadings to Chesapeake Bay by 40% by the year 2000. This requires control of nonpoint sources of nutrients, much of which comes from agriculture. Riparian forest buffer systems (RFBS) provide effective control of nonpoint source (NPS) pollution in some types of agricultural watersheds. Control of NPS pollution is dependent on the type of pollutant and the hydrologic connection between pollution sources, the RFBS, and the stream. Water quality improvements are most likely in areas of where most of the excess precipitation moves across, in, or near the root zone of the RFBS. In areas such as the Inner Coastal Plain and Piedmont watersheds with thin soils, RFBS should retain 50%-90% of the total loading of nitrate in shallow groundwater, sediment in surface runoff, and total N in both surface runoff and groundwater. Retention of phosphorus is generally much less. In regions with deeper soils and/or greater regional groundwater recharge (such as parts of the Piedmont and the Valley and Ridge), RFBS water quality improvements are probably much less. The expected levels of pollutant control by RFBS are identified for each of nine physiographic provinces of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Issues related to of establishment, sustainability, and management are also discussed.KEY WORDS: Riparian forest buffers; Chesapeake Bay; Nonpoint source pollution; Nitrogen; Phosphorus; Sediment     

Application of a Multi-Objective Optimization Method to Provide Least Cost Alternatives for NPS Pollution Control

Nonpoint source (NPS) pollutants such as phosphorus, nitrogen, sediment, and pesticides are the foremost sources of water contamination in many of the water bodies in the Midwestern agricultural watersheds. This problem is expected to increase in the future with the increasing demand to provide corn as grain or stover for biofuel production. Best management practices (BMPs) have been proven to effectively reduce the NPS pollutant loads from agricultural areas. However, in a watershed with multiple farms and multiple BMPs feasible for implementation, it becomes a daunting task to choose a right combination of BMPs that provide maximum pollution reduction for least implementation costs. Multi-objective algorithms capable of searching from a large number of solutions are required to meet the given watershed management objectives. Genetic algorithms have been the most popular optimization algorithms for the BMP selection and placement. However, previous BMP optimization models did not study pesticide which is very commonly used in corn areas. Also, with corn stover being projected as a viable alternative for biofuel production there might be unintended consequences of the reduced residue in the corn fields on water quality. Therefore, there is a need to study the impact of different levels of residue management in combination with other BMPs at a watershed scale. In this research the following BMPs were selected for placement in the watershed: (a) residue management, (b) filter strips, (c) parallel terraces, (d) contour farming, and (e) tillage. We present a novel method of combing different NPS pollutants into a single objective function, which, along with the net costs, were used as the two objective functions during optimization. In this study we used BMP tool, a database that contains the pollution reduction and cost information of different BMPs under consideration which provides pollutant loads during optimization. The BMP optimization was performed using a NSGA-II based search method. The model was tested for the selection and placement of BMPs in Wildcat Creek Watershed, a corn dominated watershed located in northcentral Indiana, to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, sediment, and pesticide losses from the watershed. The Pareto optimal fronts (plotted as spider plots) generated between the optimized objective functions can be used to make management decisions to achieve desired water quality goals with minimum BMP implementation and maintenance cost for the watershed. Also these solutions were geographically mapped to show the locations where various BMPs should be implemented. The solutions with larger pollution reduction consisted of buffer filter strips that lead to larger pollution reduction with greater costs compared to other alternatives.     

Landscape Planning for Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Reduction III: Assessing Phosphorus and Sediment Reduction Potential

Riparian buffers have the potential to improve stream water quality in agricultural landscapes. This potential may vary in response to landscape characteristics such as soils, topography, land use, and human activities, including legacies of historical land management. We built a predictive model to estimate the sediment and phosphorus load reduction that should be achievable following the implementation of riparian buffers; then we estimated load reduction potential for a set of 1598 watersheds (average 54 km²) in Wisconsin. Our results indicate that land cover is generally the most important driver of constituent loads in Wisconsin streams, but its influence varies among pollutants and according to the scale at which it is measured. Physiographic (drainage density) variation also influenced sediment and phosphorus loads. The effect of historical land use on present-day channel erosion and variation in soil texture are the most important sources of phosphorus and sediment that riparian buffers cannot attenuate. However, in most watersheds, a large proportion (approximately 70%) of these pollutants can be eliminated from streams with buffers. Cumulative frequency distributions of load reduction potential indicate that targeting pollution reduction in the highest 10% of Wisconsin watersheds would reduce total phosphorus and sediment loads in the entire state by approximately 20%. These results support our approach of geographically targeting nonpoint source pollution reduction at multiple scales, including the watershed scale.     

Ability of Remnant Riparian Forests,With and Without Grass Filters,to Buffer Concentrated Surface Runoff1

Knight, Kris W., Richard C. Schultz, Cathy M. Mabry, and Thomas M. Isenhart, 2010. Ability of Remnant Riparian Forests, With and Without Grass Filters, to Buffer Concentrated Surface Runoff. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 46(2):311-322. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2010.00422.x Abstract: Riparian forest buffers established according to accepted conservation practice standards have been recommended as one of the most effective tools for mitigating nonpoint source pollution. The midwestern United States is characterized by many kilometers of narrow, naturally occurring forests along streams. However, little is known about the relative effectiveness of these remnant forests compared with these newly established buffers. This study compared the ability of naturally occurring remnant forests with and without adjacent planted grass filters to buffer concentrated flow paths (CFPs) originating in crop fields along first- and second-order streams in three northeast Missouri watersheds. Remnant forests breached by runoff through CFPs were narrower than those that dispersed 100% of the CFPs. Remnant forests with adjacent grass buffers were nearly twice the width as those without grass filters. We also found that CFPs, which developed within remnant forests and at the base of in-field grass waterways, were potential sources of sediments to streams. Methods to mitigate these CFPs warrant further investigation. Our study suggests that although these natural remnant forests provide substantial buffering capacity, both improved management and/or the addition of an adjacent grass filter would improve water quality by reducing sediment loss to streams. Inferences can be used to inform the design and management of similar conservation buffer systems within the region.     

Reduction of stream sediment concentration by a riparian buffer: filtering of road runoff in disturbed headwater basins of montane mainland southeast Asia

We determined the extent that a riparian buffer reduces stream suspended sediment concentrations by filtering road runoff during 18 rain events in a 2.5-ha, multi-use watershed in northern Thailand. The dominant buffer species was the perennial sedge Fimbristylis aphylla Zoll. ex Steud. (Cyperaceae). We monitored stream sediment concentration for situations where road runoff either flowed into the riparian buffer or was diverted directly into the stream (buffer and no buffer scenarios). These data were used to develop the following relationships between instantaneous stream sediment concentration (Ci) and discharge (Qi): Ci= 28.329Qi(0.851) (buffer scenario) and Ci= 22.265Qi(1.579) (no buffer scenario). Using these functions to calculate total event suspended concentrations, we determined that the buffer reduced suspended sediment concentration by 34 to 87%, for the range of events monitored. Removal of sediment from runoff generated on a 2.4-m-wide, 165-m-long unpaved road section was achieved principally via ponding, which reduced the transport capacity as flow entered the relatively flat, saturated buffer. Sediment deposition occurred primarily within the first 10 m of the buffer. Some sediment was also deposited on the fillslope leading to the buffer. Maximum road sediment concentration during the largest buffer event approached 100,000 mg L(-1). Meanwhile, the corresponding maximum stream suspended sediment concentration was <4000 mg L(-1). In contrast, maximum stream concentrations when flow bypassed the buffer during smaller events were commonly 4000 to 7000 mg L(-1). Naturally occurring buffers represent an economical means of mitigating road-related impacts in upland basins in Southeast Asia, particularly if combined with measures limiting sediment and runoff production on contributing road sections.     

Efficacy of Vegetated Buffers in Preventing Transport of Fecal Coliform Bacteria from Pasturelands

An experimental study was conducted in Tillamook, Oregon, USA, to quantify the effectiveness of edge-of-field vegetated buffers for reducing transport of fecal coliform bacteria (FCB) from agricultural fields amended with dairy cow manure. Installation of vegetated buffers on loamy soils dramatically reduced the bacterial contamination of runoff water from manure-treated pasturelands, but the size of the vegetated buffer was not an important determinant of bacterial removal efficiency. Only 10% of the runoff samples collected from treatment cells having vegetated buffers exhibited FCB concentrations >200 colony forming units (cfu)/100 mL (a common water quality standard value), and the median concentration for all cells containing vegetated buffers was only 6 cfu/100 mL. The presence of a vegetated buffer of any size, from 1 to 25 m, generally reduced the median FCB concentration in runoff by more than 99%. Results for FCB load calculations were similar. Our results suggest that where substantial FCB contamination of runoff occurs from manure-treated pasturelands, it might be disproportionately associated with specific field or management conditions, such as the presence of soils that exhibit low water infiltration and generate larger volumes of runoff or the absence of a vegetated buffer. Buffer size regulations that do not consider such differences might not be efficient or effective in reducing bacterial contamination of runoff.     

EVALUATION OF Ann AGNPS NITROGEN LOADING IN AN AGRICULTURAL WATERSHED1

ABSTRACT: Pollutants entering a water system can be very destructive to the health of that system. Best Management Practices (BMPs) are used to reduce these pollutants, but understanding the most effective practices is very difficult. Watershed models are an effective tool to aid in the decision‐making process of selecting the BMPs that are most effective in reducing the pollutant loading and are also the most cost effective. The Annualized Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution model (AnnAGNPS 2.0) is a technological tool that can be used to estimate watershed response to agricultural management practices. The main purpose of this paper is to test the performance of AnnAGNPS 2.0 on nitrogen loading using comparisons with measurements from the Deep Hollow watershed of the Mississippi Delta Management Systems Evaluation Area (MDMSEA) project. Previous work has demonstrated the capability of the model to simulate runoff and sediment. From sensitivity analyses in this study, initial nitrogen concentration in the soil and crop nitrogen uptake had the most impact on the nitrogen loadings. AnnAGNPS simulations of monthly nitrogen loadings are poor. However, statistical test (t‐test) showed that the predicted nitrogen loading is not significantly different from observed nitrogen loading at the 95 percent level of confidence.     

APPLICATION OF THE CONTINUOUS STORMWATER POLLUTION SIMULATION SYSTEM (CSPSS): PHILADELLPHIA CASE STUDY1

ABSTRACT: This paper describes the Continuous Stormwater Pollution Simulation System (CSPSS) as well as a site-specific application of CSPSS to the Philadelphia urban area and its receiving water, the Delaware Estuary. Conceptually, CSPSS simulates the quantity and quality or urban stormwater runoff, combined sewer overflow, municipal and industrial waste water effuent, and upstream flow on a continuous basis for each time step in the simulation period. In addition, receiving water dissolved oxygen, suspended solids, and lead concentrations resulting from these pollutant sources may be simulated. However, only rceiving water dissolved oxygen (DO) response is considered in this paper. The continuous Do receiving water response model was calibrated to existing conditions usinv observed data at Chester, Pennsylvnia, located on the Delaware Estuary approximately 10 miles down stream from the study area. Average annual pollutant loads to the receiving water were estimated for all major sources and receiving water quality improvements resulting from removal of various portions of these pollutant loads were estimated by application of the calibrated stimultion model. It was found that the removal of oxygen-demanding pollutants from combined sewer overflow and urban stormwater runoff would result in relatively minor improvements in the overall dissoved oxygen resources of the Delaware Estuary; whereas. removal of oxygen demanding pollutants from waste water treatment plant effluent would result in greater improvemens. The results of this investigation can be used along with appropriate economic techniques to identify the most cost-effective mix of point and nonpoint source pollution control measures.     

Role of buffer strips in management of waterway pollution: A review

A buffer strip can perform a multitude of functions, and these include channel stability, a filter for sediment and nutrients, water purification (e.g., bacteria and pathogens), a nondisturbance area, and the provision of terrestrial and stream habitat. These functions are reviewed with specific application to Australian conditions, and methods for modeling their performance are outlined. The primary focus is on the use of buffer strips to minimize waterway pollution from diffuse sources since their use is often justified on this basis. Particular attention is given to the conditions under which a buffer strip will act as an effective filter and the conditions under which it will fail. Buffer strips are most effective when the flow is shallow (nonsubmerged), slow, and enters the buffer strip uniformly along its length. Their sediment trapping performance decreases as the sediment particle size decreases. Nutrients are often preferentially attached to fine sediment. As a result, buffer strips are better filters of sediment than of nutrients. Buffer strips should only be considered as a secondary conservation practice after controlling the generation of pollutants at their source and, to be effective, buffer strips should always be carefully designed, installed, and maintained.     

Managing biosolids runoff phosphorus using buffer strips enhanced with drinking water treatment residuals

Vegetated buffers strips typically have limited ability to reduce delivery of dissolved phosphorus (DP) from agricultural fields to surface waters. A field study was conducted to evaluate the ability of buffer strips enhanced with drinking water treatment residuals (WTRs) to control runoff P losses from surface-applied biosolids characterized by high water-extractable P (4 g kg(-)(1)). Simulated rainfall (62.4 mm h(-1)) was applied to grassed plots (3 m x 10.7 m including a 2.67 m downslope buffer) surface-amended with biosolids at 102 kg P ha(-1) until 30 min of runoff was collected. With buffer strips top-dressed with WTR (20 Mg ha(-1)), runoff total P (TP = 2.5 mg L(-1)) and total DP (TDP = 1.9 mg L(-1)) were not statistically lower (alpha = 0.05) compared to plots with unamended grass buffers (TP = 2.7 mg L(-1); TDP = 2.6 mg L(-1)). Although the applied WTR had excess capacity (Langmuir P maxima of 25 g P kg(-1)) to sorb all runoff P, kinetic experiments suggest that sheet flow travel time across the buffers ( approximately 30 s) was insufficient for significant P reduction. Effective interception of dissolved P in runoff water by WTR-enhanced buffer strips requires rapid P sorption kinetics and hydrologic flow behavior ensuring sufficient runoff residence time and WTR contact in the buffer. Substantial phosphate-adsorbent contact opportunity may be more easily achieved by incorporating WTRs into P-enriched soils or blending WTRs with applied P sources.     

A Geospatial Methodology to Identify Locations of Concentrated Runoff from Agricultural Fields

A geospatial methodology has been developed that utilizes high resolution lidar‐derived DEMs to help track runoff from agricultural fields and identify areas of potential concentrated flow through vegetated riparian areas in the Coastal Plain of Virginia. Points of concentrated flow are identified across 74 agricultural fields within the Virginia portion of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. On average, 70% of the surface area of the agricultural fields analyzed drains through less than 20 m of the field margin, and on average 81% of the field surface area drains through 1% or less of the field margin. Within the riparian buffer, locations that were predicted by the geospatial model to have high levels of concentrated flow were found to exhibit evidence of channelization. Results indicate that flow concentration and channelized flow through vegetated riparian areas may be common along the margin of agricultural fields, resulting in vegetated riparian areas that are less effective at sediment trapping than assumed. Additional results suggest that the regulations governing the location and width of vegetated riparian may not be sufficient to achieve goals for reducing sediment and nutrient runoff from nonpoint agricultural sources. Combined with the increasing availability of lidar‐derived DEMs, the geospatial model presented has the potential to advance management practices aimed at reducing nonpoint source pollution leaving agricultural fields.     

Assessing Critical Source Areas in Watersheds for Conservation Buffer Planning and Riparian Restoration

A science-based geographic information system (GIS) approach is presented to target critical source areas in watersheds for conservation buffer placement. Critical source areas are the intersection of hydrologically sensitive areas and pollutant source areas in watersheds. Hydrologically sensitive areas are areas that actively generate runoff in the watershed and are derived using a modified topographic index approach based on variable source area hydrology. Pollutant source areas are the areas in watersheds that are actively and intensively used for such activities as agricultural production. The method is applied to the Neshanic River watershed in Hunterdon County, New Jersey. The capacity of the topographic index in predicting the spatial pattern of runoff generation and the runoff contribution to stream flow in the watershed is evaluated. A simple cost-effectiveness assessment is conducted to compare the conservation buffer placement scenario based on this GIS method to conventional riparian buffer scenarios for placing conservation buffers in agricultural lands in the watershed. The results show that the topographic index reasonably predicts the runoff generation in the watershed. The GIS-based conservation buffer scenario appears to be more cost-effective than the conventional riparian buffer scenarios.     

Phosphorus concentrations in soil and subsurface water: a field study among cropland and riparian buffers

Riparian buffers can be effective at removing phosphorus (P) in overland flow, but their influence on subsurface P loading is not well known. Phosphorus concentrations in the soil, soil solution, and shallow ground water of 16 paired cropland-buffer plots were characterized during 2004 and 2005. The sites were located at two private dairy farms in Central New York on silt and gravelly silt loams (Aeric Endoaqualfs, Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts, Fluvaquentic Eutrudepts, Glossaquic Hapludalfs, and Glossic Hapludalfs). It was hypothesized that P availability (sodium acetate extractable-P) and soil-landscape variability would affect P release to the soil solution and shallow ground water. Results showed that P availability tended to be greater in crop fields relative to paired buffer plots. Soil P was a good indicator of soil solution dissolved (<0.45 microm) molybdate-reactive P (DRP) concentrations among plots, but was not independently effective at predicting ground water DRP concentrations. Mean ground water DRP in corn fields ranged from < or =20 to 80 microg L(-1), with lower concentrations in hay and buffer plots. More imperfectly drained crop fields and buffers tended to have greater average DRP, particulate (> or =0.45 microm) reactive P (PRP), and dissolved unreactive P (DUP) concentrations in ground water. Soil organic matter and 50-cm depth soil solution DRP in buffers jointly explained 75% of the average buffer ground water DRP variability. Results suggest that buffers were relatively effective at reducing soil solution and shallow ground water DRP concentrations, but their impact on particulate and organic P in ground water was less clear.