Where Do Riparian Forest Buffers Fit into
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 17

Where Do Riparian Forest Buffers Fit into Directive 06-1? PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 93 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Where Do Riparian Forest Buffers Fit into Directive 06-1? “Potential “ Riparian Forest Buffer Goals. The Directive Emphasizes “….conservation of forest lands most critical to water quality…. ”. Here the focus will be the first bullet from the Directive:

Download Presentation

Where Do Riparian Forest Buffers Fit into Directive 06-1?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Where do riparian forest buffers fit into directive 06 1

Where Do Riparian Forest Buffers Fit into

Directive 06-1?

“Potential “ Riparian Forest Buffer Goals


Where do riparian forest buffers fit into directive 06 1

The Directive Emphasizes “….conservation of forest lands most critical to water quality….”

Here the focus will be the first bullet from the Directive:

  • Stream, shoreline and floodplain forests and forested wetlands.


Where do riparian forest buffers fit into directive 06 1

The Objective of Proposed Riparian Forest Buffer Goals

  • Support 2003 forest buffer commitments

  • Incorporation in Directive of unrealized commitments ( “Conserve existing forests along all streams and shorelines”) and (“Preserve from development 20% of the land area in the watershed by 2010, targeting high value areas”).

  • 2003 Key finding “For maximum ecosystem resiliency, forest buffers should exist on 70% of all shorelines and stream banks in the watershed”.


Proposed goals

Proposed Goals

  • Because: Signatory states committed to Tributary Strategy goals which include set numbers of riparian forest buffer miles…

  • Because: ~ 30,000 miles of forest buffers on streams and shorelines are needed to reach 70% forest cover, a recommendation for ecological health…

  • Because: The 2003 goal of 10,000 miles by 2010 is reasonable and 53% realized…


It is suggested to

It is suggested to…

Goal 1. CONTINUE THE EXPECTED ANNUAL RESTORATION RATE OF

900 - 1000 MILES BEYOND 2010.


Where do riparian forest buffers fit into directive 06 1

Why 900 miles past 2010?

Approximately 288,000 total miles of streams and shorelines in Bay watershed (Penn State data revised in 2005).201,600 miles represent 70% of shorelines and streams

167,040 miles represents already 58% forest buffers

187,200 miles of buffer needed for 65% of streams and shorelines

167,040 miles (current 58% buffered)

20,160 miles to reach the 65% minus 10,000 mile goal 2010 = 10160 miles left

at current expected rate of restoration the end timeline is 2020.


Suggested actions to implement goal 1

Suggested Actions to Implement Goal 1

  • Target through GIS applicationson a coarse scale, areas in need of riparian forest buffers for nutrient reduction efficiency, source water protection, stormwater management, and quality habitat.

  • Train technical assistance providersto use a GIS framework to recognize and locate target areas in their work region.

  • Compile a landscape targeting matrixfor finer scale targeting of riparian forest buffers atlocal levels.

  • Establish a Forestry Workgroup GIS consortium to serve as a resource for state conservation targeting efforts.

  • Create economic incentives for landownersto incorporate and protect riparian forest buffers as best management practices on their land.

  • Continue state and federal support for cost share programs with RFB element.


Goal 2

Goal 2

  • Because: Wilder and Jorgenson (2006) reported range of 1.1-5.2% loss of riparian forest buffers in highly developing counties in MD,PA, and VA…

  • Because: The current 10000 mile goal does not consider forest buffer losses occurring simultaneously with restoration….

  • Because: Forest buffer losses in the Bay watershed are counterproductive to nutrient reduction and forest buffer restoration efforts…


It is suggested to1

It is suggested to …..

Goal 2:PERMANENTLY PROTECT 50 % OF RESTORED FOREST BUFFERS IN TARGETED WATERSHEDS BY 2020.


Suggested actions to implement goal 2

Suggested actions to implement Goal 2….

  • Assess losses of forest buffersalong streams and shorelines

  • in the Bay watershed using newly developed GIS buffer

  • mapping and analysis tools supported by Forestry Work

  • Group funding.

  • Use forest buffer loss analysis to targetneeded restoration

  • And to implement the 50% permanent protection for these sites.

  • Provide riparian forest buffer restoration and permanent

  • protection information to landowners and decision makers.


Goal 3

Goal 3

  • Because: A coordinated approach to riparian forest buffer monitoring across the Bay states will produce more credible data that can be interpreted at a watershed scale…

  • Because: The early years of riparian forest establishment are influenced by many outside factors that threaten survival…

  • Because: Tracking and monitoring of successful projects provides the opportunity to correlate restoration efforts with improvements in Bay water quality…

  • Because: Monitoring provides information that can be used to promote and sustain riparian forest buffer efforts..


It is suggested to2

It is suggested to….

GOAL 3. ENHANCE AND STRENGTHEN 2003 MONITORING EFFORTS FOR FIRST FIVE YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION, FOR ALL NEWLY RESTORED RIPARIAN FOREST BUFFERS UNDER PERMANENT PROTECTION


Suggested actions to implement goal 3

Suggested actions to implement Goal 3 ….

  • Develop a stratified random monitoring designto statistically represent on the ground success of riparian forest buffer efforts.

  • Provide a monitoring system that is linked geographicallyand easily coupled with other monitoring in states and across state lines, the Pennsylvania WAVE , and the Virginia IFRIS systems are good examples or starting points to reference.


Goal 4

Goal 4

  • Because: Urban canopy coverthrough interception, stemflow, litter interception and evapo-transpirationreduces hydrologic fluctuationand provides protection for streams, similar to the functions of riparian forest buffers…

  • Because: UFORE- HYDRO can be employed to determine canopy cover contributions to stormwater managementand the findings can be applied to conservation and/or restoration needs for jurisdictions...

  • Because: The information obtained throughUFORE-HYDRO analysis can be incorporated into watershed planning processes, and sprawl reduction efforts, both are elements of keystone commitments for the Chesapeake Bay Program….


It is suggested to3

It is suggested to…

Goal 4. COMMIT TO AN INCREASE OF CANOPY COVER AND REDUCTION OF IMPERVIOUS COVER IN ONE URBAN COMMUNITY IN EACH STATE


Suggested actions to implement goal 4

Suggested actions to implement Goal 4…

  • Use UFORE -HYDRO analysis in a demonstration community, in each state.

  • Develop canopy cover restoration and protection policiesthat relate to the UFORE – HYDRO analysis in the demonstration community.

  • Build private/ public partnershipsthat philosophically and financially support implementation of canopy cover restoration and permanent protection.

  • Use green market opportunities tofinanciallysupportrestoration and permanent protection efforts.


Summary

SUMMARY

  • The proposed goals support and enhance goals developed and committed to in 2003.

  • The assessment and monitoring components will have a lasting influence on riparian forest buffer conservation and restoration decisions.

  • A coordinated approach to goal setting will maintain momentum to establish more and better forest buffer conservation, restoration and protection throughout the Bay watershed.

    THOUGHTS QUESTIONSCOMMENTS


  • Login