1 / 38

Enhancing Water Quality: An Analysis of Riparian Forest Buffer Restoration in the Chesapeake Bay

This study examines the impact of riparian forest buffer restoration on water quality and aquatic ecosystems in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. By analyzing the relationship between buffer age, water quality, and benthic macroinvertebrate diversity, researchers provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of restoration efforts. Results indicate that older buffers contribute significantly to improved water quality and increased biodiversity among benthic communities. The findings highlight the importance of integrated management approaches for riparian zones and suggest future monitoring and management strategies for sustainable ecosystem health.

ahava
Télécharger la présentation

Enhancing Water Quality: An Analysis of Riparian Forest Buffer Restoration in the Chesapeake Bay

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Stream Community Structure: An Analysis of Riparian Forest Buffer Restoration in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Leslie Orzetti, PhD Ecosystem Solutions, Inc.

  2. Outline • Background • Forest Buffer Zones • Benthic Macroinvertebrates • Chesapeake Bay • Hypotheses • Methods • Results • Discussion

  3. What is a forest buffer? • Chesapeake Bay Program Definition • Areas of trees, shrubs and other vegetation, that are adjacent to a body of water, that are managed for several purposes

  4. Benthic Macroinvertebrates: Nature’s Water Quality Indicators • What are they? • Why do we want to use bugs? • What affects them? • Water quality • Habitat • How do we use them? • Metrics

  5. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Metrics

  6. Hypotheses • Does stream water quality and habitat improve with relative age of restored forest buffer? • Does stream benthic community increase in diversity and richness with age of restored buffer? • Does stream benthic community diversity and richness increase with improved ambient water quality and habitat?

  7. Sites • How big are they? • First order streams • Where are they? • Piedmont physiographic region • Frederick, Carroll, Loudon, Fauquier, Fairfax, Prince William Counties Okajangus, 1982

  8. Sites with no buffer Wacopin Garrett

  9. Sites 1-2 Years Old Stull Harbaugh

  10. Sites 4-6 Years Old Royer Friend

  11. Sites Older than 10 Years Monocacy NRMA Johnny Moore

  12. Control SitesPrince William Forest Park

  13. Field Methods • 150 m reach in buffer zone • In situ water quality • DataSonde Hydrolab • Water samples • Benthic invertebrate collection • Habitat characterization • Landuse characterization

  14. Laboratory Methods • Nutrient analysis • Nitrogen • Phosphorus • Solids analysis • Benthic invertebrate analysis • Identification • Metrics

  15. RESULTS

  16. Habitat Results

  17. Habitat Catharpin Popes Head

  18. Water Quality PCA: Age

  19. Water Quality PCA: Landuse

  20. Water Quality PCA: Buffer Width

  21. Water Quality Discriminant Analysis

  22. Composition and Tolerance PCA: Age

  23. Composition and Tolerance PCA: Landuse

  24. Composition and Tolerance PCA: Buffer Width

  25. Discriminant Analysis:Composition and Tolerance Metrics

  26. Abundance PCA: Age

  27. Discriminant Analysis:Abundance Data

  28. Conclusions • Habitat improved with age of buffer • Water quality improved with age of buffer • Benthic macroinvertebrate diversity and richness improved with age of buffer • Benthic macroinvertebrate diversity and richness improved with ambient water quality and habitat

  29. Conclusions • Physical, chemical and biological components of a stream ecosystem are intrinsically linked • Younger buffered sites have the capacity to improve with time • Managers should see improvements within 5-10 years post restoration

  30. Forest Buffers on DoD Installations • DoD Legacy funded study • Year 1 • Visited 15 field sites on 8 installations • Collected samples from 11 sites • Benthic macroinvertebrates • Water Quality • Habitat • 4 Sites unsampleable

  31. Status of Buffers on DoD Installations • Several installations have well maintained restored buffer areas • Many installations have intact buffers without restoration • Natural Resource Manager turnover and loss of restored buffer information • Reporting of buffer miles

  32. NRL Chesapeake

  33. Recommendations and Future Considerations • In-stream improvements • Monitoring plantings • Continued stream monitoring (every 2-3 years post restoration) • Stream corridor preservation • Increase buffer zone width • Redefine forest riparian buffer zone for reporting restored buffer miles

  34. Acknowledgements • George Mason University • Virginia Department of Forestry • Maryland Department of Forestry • Prince William Forest Park • Lab and Field Crews

More Related