+
Roni, P., Hanson, K., Beechie, T., Pess, G., Pollock, M., & Bartley, D.M. (2005)
Habitat rehabilitation for inland fisheries: Global review of effectiveness and guidance for rehabilitation of freshwater ecosystems.
Title: Habitat rehabilitation for inland fisheries: Global review of effectiveness and guidance for rehabilitation of freshwater ecosystems.
Authors: Roni, P., Hanson, K., Beechie, T., Pess, G., Pollock, M., & Bartley, D.M.
Journal: NA
Year: 2005
DOI: NA
Species or groups: Blacktail deer, livestock (cattle), rainbow trout, Atlantic salmon, brown trout, minnow
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: The degradation of inland aquatic habitats through decades of human activities has lead
to massive efforts to rehabilitate freshwater habitats for fisheries and aquatic resources
in watersheds throughout the world. Many texts have been written on techniques
for rehabilitation though no comprehensive worldwide review of the effectiveness of
techniques has been undertaken. This paper reviews published evaluations of freshwater
habitat rehabilitation projects, including studies on roads improvements and sediment
reduction, riparian and floodplain rehabilitation, placement of habitat structures in lakes
and streams, addition of nutrients to increase aquatic production and other less common
techniques. In particular, the authors summarize what is known about the effects of
various techniques for restoring natural processes, improving habitat, and increasing
fish and biotic production. Recommendations on limitations of techniques, which
techniques are effective, as well as information on planning, prioritizing and monitoring
rehabilitation projects are also provided.
Despite locating more than 330 studies on effectiveness, as well as hundreds of
other papers on rehabilitation, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions about many
specific techniques because of the limited information provided on physical habitat,
biota and costs, as well as the short duration and scope of most published evaluations.
However, techniques such as reconnection of isolated habitats, rehabilitation of
floodplains and placement of instream structures have proven effective for improving
habitat and increasing local fish abundance under many circumstances. Techniques that
restore processes, such as riparian rehabilitation, sediment reduction methods (road
improvements), dam removal and restoration of floods, also show promise but may take
years or decades before a change in fish or other biota is evident. Other techniques such
as bank protection, beaver removal and bank debrushing can produce positive effects
for some species but more often produce negative impacts on biota or disrupt natural
processes.
Comparing the cost-effectiveness of different types of rehabilitation techniques
was not possible because few evaluations reported various costs or economic benefits;
however, estimates of average costs for various techniques are provided. Monitoring
and evaluations clearly need to be designed as part of the rehabilitation action. The
authors discuss the key steps to consider when designing monitoring and evaluation of
rehabilitation actions at various scales.
Similar to less-comprehensive reviews of rehabilitation, this review demonstrates
three key areas lacking in most rehabilitation projects: 1) adequate assessment of historic
conditions, impaired ecosystem processes and factors limiting biotic production; 2)
understanding upstream or watershed-scale factors that may influence effectiveness
of reach or localized rehabilitation; and 3) well-designed and -funded monitoring and
evaluation. These are the same factors that consistently limit the ability of published
studies to determine the success of a given technique at improving habitat conditions
or fisheries resources. Finally, this review suggests that many habitat rehabilitation
techniques show promise, but most have not received adequate planning, monitoring or
cost-benefit analysis.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Sievers, M., Hale, R., & Morrongiello, J.R. (2017)
Do trout response to riparian change? A meta-analysis with implications for restoration and management
Title: Do trout response to riparian change? A meta-analysis with implications for restoration and management
Authors: Sievers, M., Hale, R., & Morrongiello, J.R.
Journal: Freshwater Biology
Year: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12888
Species or groups: Brook trout, Brown trout, Cutthroat trout, Rainbow trout
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: There are strong conceptual links between riparian zones and freshwater fish via riparian
influences on water quality, habitat quality and availability, and trophic dynamics. Many of the
world’s riparian zones are, however, severely degraded, and the key functions they provide for fish
are lost or compromised. In response to their ongoing degradation, extensive works are underway
globally to restore the structure and function of riparian zones. Despite intense effort, we lack clear
empirical evidence of how fishes respond to changes in riparian zones.
2. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore how trout (specifically brook,
brown, cutthroat, rainbow and steelhead), fish with globally important social, cultural, economic and
ecological value, respond to key drivers of riparian alteration. We also identified where and with
which species current research is being undertaken and examined the broad characteristics of
different studies (e.g. location, focal species, length of study, study design) to better understand
potential knowledge gaps in our understanding of how trout respond to changes in riparian zones.
3. ISI Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched for relevant peer-reviewed studies, and
from an initial 6514 papers, 55 were included in the formal meta-analysis. From these, we extracted
data to calculate response ratios comparing biological attributes at sites with altered riparian
characteristics to suitable unmanipulated control sites. We used linear mixed effects models to assess
general and species-specific trout responses to eight key ‘drivers’ of change in riparian condition.
4. Most studies were undertaken in North America using control-impact designs. We found little
evidence for species-specific responses to riparian change, and surprisingly, many drivers deemed
important in the literature (e.g. revegetation, managed canopy removal, grazing, and forestry
clearing) did not consistently influence trout population- or individual-level metrics. Nonetheless,
trout populations did respond positively to increasing woody debris and livestock exclusion (+87.7
and +66.6% respectively), and negatively to bushfire and afforestation (_x0001_67.4 and _x0001_88.2%
respectively). We found some evidence that positive riparian changes may just attract fish (i.e.
increased abundance or density) rather than enhance actual population production (i.e. individual
size and growth). While this conclusion necessarily needs to be interpreted with caution, it does
suggest that targeted research on the ‘production versus attraction’ hypothesis would be beneficial.
5. Several key drivers of riparian change, such as revegetation activities, have been the focus of only
limited research. More generally, long-term data are lacking for most drivers. Both of these key
information gaps limit our ability to predict the likely timing and trajectory of responses to riparian
management. Robust monitoring programmes in areas with altered riparian zones – particularly
using BACI designs to allow changes to be attributed to management – are required. The knowledge
gaps present for fishes as ecologically, socially and environmentally important as trout are likely to
be even more pronounced for the majority of less-studied freshwater fish species.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Roni, P., Hanson, K., & Beechie, T. (2008)
Global review of the physical and biological effectiveness of stream habitat rehabilitation techniques
Title: Global review of the physical and biological effectiveness of stream habitat rehabilitation techniques
Authors: Roni, P., Hanson, K., & Beechie, T.
Journal: North American Journal of Fisheries Management
Year: 2008
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1577/M06-169.1
Species or groups: Livestock, black-tailed deer, willows, Rainbow trout, Atlantic salmon, Brown trout, minnow, aquatic macroinvertebrates, European seabass
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: The degradation of inland aquatic habitats caused by decades of human activities has led to
worldwide efforts to rehabilitate freshwater habitats for fisheries and aquatic resources. We reviewed
published evaluations of stream rehabilitation techniques from throughout the world, including studies on
road improvement, riparian rehabilitation, floodplain connectivity and rehabilitation, instream habitat
improvement, nutrient addition, and other, less-common techniques. We summarize current knowledge about
the effectiveness of these techniques for improving physical habitat and water quality and increasing fish and
biotic production. Despite locating 345 studies on effectiveness of stream rehabilitation, firm conclusions
about many specific techniques were difficult to make because of the limited information provided on
physical habitat, water quality, and biota and because of the short duration and limited scope of most
published evaluations. Reconnection of isolated habitats, floodplain rehabilitation, and instream habitat
improvement have, however, proven effective for improving habitat and increasing local fish abundance
under many circumstances. Techniques such as riparian rehabilitation, road improvements (sediment
reduction), dam removal, and restoration of natural flood regimes have shown promise for restoring natural
processes that create and maintain habitats, but no long-term studies documenting their success have yet been
published. Our review demonstrates that the failure of many rehabilitation projects to achieve objectives is
attributable to inadequate assessment of historic conditions and factors limiting biotic production; poor
understanding of watershed-scale processes that influence localized projects; and monitoring at inappropriate
spatial and temporal scales. We suggest an interim approach to sequencing rehabilitation projects that partially
addresses these needs through protecting high-quality habitats and restoring connectivity and watershed
processes before implementing instream habitat improvement projects.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Liu, T., Bruins, R.J.R., & Herberling, M.T. (2018)
Factors influencing farmers' adoption of best management practices: A review and synthesis
Title: Factors influencing farmers' adoption of best management practices: A review and synthesis
Authors: Liu, T., Bruins, R.J.R., & Herberling, M.T.
Journal: Sustainability
Year: 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020432
Species or groups: NA
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: Best management practices (BMPs) for reducing agricultural non-point source pollution are
widely available. However, agriculture remains a major global contributor to degradation of waters
because farmers often do not adopt BMPs. To improve water quality, it is necessary to understand
the factors that influence BMP adoption by farmers. We review the findings of BMP adoption studies
from both developed and developing countries, published after (or otherwise not included in) two
major literature reviews from 2007 and 2008. We summarize the study locations, scales, and BMPs
studied; the analytical methods used; the factors evaluated; and the directionality of each factor’s
influence on BMP adoption. We then present a conceptual framework for BMP adoption decisions
that emphasizes the importance of scale, the tailoring or targeting of information and incentives,
and the importance of expected farm profits. We suggest that future research directions should focus
on study scale, on measuring and modeling of adoption as a continuous process, and on incorporation
of social norms and uncertainty into decision-making. More research is needed on uses of social
media and market recognition approaches (such as certificate schemes and consumer labeling) to
influence BMP adoption.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
McKergow, L.A., Matheson, F.E., & Quinn, J.M. (2016)
Riparian management: A restoration tool for New Zealand streams
Title: Riparian management: A restoration tool for New Zealand streams
Authors: McKergow, L.A., Matheson, F.E., & Quinn, J.M.
Journal: Ecological Management & Restoration
Year: 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12232
Species or groups: NA
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: Many New Zealanders are planning and implementing riparian management,and riparian fencing and planting are now standard best practice tools for water quality andhabitat restoration. New Zealand has a long history of action, with the first catchment riparianschemes and science dating back to the 1970s. As a result of this, there is now solid scientific evidence that demonstrates the value of a range of management actions including thefollowing: riparian zones and buffers for livestock exclusion (fencing with or without planting),nutrient processing, shading small streams for temperature control, providing leaf and woodinput to stream ecosystems, and enhancing fish and invertebrate habitat. In the last decadeor so, on-ground action has accelerated significantly with the introduction of dairy industryand government agreed targets. In 2015, 96% of dairy cows had been excluded from water-ways >1 m wide and >30 cm deep on land that cows graze during the milking season provid-ing impetus for on-ground action to spread into other pastoral industries. Tools for planning,managing and implementing successful riparian restoration have proliferated, informed byon-ground successes and failures. Despite this, there remain challenges for individuals orcommunities planning riparian restoration. Careful case-by-case assessment is recomended to ensure that plans match design to local landscape constraints and can realisti-cally contribute to improved water quality or habitat outcomes.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Kroll, S.A., & Oakland, H.C. (2019)
A review of studies documenting the effects of agricultural best management practices on physiochemical and biological measures of stream ecosystem integrity
Title: A review of studies documenting the effects of agricultural best management practices on physiochemical and biological measures of stream ecosystem integrity
Authors: Kroll, S.A., & Oakland, H.C.
Journal: Natural Areas Journal
Year: 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3375/043.039.0105
Species or groups: Rainbow trout, aquatic macroinvertebrates
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: After decades of efforts by the agricultural and scientific communities to manage the impacts
of farming through Best Management Practice (BMP) implementation, there is a need to communicate to
program managers and policy makers how effective these practices actually are via their expected effects
on aquatic ecosystems. Land managers, biologists, funders, and policy makers could all greatly benefit
from how to account for factors that influence reductions in compounds accomplished by BMP projects,
to set expectations for physiochemical and biological community responses. To date there have been a
great deal of studies on how BMPs may relate to nutrients and sediment in streams, and there is some
professional consensus on expected outcomes on water chemistry. Studies based on observational and/
or modelled data have yielded very broad ranges of 0–92% reductions in nitrogen compounds, 0–91%
in phosphorus compounds, and 0–90% in total suspended sediments; these ranges make it difficult to
choose values for reliable models and predictions. Uncertainty in expected abiotic responses to BMP
implementation also implies a potentially broad range of biotic responses. In this review, we synthesize
results from studies investigating how the application of agricultural BMPs affect the water quality and
ecological integrity of nearby water bodies and provide suggestions for monitoring BMP projects to
better understand the effects of these practices. The objective of this review is to compare study results
on BMP effectiveness as well as to contribute information for decision-making on BMP implementation.
Our synthesis highlights the high variability in reported BMP impacts and, subsequently, the need for
single studies to be interpreted with caution. We conclude with recommendations for land management
and further studies of BMP effectiveness.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
McDowell, R.W., & Nash, D. (2012)
A review of the cost-effective and suitability of mitigation strategies to prevent phosphorus loss from dairy farms in New Zealand and Australia
Title: A review of the cost-effective and suitability of mitigation strategies to prevent phosphorus loss from dairy farms in New Zealand and Australia
Authors: McDowell, R.W., & Nash, D.
Journal: Journal of Environmental Quality
Year: 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2011.0041
Species or groups: NA
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: The loss of phosphorus (P) from land to water is detrimental to
surface water quality in many parts of New Zealand and Australia.
Farming, especially pasture-based dairying, can be a source of P
loss, but preventing it requires a range of fully costed strategies
because little or no subsidies are available and the effectiveness
of mitigation strategies varies with diff erent farm management
systems, topography, stream density, and climate. Th is paper
reviews the cost-eff ectiveness of mitigation strategies for New
Zealand and Australian dairy farms, grouping strategies into (i)
management (e.g., decreasing soil test P, fencing streams off from
stock, or applying low-water-soluble P fertilizers), (ii) amendments
(e.g., alum or red mud [Bauxite residue]), and (iii) edge-of-fi eld
mitigations (e.g., natural or constructed wetlands). In general, onfarm
management strategies were the most cost-eff ective way of
mitigating P exports (cost range, $0 to $200 per kg P conserved).
Amendments, added to tile drains or directly to surface soil,
were often constrained by supply or were labor intensive. Of the
amendments examined, red mud was cost eff ective where cost
was off set by improved soil physical properties. Edge-of-fi eld
strategies, which remove P from runoff (i.e., wetlands) or prevent
runoff (i.e., irrigation runoff recycling systems), were generally the
least cost eff ective, but their benefi ts in terms of improved overall
resource effi ciency, especially in times of drought, or their eff ect on
other contaminants like N need to be considered. By presenting
a wide range of fully costed strategies, and understanding their
mechanisms, a farmer or farm advisor is able to choose those that
suit their farm and maintain profi tability. Further work should
examine the potential for targeting strategies to areas that lose the
most P in time and space to maximize the cost-eff ectiveness of
mitigation strategies, quantify the benefi ts of multiple strategies,
and identify changes to land use that optimize overall dairy
production, but minimize catchment scale, as versus farm scale,
nutrient exports.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Collins, R., McLeod, M., Hedley, M., Donnison, A., Close, M., Hanly, J., Horne, D., Ross, C., Davies-Colley, R., Bagshaw, C., & Matthews, L. (2007)
Best management practices to mitigate faecal contamination by livestock of New Zealand waters
Title: Best management practices to mitigate faecal contamination by livestock of New Zealand waters
Authors: Collins, R., McLeod, M., Hedley, M., Donnison, A., Close, M., Hanly, J., Horne, D., Ross, C., Davies-Colley, R., Bagshaw, C., & Matthews, L.
Journal: New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research
Year: 2007
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00288230709510294
Species or groups: NA
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: This paper summarises findings from the
Pathogen Transmission Routes Research Program, describing pathogen pathways from farm animals to
water bodies and measures that can reduce or prevent
this transfer. Significant faecal contamination arises
through the deposition of faeces by grazing animals
directly into waterways in New Zealand. Bridging of
streams intersected by farm raceways is an appropriate
mitigation measure to prevent direct deposition
during herd crossings, whilst fencing stream banks
will prevent access from pasture into waterways by
cattle that are characteristically attracted to water.
Riparian buffer strips not only prevent cattle access
to waterways, they also entrap microbes from cattle
and other animals being washed down-slope towards
the stream in surface runoff. Microbial water quality
improvements can be realised by fencing stock from
ephemeral streams, wetlands, seeps, and riparian
paddocks that are prone to saturation. Soil type is a
key factor in the transfer of faecal microbes to waterways.
The avoidance of, or a reduction in, grazing
and irrigation upon poorly drained soils characterised
by high bypass flow and/or the generation of
surface runoff, are expected to improve microbial
water quality. Dairyshed wastewater should be irrigated
onto land only when the water storage capacity
of the soil will not be exceeded. This "deferred
irrigation" can markedly reduce pollutant transfer
to waterways, particularly that via subsurface drains
and groundwater. Advanced pond systems provide
excellent effluent quality and have particular application
where soil type and/or climate are unfavourable
for irrigation. Research needs are indicated to reduce
faecal contamination of waters by livestock.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Grudzinski, B., Fritz, K., & Dodds, W. (2020)
Does riparian fencing protect stream water quality in cattle-grazed lands?
Title: Does riparian fencing protect stream water quality in cattle-grazed lands?
Authors: Grudzinski, B., Fritz, K., & Dodds, W.
Journal: Environmental Management
Year: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01297-2
Species or groups: NA
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: Cattle degrade streams by increasing sediment, nutrient, and fecal bacteria levels. Riparian fencing is one best management
practice that may protect water quality within many grazed lands. Here we surveyed the literature and summarized the
responses of sediment, nutrient, and fecal indicator bacteria levels to riparian exclosure fencing in cattle-grazed lands.
Overall, our review of relevant literature supports the role of riparian exclosure fencing in reducing the negative impact of
cattle on water quality, particularly for sediment and fecal indicator bacteria in temperate forest and temperate grassland
streams. Establishing buffer widths > 5–10 m appears to increase the likelihood of water quality improvements. Fencing may
also be effective at reducing pollutant inputs during stormflows. Our survey also identified critical spatial and thematic gaps
that future research programs should address. Despite cattle grazing being prevalent in 12 terrestrial biomes, our systematic
search of the empirical literature identified 26 relevant studies across only three biomes. Regions with the greatest cattle
populations remain largely unstudied. In addition, we identified inconsistencies in how studies reported information on
regional factors, cattle management, and other metrics related to study results. We provide a list of standard parameters for
future studies to consider reporting to improve cross-study comparisons of riparian fencing impacts. We also encourage
future studies in semi-arid and tropical regions where cattle grazing is common.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Mosely, J.C., Cook, P.S., Griffis, A.J., & O'Laughlin, J. (1997)
Guidelines for managing cattle grazing in riparian areas to protect water quality: Review of research and best management practices policies
Title: Guidelines for managing cattle grazing in riparian areas to protect water quality: Review of research and best management practices policies
Authors: Mosely, J.C., Cook, P.S., Griffis, A.J., & O'Laughlin, J.
Journal: NA
Year: 1997
DOI: NA
Species or groups: Fish (trout), aquatic macroinvertebrates
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: Riparian areas* are lands adjacent to water
bodies. Consequently, these lands are more
moist and more productive than contiguous
floodpJains or uplands. Riparian areas provide a
wealth of products and values including clean
water, fish and wildlife habitat, recreational
opportunities, and scenic beauty. These lands
are also valuable sites for timber production,
cropland agriculture, and livestock grazing.
Appropriate management of riparian areas is thus
a vital environmental and economic issue.
Livestock grazing in riparian areas is
controversial. Many riparian areas in the United
States have been mismanaged and degraded by
improper livestock grazing. However, the
negative effects of grazing in riparian areas can
be minimized or eliminated with proper
management. Grazing management is the key to
attaining the benefits riparian areas offer
livestock while maintaining water quality
standards and fully functioning riparian
ecosystems.
Water quality in many of Idaho's waters
translates directly into conditions that support
adequate habitat for fish. Protecting water
quality and providing forage for cattle are only
two of the many functions of land areas adjacent
to water. This report addresses only the water
quality protective functions of riparian zones.
This is not to say that the many other values of
riparian areas are less important than water
quality, but these other purposes are not required
by the federal Clean Water Act.
The purpose of this report is to provide
management guidelines that will help livestock
producers meet the goals of the Clean Wa~er Act
while grazing cattle in riparian areas. Depending
on the current condition of a particular riparian
area, this could mean that the producer may have
to modify the timing, frequency ~ and intensitY of
grazing in order to maintain conditions that will
protect water quality. These guidelines are based
on a review of research results published in the
scientific literature. That review is in Chapter 1
of this report. Best management practices, or
Executive Summary. 1
BMPs, are the Clean Water Act's approach to
minimizing the adverse impacts of livestock
grazing and other land-use activities on water
quality. The guidelines in this report may be
useful for resource" stewardship in riparian areas
whether or not a livestock producer is following
grazing management strategies that have been
offic'ially incorporated into BMPs. Chapter 2 of
this report explains the origin and purpose of
BMPs, and should be informative not only for
producers considering their use but also for
officials responsible for designing and overseeing
the implementation of BMPs.
In addition, the overall policy context of
livestock grazing and water quality in Idaho is
addressed in Chapter 3. Two case examples "
from Idaho (Sawmill Creek and Clover Creek)
illustrate the relationship between scientific
research and on-the-ground BMP application.
This report attempts to reply to three focus
questions about riparian grazing. In short, what
management strategies are indicated by research)
how are BMPs administered, and how does state
policy protect water quality? The fu]] questions
and short summaries of the replies are given
below.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
O'Callaghan, P., Kelly-Quinn, M., Jennings, E., Antunes, P., O'Sullivan, M., Fenton, O., & Ó. hUallacháin, D. (2019)
The environmental impact of cattle access to watercourses: A review
Title: The environmental impact of cattle access to watercourses: A review
Authors: O'Callaghan, P., Kelly-Quinn, M., Jennings, E., Antunes, P., O'Sullivan, M., Fenton, O., & Ó. hUallacháin, D.
Journal: Journal of Environmental Quality
Year: 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2018.04.0167
Species or groups: Aquatic macroinvertebrates, amphibians, salmon
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: The degradation of freshwater resources and loss of freshwater
biodiversity by anthropogenic activities, including agriculture,
are of major global concern. Together with diffuse pollutants,
point sources, such as where cattle have direct access to riparian
margins and watercourses, can potentially present significant
environmental challenges. These can include impacts on stream
morphology, increased sedimentation, nutrient additions,
microbial contamination, and impacts on aquatic biota.
Mitigation measures aimed at reducing these frequently include
reducing the amount of time cattle spend in riparian margins and
watercourses. This is often accomplished through the provision
of an alternative water supply and grazing management, or even
cattle exclusion measures. Although a number of studies refer
to potential negative impacts, there has been little attempt to
review previous research on this topic. The key aim of this paper
is to collate and review these disparate studies, as well as those
relating to the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Although it is
difficult to draw generalizations from studies due to the inherent
variability between and within catchments, evidence pertaining
to impacts in relation to sedimentation, pathogens, and riparian
margin vegetation were strong. Conclusions in relation to impacts
on stream morphology and nutrient parameters were less clear,
whereas studies on responses of macroinvertebrate communities
were particularly variable, with differences due to cattle access
difficult to separate from catchment scale effects. A greater
understanding of the impact of cattle access on watercourses
under varying conditions will help inform policymakers on the
cost effectiveness of existing management criteria and will help
in revising existing measures.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Agouridis, C.T., Workman, S.R., Warner, R.C., & Jennings, G.D. (2005)
Livestock grazing management impacts on stream water quality: A review
Title: Livestock grazing management impacts on stream water quality: A review
Authors: Agouridis, C.T., Workman, S.R., Warner, R.C., & Jennings, G.D.
Journal: Journal of the American Water Resources Association
Year: 2005
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03757.x
Species or groups: Riparian birds, aquatic macroinvertebrates
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: Controlling agricultural nonpoint source pollution
from livestock grazing is a necessary step to improving the water
quality of the nation’s streams. The goal of enhanced stream water
quality will most likely result from the implementation of an integrated
system of best management practices (BMPs) linked with
stream hydraulic and geomorphic characteristics. However, a grazing
BMP system is often developed with the concept that BMPs will
function independently from interactions among controls, climatic
regions, and the multifaceted functions exhibited by streams. This
paper examines the peer reviewed literature pertaining to grazing
BMPs commonly implemented in the southern humid region of the
United States to ascertain effects of BMPs on stream water quality.
Results indicate that the most extensive BMP research efforts
occurred in the western and midwestern U.S. While numerous studies
documented the negative impacts of grazing on stream health,
few actually examined the success of BMPs for mitigating these
effects. Even fewer studies provided the necessary information to
enable the reader to determine the efficacy of a comprehensive systems
approach integrating multiple BMPs with pre-BMP and post-
BMP geomorphic conditions. Perhaps grazing BMP research should
begin incorporating geomorphic information about the streams
with the goal of achieving sustainable stream water quality.
(KEY TERMS: sustainability; agriculture; environmental impacts;
water quality; nonpoint source pollution; best management practices.)
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Smith, R.K., & Sutherland, W.J. (2014)
Amphibian conservation: Global evidence for the effects of interventions
Title: Amphibian conservation: Global evidence for the effects of interventions
Authors: Smith, R.K., & Sutherland, W.J.
Journal: NA
Year: 2014
DOI: NA
Species or groups: Green frog, American toad, Columbia spotted frog, Natterjack toad, salamanders, American bullfrog, Wood frog, treefrogs
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: NA
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
De Steven, D., & Lowrance, R. (2011)
Agricultural conservation practices and wetland ecosystem services in the wetland-rich Piedmont-Coastal Plain region
Title: Agricultural conservation practices and wetland ecosystem services in the wetland-rich Piedmont-Coastal Plain region
Authors: De Steven, D., & Lowrance, R.
Journal: Ecological Applications
Year: 2011
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/09-0231.1
Species or groups: NA
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2408; https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2495
Abstract: In the eastern U.S. Coastal Plain and Piedmont region, diverse inland wetlands
(riverine, depressional, wet flats) have been impacted by or converted to agriculture. Farm Bill
conservation practices that restore or enhance wetlands can return their ecological functions
and services to the agricultural landscape. We review the extent of regional knowledge
regarding the effectiveness of these conservation practices. Riparian buffers and wetland
habitat management have been the most commonly applied wetland-related practices across
the region. Riparian Forest Buffers (RFB) have been most studied as a practice. Water quality
functions including pollutant removal, provision of aquatic habitat, and enhanced instream
chemical processing have been documented from either installed RFBs or natural riparian
forests; forest buffers also serve wildlife habitat functions that depend in part on buffer width
and connectivity. Wetland restoration/creation and habitat management practices have been
less studied on regional agricultural lands; however, research on mitigation wetlands suggests
that functional hydrology, vegetation, and faunal communities can be restored in depressional
wetlands, and the wetland habitat management practices represent techniques adapted from
those used successfully on wildlife refuges. Other conservation practices can also support
wetland services. Drainage management on converted wetland flats restores some water
storage functions, and viable wetlands can persist within grazed flats if livestock access and
grazing are managed appropriately. Because wetland hydrogeomorphic type influences
functions, ecosystem services from conservation wetlands will depend on the specifics of how
practices are implemented. In a region of diverse wetlands, evaluation of ecological benefits
could be improved with more information on the wetland types restored, created, and
managed.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Parkyn, S. (2004)
Review of riparian buffer zone effectiveness
Title: Review of riparian buffer zone effectiveness
Authors: Parkyn, S.
Journal: NA
Year: 2004
DOI: NA
Species or groups: NA
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2407
Abstract: The purpose of this report is to review and summarise published research on the efficiency and management of riparian buffer zones (RBZ) with respect to the attenuation of sediment and nutrients, and biodiversity enhancement. While there have been numerous studies on the efficiency of RBZ with respect to sediment and nutrients, many of these studies have been small-scale and site-specific. Therefore, a review of these studies needs to consider an assessment of the catchment scale factors that influence the effectiveness of RBZ in attenuating catchment loads.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
+
Flávio, H.M., Ferreira, P., Formigo, N., & Svendsen, J.C. (2017)
Reconciling agriculture and stream restoration in Europe: A review relating to the EU Water Framework Directive
Title: Reconciling agriculture and stream restoration in Europe: A review relating to the EU Water Framework Directive
Authors: Flávio, H.M., Ferreira, P., Formigo, N., & Svendsen, J.C.
Journal: Science of the Total Environment
Year: 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.057
Species or groups: Macroinvertebrates, riparian and aquatic plants, birds, amphibians, fish
Other sources of evidence: https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1545
Abstract: Agriculture is widespread across the EU and has caused considerable impacts on freshwater ecosystems. To
revert the degradation caused to streams and rivers, research and restoration efforts have been developed
to recover ecosystem functions and services, with the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) playing
a significant role in strengthening the progress.
Analysing recent peer-reviewed European literature (2009–2016), this review explores 1) the conflicts and
difficulties faced when restoring agriculturally impacted streams, 2) the aspects relevant to effectively reconcile
agricultural land uses and healthy riverine ecosystems and 3) the effects and potential shortcomings
of the first WFD management cycle.
Our analysis reveals significant progress in restoration efforts, but it also demonstrates an urgent need
for a higher number and detail of restoration projects reported in the peer-reviewed literature. The first
WFD cycle ended in 2015 without reaching the goal of good ecological status in many European waterbodies.
Addressing limitations reported in recent papers, including difficulties in stakeholder integration and
importance of small headwater streams, is crucial. Analysing recent developments on stakeholder engagement
through structured participatory processes will likely reduce perception discrepancies and increase
stakeholder interest during the next WFD planning cycle.
Despite an overall dominance of nutrient-related research, studies are spreading across many important
topics (e.g. stakeholder management, land use conflicts, climate change effects), which may play an important
role in guiding future policy. Our recommendations are important for the second WFD cycle because
they 1) help secure the development and dissemination of science-based restoration strategies and 2)
provide guidance for future research needs.
Assessment of reliability and robustness (CEESAT)
-
2.1
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
-
5.2
-
6.1
-
6.2
-
6.3
-
7.1
-
7.2
-
7.3
-
8.1
Assessment of relevance to Canada (RASCAT)
-
1.1
-
2.1
-
2.2
-
3.1
-
3.2
-
4.1
-
4.2
-
4.3
-
5.1
