TY - CONF
T1 - Assessment of riparian buffers' effectiveness in controlling nutrient and sediment loads as a function of buffer design, site characteristics and upland loadings
AU - Jiang, Fei
AU - Gall, Heather
AU - Veith, Tamie
AU - Cibin, Raj
AU - Drohan, Patrick
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by USDA Grant #2017-77019-26374. Thanks to Matt Royer, Ag & Environ. Center, PSU, for facilitating focus groups and to all participating stakeholders for their valuable input. H.E. Gall is supported in part, by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture Federal Appropriations under Project PEN04574 and Accession number 1004448. R. Cibin is supported in part, by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture Federal Appropriations under Project PEN04629 and Accession number 1014132. P.J. Drohan is supported in part, by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture under Project PEN04573 and Accession number 1004449. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by The Pennsylvania State University or the US Department of Agriculture. All entities involved are equal opportunity providers and employers.
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - Riparian buffers are a widely adopted agricultural best management practice due to their ability to reduce sediment and nutrient loads to streams. Current efforts in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to incentivize widespread adoption of riparian buffers have fallen short as the state struggles to be in compliance with Chesapeake Bay restoration goals. Constrained buffer design in current policies has been identified as one of the barriers to adoption, and therefore this research explores the water quality tradeoffs that may result from a more flexible buffer design paradigm. The Spring Creek watershed in central Pennsylvania was selected as the case study watershed to test the effectiveness of four different buffer designs (variations in vegetation and width) and two alternative buffer management scenarios that involved harvesting of either grass or trees from the buffer. Three crop rotations were simulated in the Soil & Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), with nutrient and sediment loads coupled to the Riparian Ecosystem Management Model (REMM) to better understand how input loads affect the effectiveness of a specific buffer design and how the effectiveness of a buffer design changes as a function of input load. Simulations were run at a daily scale for 16 years, allowing annual-scale performance as well as event-specific performance to be investigated. The results revealed that knowing annual removal efficiency of a buffer is insufficient and that adoption recommendations should be made based on loads treated by the buffer, as higher nutrient and sediment masses may be reduced by buffers with lower removal efficiencies.
AB - Riparian buffers are a widely adopted agricultural best management practice due to their ability to reduce sediment and nutrient loads to streams. Current efforts in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to incentivize widespread adoption of riparian buffers have fallen short as the state struggles to be in compliance with Chesapeake Bay restoration goals. Constrained buffer design in current policies has been identified as one of the barriers to adoption, and therefore this research explores the water quality tradeoffs that may result from a more flexible buffer design paradigm. The Spring Creek watershed in central Pennsylvania was selected as the case study watershed to test the effectiveness of four different buffer designs (variations in vegetation and width) and two alternative buffer management scenarios that involved harvesting of either grass or trees from the buffer. Three crop rotations were simulated in the Soil & Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), with nutrient and sediment loads coupled to the Riparian Ecosystem Management Model (REMM) to better understand how input loads affect the effectiveness of a specific buffer design and how the effectiveness of a buffer design changes as a function of input load. Simulations were run at a daily scale for 16 years, allowing annual-scale performance as well as event-specific performance to be investigated. The results revealed that knowing annual removal efficiency of a buffer is insufficient and that adoption recommendations should be made based on loads treated by the buffer, as higher nutrient and sediment masses may be reduced by buffers with lower removal efficiencies.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084016347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85084016347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.13031/aim.201901516
DO - 10.13031/aim.201901516
M3 - Paper
AN - SCOPUS:85084016347
T2 - 2019 ASABE Annual International Meeting
Y2 - 7 July 2019 through 10 July 2019
ER -