1997 Annual Report for ENE97-033
Riparian Buffer Training (Enhancement, Installation, and Management of Riparian Buffer Systems)
Summary
Summary
Vegetated riparian buffers have been identified as an effective filter for non-point-source pollution. On agricultural lands, vegetated buffers reduce nutrient and sediment loads in streams by slowing overland flow and reducing stream bank erosion. In addition to their water quality benefits, riparian buffers provide a critical habitat for many aquatic and terrestrial animals. Vegetated buffers can provide benefits to landowners and rural communities through enhanced recreational and aesthetic appeal and enhanced farm income. In response to these benefits, many riparian buffer initiatives have been implemented throughout the northeast region and in the United States.
Objectives
1) To train resource managers in the northeast and mid-Atlantic region in riparian buffer functions, values, establishment, enhancement, maintenance, and buffer design site evaluations.
2) To understand and apply site assessment criteria and management options of riparian buffers in both the urban and rural settings.
3) To enable resource managers to make informed management recommendations for establishment, enhancement, and maintenance of riparian buffers.
4) To provide up-to-date resource materials and research findings on the science of riparian buffer management.
5) To think of a riparian buffer as a system and recognize its critical components.
Project Narrative
The purpose of this project is to provide the resource professionals who work with landowners and communities the information they need to successfully design and install a riparian buffer. Critical training components include riparian buffer enhancement, installation, and management. A two-day training program was developed that included one day in the classroom and the second day in the field. This project incorporated three educational delivery systems: a satellite broadcast, which was four hours of key information presented by nationally recognized experts, on-site classroom training, made up of three hours of technical information delivered by local experts, and field trips to local farms, which was eight hours of field training on site assessment criteria and application of knowledge gained through case studies.
Day one included a variety of classroom instructors and teaching techniques. The training occurred simultaneously in ten eastern states. All sites participated in a half-day satellite broadcast from the University of Maryland at College Park. The broadcast focused on the basic structure and ecology of riparian buffers and covered the dynamics of riparian buffer systems, nutrient cycling potential of riparian buffers, principles of groundwater hydrology, in-stream system and aquatic considerations, determining buffer width, and economic concerns and opportunities. The satellite broadcast was followed by additional on-site instruction in the afternoon that addressed local concerns presented by local experts. Afternoon training generally included topics such as selection of appropriate plant materials, stream bank stabilization and bioengineering, and wildlife habitat considerations. These topics varied by state and allowed the afternoon training to be tailored to each state’s immediate needs. For example, specific topics taught in Maryland included stream system concerns and using bioengineering techniques, site design and selecting the proper tree species, herbaceous materials, and wildlife habitat considerations.
Day two took place in the field on local farms. It involved application of site assessment techniques in both urban and rural settings. Emphasis was placed on practical information for assessment and developing management strategies. The training format included team problem solving and case studies. Multidisciplinary teams were developed and assigned a series of case studies to solve. Each team consisted of eight to ten resource professionals with different backgrounds. This approach allows individuals from different agencies and backgrounds to work together and build a better understanding of each other’s programs, technical specialists, and overall perspective.
This training targeted the northeast and mid-Atlantic agricultural extension agents, forestry and wildlife specialists, soil conservationists, and other resource professionals who work with farmers, rural landowners, and communities to manage farmlands, open space, forests, streams, wildlife, and fisheries.
Project Results
A two-day training program was developed and delivered to ten states, with forty-four downlink sites and about 900 participants in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Jersey, and Ohio. Forty-four satellite downlink sites were used.
The training attracted people with a range of educational and professional backgrounds. For example, there were participants with associate degrees, bachelor’s degrees, and doctorates. The professional backgrounds included agricultural sciences, environmental sciences, fish and wildlife management, forestry, biology, ecology, watershed management, geology, soil science, agronomy, engineering, public health, planning, water resources, landscape architecture, resource policy, resource economy, water and electric utility specialties, environmental consulting,, soil and water conservation, and environmental education. The average number of years of experience of all participants was approximately fourteen, with a range from one to thirty-two years.
Pre- and post-tests were given to all participants for the morning satellite training. In all of the satellite broadcast subject areas, all participants raised their level of knowledge by .7 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being a low level of knowledge and 5 being a high level of knowledge. For example, the pre-test score on the dynamics of riparian systems was 2.9 before the training; it rose to 3.9 after it. These results were consistent through the six categories tested.
As a result of this training, four other states outside the region -- Kentucky, Texas, Washington, and Michigan -- have requested training materials so they can begin to develop a similar training program in their state. Additionally, many of the states that participated in this program are developing other training programs, both for professionals and landowners, that would teach the science of riparian buffer systems.
Training materials developed for this effort included a series of seven fact sheets and a three-ring binder of resource materials that included speaker notes, research documents, publications on riparian buffers from numerous agencies, fish and wildlife management options, forest management options, and other material relating to riparian buffers. Also available to all participants was the USDA Forest Service manual, "A Riparian Forest Buffers - A Technical Guide for the Chesapeake Bay Region," and a 21-minute video produced by the University of Maryland Cooperative Extension, "Riparian Forest Buffers - the Link Between Land & Water."
Reported December 1998. 1999 Northeast Region SARE/ACE Report.