Literature DB >> 18704561

Landscape planning for agricultural nonpoint source pollution reduction I: a geographical allocation framework.

Matthew W Diebel1, Jeffrey T Maxted, Peter J Nowak, M Jake Vander Zanden.   

Abstract

Agricultural nonpoint source pollution remains a persistent environmental problem, despite the large amount of money that has been spent on its abatement. At local scales, agricultural best management practices (BMPs) have been shown to be effective at reducing nutrient and sediment inputs to surface waters. However, these effects have rarely been found to act in concert to produce measurable, broad-scale improvements in water quality. We investigated potential causes for this failure through an effort to develop recommendations for the use of riparian buffers in addressing nonpoint source pollution in Wisconsin. We used frequency distributions of phosphorus pollution at two spatial scales (watershed and field), along with typical stream phosphorus (P) concentration variability, to simulate benefit/cost curves for four approaches to geographically allocating conservation effort. The approaches differ in two ways: (1) whether effort is aggregated within certain watersheds or distributed without regard to watershed boundaries (dispersed), and (2) whether effort is targeted toward the most highly P-polluting fields or is distributed randomly with regard to field-scale P pollution levels. In realistic implementation scenarios, the aggregated and targeted approach most efficiently improves water quality. For example, with effort on only 10% of a model landscape, 26% of the total P load is retained and 25% of watersheds significantly improve. Our results indicate that agricultural conservation can be more efficient if it accounts for the uneven spatial distribution of potential pollution sources and the cumulative aspects of environmental benefits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18704561     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-008-9186-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  13 in total

1.  Effects of local land use on physical habitat, benthic macroinvertebrates, and fish in the Whitewater River, Minnesota, USA.

Authors:  B A Nerbonne; B Vondracek
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  A General Framework for Prioritizing Land Units for Ecological Protection and Restoration.

Authors: 
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Environmental water-quality zones for streams: a regional classification scheme.

Authors:  Dale M Robertson; David A Saad
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Landscape character and fish assemblage structure and function in western Lake Superior streams: general relationships and identification of thresholds.

Authors:  John C Brazner; Danny K Tanner; Naomi E Detenbeck; Sharon L Batterman; Stacey L Stark; Leslie A Jagger; Virginia M Snarski
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.266

5.  Ecology. Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts.

Authors:  E S Bernhardt; M A Palmer; J D Allan; G Alexander; K Barnas; S Brooks; J Carr; S Clayton; C Dahm; J Follstad-Shah; D Galat; S Gloss; P Goodwin; D Hart; B Hassett; R Jenkinson; S Katz; G M Kondolf; P S Lake; R Lave; J L Meyer; T K O'donnell; L Pagano; B Powell; E Sudduth
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-04-29       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Multivariate analysis of paired watershed data to evaluate agricultural best management practice effects on stream water phosphorus.

Authors:  Patricia L Bishop; W Dean Hively; Jery R Stedinger; Michael R Rafferty; Jeffrey L Lojpersberger; Jay A Bloomfield
Journal:  J Environ Qual       Date:  2005-05-11       Impact factor: 2.751

7.  Linkages between nutrients and assemblages of macroinvertebrates and fish in wadeable streams: implication to nutrient criteria development.

Authors:  Lizhu Wang; Dale M Robertson; Paul J Garrison
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 3.266

8.  Landscape planning for agricultural nonpoint source pollution reduction III: assessing phosphorus and sediment reduction potential.

Authors:  Matthew W Diebel; Jeffrey T Maxted; Dale M Robertson; Seungbong Han; M Jake Vander Zanden
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2008-06-03       Impact factor: 3.266

9.  Landscape planning for agricultural non-point source pollution reduction. II. Balancing watershed size, number of watersheds, and implementation effort.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Maxted; Matthew W Diebel; M Jake Vander Zanden
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2008-07-02       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 10.  Chesapeake Bay eutrophication: scientific understanding, ecosystem restoration, and challenges for agriculture.

Authors:  D F Boesch; R B Brinsfield; R E Magnien
Journal:  J Environ Qual       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.751

View more
  8 in total

1.  The impact of future land use scenarios on runoff volumes in the Muskegon River Watershed.

Authors:  Deepak K Ray; Jonah M Duckles; Bryan C Pijanowski
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Landscape planning for agricultural nonpoint source pollution reduction III: assessing phosphorus and sediment reduction potential.

Authors:  Matthew W Diebel; Jeffrey T Maxted; Dale M Robertson; Seungbong Han; M Jake Vander Zanden
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2008-06-03       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Stream nitrogen sources apportionment and pollution control scheme development in an agricultural watershed in eastern China.

Authors:  Dingjiang Chen; Jun Lu; Hong Huang; Mei Liu; Dongqin Gong; Jiabo Chen
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Landscape planning for agricultural non-point source pollution reduction. II. Balancing watershed size, number of watersheds, and implementation effort.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Maxted; Matthew W Diebel; M Jake Vander Zanden
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2008-07-02       Impact factor: 3.266

5.  An in-depth examination of farmers' perceptions of targeting conservation practices.

Authors:  Margaret Kalcic; Linda Prokopy; Jane Frankenberger; Indrajeet Chaubey
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 3.266

6.  Building a potential wetland restoration indicator for the contiguous United States.

Authors:  Elena K Horvath; Jay R Christensen; Megan H Mehaffey; Anne C Neale
Journal:  Ecol Indic       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 4.958

7.  Outsized nutrient contributions from small tributaries to a Great Lake.

Authors:  Robert J Mooney; Emily H Stanley; William C Rosenthal; Peter C Esselman; Anthony D Kendall; Peter B McIntyre
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Spatially-Distributed Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Framework to Control Phosphorus from Agricultural Diffuse Pollution.

Authors:  Runzhe Geng; Xiaoyan Wang; Andrew N Sharpley; Fande Meng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.