The Tarland Catchment Initiative and its effect on stream water quality and macroinvertebrate indices.

The Tarland Catchment Initiative is a partnership venture between researchers, land managers, regulators, and the local community. Its aims are to improve water quality, promote biodiversity, and increase awareness of catchment management. In this study, the effects of buffer strip installations and remediation of a large septic tank effluent were appraised by water physico-chemistry (suspended solids, NO, NH, soluble reactive P) and stream macroinvertebrate indices used by the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency. It was done during before and after interventions over an 8-yr period using a paired catchment approach. Because macroinvertebrate indices were previously shown to respond negatively to suspended solid concentrations in the study area, the installation of buffer strips along the headwaters was expected to improve macroinvertebrate scores. Although water quality (soluble reactive P, NH) improved downstream of the septic tank effluent after remediation, there was no detectable change in macroinvertebrate scores. Buffer strip installations in the headwaters had no measurable effects (beyond possible weak trends) on water quality or macroinvertebrate scores. Either the buffer strips have so far been ineffective or ineffectiveness of assessment methods and sampling frequency and time lags in recovery prevent us detecting reliable effects. To explain and appreciate these constraints on measuring stream recovery, continuous capacity building with land managers and other stakeholders is essential; otherwise, the feasibility of undertaking sufficient management interventions is likely to be compromised and projects deemed unsuccessful.

[1]  C. Townsend,et al.  Individual and combined responses of stream ecosystems to multiple stressors , 2008 .

[2]  Alan Jenkins,et al.  Handbook of catchment management. , 2009 .

[3]  M. Stutter,et al.  Vegetated buffer strips can lead to increased release of phosphorus to waters: a biogeochemical assessment of the mechanisms. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  S. Ormerod,et al.  Low‐level effects of inert sediments on temperate stream invertebrates , 2010 .

[5]  C. Spash,et al.  Motives behind willingness to pay for improving biodiversity in a water ecosystem: Economics, ethics and social psychology , 2009 .

[6]  J. Newbold,et al.  Riparian deforestation, stream narrowing, and loss of stream ecosystem services. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  R. Davies‐Colley,et al.  Planted Riparian Buffer Zones in New Zealand: Do They Live Up to Expectations? , 2003 .

[8]  S. Ormerod.  A golden age of river restoration science , 2004 .

[9]  P. Armitage,et al.  Biological Effects of Fine Sediment in the Lotic Environment , 1997, Environmental management.

[10]  M. Zalewski,et al.  Linking biological and physical processes at the river basin scale: the origins, scientific backgrou , 2008 .

[11]  Paul Kay,et al.  A review of the efficacy of contemporary agricultural stewardship measures for ameliorating water pollution problems of key concern to the UK water industry , 2009 .

[12]  Petr Šmilauer,et al.  CANOCO 4.5 Reference Manual and CanoDraw for Windows User's Guide: Software for Canonical Community Ordination , 2002 .

[13]  Isabelle Durance,et al.  Restoration and recovery from acidification in upland Welsh streams over 25 years , 2009 .

[14]  Lloyd B. Owens,et al.  Sediment losses from a pastured watershed before and after stream fencing , 1996 .

[15]  New procedures for identifying running-water sites subject to environmental stress and for evaluating sites for conservation, based on the macroinvertebrate fauna , 1993 .

[16]  D. Chanasyk,et al.  Influence of streambank fencing on the environmental quality of cattle-excluded pastures. , 2010, Journal of environmental quality.

[17]  S. Ormerod,et al.  Combined effects of habitat modification on trait composition and species nestedness in river invertebrates , 2010 .

[18]  Chris Phillips,et al.  Water quality impact of a dairy cow herd crossing a stream , 2004 .

[19]  D. Chanasyk,et al.  Influence of streambank fencing with a cattle crossing on riparian health and water quality of the Lower Little Bow River in Southern Alberta, Canada , 2010 .

[20]  A. Hershey,et al.  Recovery of three arctic stream reaches from experimental nutrient enrichment , 2005 .

[21]  W. Hession,et al.  Livestock exclusion influences on riparian vegetation, channel morphology, and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages , 2009, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation.

[22]  L. Condron,et al.  Potential phosphorus and sediment loads from sources within a dairy farmed catchment , 2010 .

[23]  M. Stutter,et al.  River sediments provide a link between catchment pressures and ecological status in a mixed land use Scottish River system. , 2007, Water research.

[24]  D. Harper,et al.  A catchment-scale approach to the physical restoration of lowland UK rivers , 1999 .

[25]  N. Friberg.  Pressure-response relationships in stream ecology: introduction and synthesis , 2010 .

[26]  Ter Braak,et al.  Canoco reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user''s guide: software for canonical community ord , 2002 .

[27]  S. Larsen,et al.  Stream macroinvertebrate occurrence along gradients in organic pollution and eutrophication , 2009 .

[28]  M. Murakami,et al.  Reciprocal subsidies: dynamic interdependence between terrestrial and aquatic food webs. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  J. Allan,et al.  Ecological Success in Stream Restoration: Case Studies from the Midwestern United States , 2007, Environmental management.

[30]  D. Meals,et al.  Lag time in water quality response to best management practices: a review. , 2010, Journal of environmental quality.

[31]  William C. Sullivan,et al.  Preferences for riparian buffers. , 2009 .

[32]  Christopher J. Walsh,et al.  The importance of upland flow paths in determining urban effects on stream ecosystems , 2009, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[33]  Richard T. Cooper,et al.  Spatial and temporal dynamics of stream water particulate and dissolved N, P and C forms along a catchment transect, NE Scotland , 2008 .

[34]  M. Stutter,et al.  River phosphorus cycling: separating biotic and abiotic uptake during short-term changes in sewage effluent loading. , 2010, Water research.

[35]  J. A. Bloomfield,et al.  Multivariate analysis of paired watershed data to evaluate agricultural best management practice effects on stream water phosphorus. , 2005, Journal of environmental quality.

[36]  B. Bryan,et al.  Cost‐effective alternatives for mitigating Cryptosporidium risk in drinking water and enhancing ecosystem services , 2009 .

[37]  S. Ormerod,et al.  Experimental effects of sediment deposition on the structure and function of macroinvertebrate assemblages in temperate streams , 2011 .

[38]  Mike T. Furse,et al.  A preliminary classification of running‐water sites in Great Britain based on macro‐invertebrate species and the prediction of community type using environmental data , 1984 .

[39]  Stephen R. Carpenter,et al.  Randomized Intervention Analysis and the Interpretation of Whole‐Ecosystem Experiments , 1989 .

[40]  David Malakoff,et al.  The River Doctor , 2004, Science.

[41]  C. Townsend,et al.  Multiple stressors in agricultural streams: interactions among sediment addition, nutrient enrichment and water abstraction , 2010 .

[42]  H. Hawkes,et al.  Origin and development of the biological monitoring working party score system , 1998 .

[43]  Katie A. Barnas,et al.  Synthesizing U.S. River Restoration Efforts , 2005, Science.

[44]  A. Edwards,et al.  The prediction and management of water quality in a relatively unpolluted major Scottish catchment: current issues and experimental approaches , 1997 .

[45]  P Goodwin,et al.  Ecology. Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts. , 2005, Science.

[46]  S. Ormerod,et al.  Appraising riparian management effects on benthic macroinvertebrates in the Wye River system , 2010 .

[47]  M. Palmer,et al.  River restoration, habitat heterogeneity and biodiversity: a failure of theory or practice? , 2010 .

[48]  Saied Mostaghimi,et al.  OFF-STREAM WATER SOURCES FOR GRAZING CATTLE AS A STREAM BANK STABILIZATION AND WATER QUALITY BMP , 1997 .

[49]  A. Cottrell,et al.  ‘The sweeter country’: social dimensions to riparian management in the Burdekin rangelands, Queensland , 2009 .

[50]  Geoff Kaine,et al.  Adoption of Stream Fencing Among Dairy Farmers in Four New Zealand Catchments , 2007, Environmental management.

[51]  R. Death,et al.  Measuring stream macroinvertebrate responses to gradients of vegetation cover: when is enough enough? , 2009 .

[52]  S. Hurlbert.  Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments , 1984 .

[53]  J. Meyer,et al.  Standards for ecologically successful river restoration , 2005 .

[54]  M. T. Furse,et al.  The performance of a new biological water quality score system based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running-water sites , 1983 .

[55]  Angela H. Arthington,et al.  Preserving the biodiversity and ecological services of rivers: new challenges and research opportunities: Preserving the biodiversity and ecological services of rivers , 2010 .

[56]  Ian Phillip Vaughan,et al.  Scale-dependent effects of fine sediments on temperate headwater invertebrates , 2009 .