首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Environmental Management >Quantitative review of riparian buffer width from Canada and the United States
【24h】

Quantitative review of riparian buffer width from Canada and the United States

机译:加拿大和美国的河岸缓冲带宽度的定量评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This paper reviewed the provincial, territorial, and state guidelines for the retention of treed riparian buffers after timber harvest in Canada and the United States. Comparisons amongst jurisdictions were facilitated through the use of a standardized template for the classification of waterbodies. Mean buffer widths varied from 15.1 to 29.0 m for different waterbody types when both countries were combined. However, Canadian jurisdictions had wider buffers (except for intermittent streams). In part, this was due to the high percentage of Boreal jurisdictions in Canada and Southeast jurisdictions in the United States. The Boreal region had the widest buffers while Southeastern jurisdictions had the narrowest buffers. Just under half (~ 44%) of the jurisdictions investigated had three or more modifying factors in the guidelines. Of these, waterbody type, shoreline slope, waterbody size, and presence offish were the most common. Boreal and Pacific jurisdictions tended to have a more diverse set of waterbody size classes, waterbody types, and other modifying factors. Jurisdictions from the Midwest, Northeast, and Southeast maintained relatively simple 'one-size-fits-air guidelines. Jurisdictions without modifying factors for slope or presence of fish applied wider baseline buffers than jurisdictions with these factors. A large percentage of jurisdictions (~ 80%) allowed some selective harvest in buffers. However, these were often accompanied by relatively restrictive prescriptions. In comparison to the ecological recommendations, buffer widths for most jurisdictions were adequate to protect the aquatic biota and habitats but were, generally, less than recommended widths for terrestrial communities. In the future, two management trends are likely to continue, the shift towards more complicated guidelines and the expansion to larger-scale, watershed planning of riparian areas.
机译:本文回顾了加拿大,美国在木材采伐后保留沿岸河岸缓冲带的省,地区和州指南。通过使用标准化的水体分类模板,促进了辖区之间的比较。当两个国家合并时,不同水体类型的平均缓冲区宽度从15.1到29.0 m不等。但是,加拿大的司法管辖区有较宽的缓冲区(间歇流除外)。部分原因是加拿大的北方地区和美国的东南地区所占比例很高。北方地区的缓冲区最大,而东南地区的缓冲区最窄。在调查的辖区中,只有不到一半(〜44%)的指南中包含三个或更多修改因素。其中,最常见的是水体类型,海岸线坡度,水体大小和鱼类。北方和太平洋地区的管辖区往往具有更多不同的水体大小类别,水体类型和其他修改因素。来自中西部,东北和东南部的司法管辖区保持了相对简单的“一刀切空气准则”。没有修改坡度或鱼类存在因素的司法管辖区所使用的基线缓冲范围比具有这些因素的司法管辖区要宽。很大一部分辖区(约80%)允许在缓冲区中进行一些选择性收获。然而,这些通常伴随着相对限制性的处方。与生态建议相比,大多数辖区的缓冲区宽度足以保护水生生物区和栖息地,但通常小于陆地社区的建议宽度。将来,两种管理趋势可能会继续,向更复杂的准则转变以及向河岸地区扩大规模,分水岭的规划。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号