Principle – CCFM 3.0 Conservation of Soil and Water Resources

Criterion- CCFM 3.1 Physical environmental factors.

Indicator - CCFM 3.1.3 Water quality as measured by water chemistry, turbidity, etc.

Box B: Definition:

"Studies indicate that when roads are constructed through areas with acidic soil, or when these areas are clearcut, the quality of water decreases in terms of both chemistry and turbidity. This decline is reflected in higher concentrations of dissolved nutrients and organics. Results of catchment studies in Canada, the United States and overseas show that harvesting of forests leads to an increase in nutrients and organic chemicals in stream water for a period of three to five years. This change reflects the higher levels of these substances in the forest floor that result from the removal of the biological demand of trees and other vegetation, and to a lesser extent, the disturbance of the ground. Ground disturbance on the cutover and construction of roads on adjacent areas can lead to increased turbidity due to soil erosion and siltation. Secondary succession after harvesting restores the biological demand for nutrients, resulting in near background levels of nutrients in the water within three to five years. Increased streamflow after harvesting can be attributed to less biological demand and reduced evapotranspiration, due to a smaller foliage surface area. Return of the streamflow to near background levels usually takes at least 20 years, depending on the height and complexity of the forest canopy. Site conditions vary considerably within and between forest ecosystems and across ecoregions. Key variables include slope, soil texture and amount of organic matter." CCFM p. 50.

Box D: Applicability to Different Landowners. Explain any differences:

Costs may be too high for a small landowner. It is also difficult to separate an individual landowner’s actions from an entire watershed where there are multiple ownerships in the watershed.

Box E: Overlap:

None

Box I: Underlying Concepts:

"Aquatic ecosystems within forests reflect the overall condition of watersheds and thus provide another important measure of sustainability. Nutrient levels and flow rates that are elevated over long periods of time in forest streams are a clear indication of a major forest ecosystem malfunction, because the water and nutrients that should be utilized in forest growth are instead moving rapidly into drainage systems. This threatens the sustainability of not only the forests, but also the aquatic systems themselves (through eutrophication), as well as downstream agricultural and urban areas (through flooding)." (CCFM p.49)

In the test area, hydrologists consider sediment to be more important than turbidity (Hardy, 1998 and Burton, 1998) because of the effect sediment has on fisheries. In municipal watersheds then turbidity is a more important consideration.

Very elaborate monitoring is required (King, 1998) with long-term measurements to suggest trends. Large watersheds have many compounding factors other than just forestry practices so separating the effects of one from another is difficult. Pool-riffle ratios and dynamics are locally important for fisheries; more so than water chemistry and turbidity. (King, 1998)

"Nationally consistent water quality data sets, analyses, and reports for forested catchments have not been assembled….Few water-quality data collection programs are national in scope." USDA Forest Service, 1997. P 5-10.

There is no consistency in data collection in Canada, the United States or Mexico so use of this indicator is difficult. Water quality indicators are developed for a local area for the local benefiting uses (Hardy, 1998). Locally, sediment and temperature are considered the most important. Some nutrients are transported in water because they are attached to sediments (e.g. phosphorus) so sediment is used. Hardy, 1998 and Burton, 1998.

Box J: Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Management:

Water quality is an important characteristic of ecosystems, with a large amount of laws that apply directly to water quality for a variety of uses. However, it is costly and difficult to measure and monitor as it applies to forest management over large areas.

Box K: Measurement Methods:

There are many different methods and each varies in applicability depending on the geographic area. In forests growing on relatively infertile substrate such as are common (granitic regoliths) in the test area; nutrient levels are naturally low in the streams. Little information is gained from measuring nutrients in such systems. It has been done in the past but is largely abandoned. (Burton, 1998.)

"On public lands in the upper basin, non-point sources of pollution are the primary cause of degraded water quality. A non-point source of pollution is water pollution whose sources(s) cannot be pinpointed, but that can be best controlled by proper soil, water, and land management practices ." UCRD Draft EIS, p. 109. State of Idaho Best Management practices are examples of such standards applied to all landowners. Idaho Department of Lands. 1996. Best Management Practices.

Box L: Data Required

Data are limited, both locally and in North America. Most areas have little or no information available. Some selected sites have extensive amounts of work that span a decade or more. The most famous of which are the studies done in the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest of New Hampshire.

Locally some data are collected as part of local management plans but is mainly in riparian vegetation, stream structures, coarse woody debris and channel morphology rather than nutrients and turbidity. Some work is also being done on water temperature. The test area is a locus of water quality studies (mainly sediment and temperature) as they relate to fish populations.

Box M: Data Used for the North American Test

Interviews with local experts in hydrology and fisheries were consulted.

Box N: Example Results:

N/A

Box O: Assessing the Practicality:

The indicator, as written, requires long-term, elaborate and costly monitoring methods to be definitive.

The information value is especially low on large watersheds where the problem of compounding factors, (e.g. weather, soils, other activities) are difficult to separate from forestry related practices. The information value may be very high on small, controlled watersheds where the treatment can be more directly related to the watershed.

Box Q: Overall assessment:

Rejected.

The indicator should be rejected as it requires costly, long-term measurements to be definitive. There are too many time and cost constraints to make the indicator operational; especially over large areas. Water quality measurements are all locally determined depending on local beneficial uses (Hardy, 1998).

Box R: Did you rewrite or revise to a new indicator. If so what?

N/A

Please record your notes on evaluating the indicator here.