By: Chris Duncan, BMP Forester (Ret.), Texas Forest Service
Q: Two months ago I addressed the areas in
which deficiencies were observed in the most recent Texas Forest Service BMP
Implementation Monitoring report that was released in December 2008. This month I would like to address the areas
in which improvements were made.
A: In case you missed it the Texas Forest
Service completed its seventh round of BMP Implementation Monitoring and
released a report in December 2008 detailing the results of the monitoring. The Texas Forest Service conducts these
monitoring rounds approximately every two years in an effort to demonstrate how
well BMPs are being implemented on silvicultural operations here in East Texas. During the Round 7 monitoring, three major improvements
were noted: 1) a decrease in the number of significant risks to water quality
2) a higher overall rate of BMP implementation on avoiding or minimizing the
number of temporary stream crossings and 3) a higher overall BMP implementation
on site preparation and wetlands.
To begin with, let’s take a look at the first improvement – a decrease in the number of significant risks to water quality. A significant risk to water quality is an existing on-the-ground condition resulting from failure to correctly implement BMPs, that if left unmitigated, has already or will likely result in an adverse change in the chemical, physical or biological condition of a waterbody. Such change may or may not violate water quality standards. Of the 18 significant risks identified, 15 of them were for not properly removing and restoring temporary stream crossings. Significant risks to water quality can be avoided by making sure that roads are properly stabilized, stream crossings are properly removed, restored, and stabilized, and that there is an adequate SMZ along all perennial and intermittent streams.
The second improvement that was identified was a higher
overall rate of BMP implementation on avoiding or minimizing the number of
temporary stream crossings. A good job is being done at avoiding or minimizing
the number of temporary crossings installed during operations. This is a major improvement because stream
crossings come in direct contact with the stream. By choosing to cross a stream
the risk of impacting water quality is increased. Proper planning and using available resources
such as topographic maps, aerial photos, and “on the ground” reconnaissance can
help you determine if a stream crossing is necessary; and if so, where they
should be located to minimize the number needed.
The third improvement that was identified was a higher
overall BMP implementation on site preparation and wetlands. Fifty-three sites were evaluated for
implementation with site preparation BMPs. The implementation for site preparation
was 98% with one significant risk noted. The lowest implementation was for
honoring SMZ integrity and respecting sensitive areas (96% for both
categories). Seventeen sites had wetland or “wetland like” areas – not
necessarily jurisdictional wetlands. These sites had an overall implementation
of 100%. No significant risks were noted and all mandatory road BMPs for
wetlands were followed.
Overall a good job is being done implementing and adhering
to Texas BMP guidelines as shown by the 91.5% BMP implementation rate for Round
7. Hopefully in the future there will be a continued improvement of the BMP
implementation rate.
To view the full report titled “Voluntary Implementation of Forestry Best Management Practices in East
Texas, Round 7” visit the Texas Forest Service webpage at http://texasforestservice.tamu.edu/water. For more information regarding this report or
BMPs please contact me at (903) 297-3910.
* This article was published in the May 2009 issue of the Texas Logger
