How effective are slurry storage, cover or catch crops, woodland creation, controlled trafficking or break-up of compacted layers, and buffer strips as on-farm mitigation measures for delivering an improved water environment?

Environmental Evidence

Paul J Lewis¹  Louise M Donnison¹  Nicola P Randall¹ 

[1] Harper Adams University College, Newport, Shropshire, TF10 8NB, UK

关键词: Systematic map;    Sediment;    Pesticide;    Phosphate;    Nitrate;    Soil compaction;    Cover crop;    Water quality;    Farmland pollution;   

Others  :  802940
DOI  :  10.1186/2047-2382-1-12

 received in 2012-04-18, accepted in 2012-07-23,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Agriculture has intensified over the last 50 years resulting in increased usage of fertilizers and agrochemicals, changes in cropping practices, land drainage and increased stocking rates. In Europe, this has resulted in declines in the quality of soils and waters due to increased run off and water pollution. Fifty percent of nitrates in European rivers are derived from agricultural sources in the UK this value is as high as 70%, where agriculture also contributes to approximately 28% of phosphates and 76% of sediments recorded in rivers. Catchments dominated by agricultural land use have increased levels of pesticides and bacterial pathogens.

European member states have a policy commitment to tackle water pollution through the Water Framework Directive. An analysis of the effectiveness of water pollution mitigation measures should enable decision makers and delivery agencies to better facilitate catchment planning.

The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of slurry storage, cover/catch crops, woodland creation, controlled trafficking/break-up of compacted layers and buffer strips, as on farm mitigation measures, for delivering an improved water environment.

Methods

The systematic review will consist of a searchable systematic map database for all the named interventions. Where possible, quantitative analysis will be used to assess the effectiveness of interventions.

Electronic databases, the internet, and organisational websites will be searched, and stakeholders will be contacted for studies that investigate the impact of the on-farm mitigation measures on water quality. All studies found will be assessed for suitability for inclusion in the next stage. Inclusion criteria will be based on subject, intervention, comparator and outcome. The details of included studies will be incorporated into the systematic map database, and studies scored for effectiveness of intervention and study design. Where there is suitable data available, meta-analysis will be carried out to test the effectiveness of individual mitigation measures. A report will summarise the evidence, highlight any gaps in the available research, and provide recommendations for future research.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Randall et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Herzog F, Steiner B, Bailey D, Baudry J, Billeter R, Bukácek R, De Blust G, De Cock R, Dirksen J, Dormann CF, De Filippi R, Frossard E, Liira J, Schmidt T, Stöckli R: Assessing the intensity of temperate European agriculture at the landscape scale. European J Agronomy 2006, 24:165-181.
• [2]Department for Environment: Food and Rural Affairs: Safeguarding our soils. UK: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; 2009. http://www.Defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13297-soil-strategy-090910.pdf webcite
• [3]The European Commission: Report from the commission to the council and the European parliament: On implementation of Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources based on Member State reports for the period 2004–2007. Brussells: The European Commission; 2011. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-nitrates/pdf/sec_2011_909.pdf webcite
• [4]Carsten von der Ohe P, Dulio V, Slobodnik J, De Deckere E, Kühne R, Ebert R, Ginebreda A, De Cooman W, Schüürmann G, Brack W: A new risk assessment approach for the prioritization of 500 classical and emerging organic microcontaminants as potential river basin specific pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive. Sci Total Environ 2011, 409(11):2064-2077.
• [5]Salomons W, Brils J: Contaminated Sediments in European River Basins. The Netherlands: European Sediment Research Network; 2004. http://www.sednet.org/download/Sednet_booklet_final.pdf webcite
• [6]Collins AL, Anthony SG, Hawley J, Turner T: Predicting potential change in agricultural sediment inputs to rivers across England and Wales by 2015. Mar and Freshwater Res 2009, 60:626-637.
• [7]Edwards AC, Withers PJA: Transport and delivery of suspended solids, nitrogen and phosphorus from various sources to freshwaters in the UK. J Hydrology 2008, 350:144-153.
• [8]Kay D, Crowther J, Fewtrell L, Francis CA, Hopkins M, Kay C, McDonald AT, Stapleton CM, Watkins J, Wilkinson J, Wyer MD: Quantification and control of microbial pollution from agriculture: a new policy challenge? Environ Sci Policy 2008, 11(2):171-184.
• [9]Environment Agency: The State of Soils in England and Wales. UK: Environment Agency; 2004. http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/pdf/GEHO0304BKBH-e-e.pdf webcite
• [10]Department for Environment: Food and Rural Affairs: Water for life White Paper. UK: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; 2011. http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm82/8230/8230.asp webcite
• [11]Burke A: Synthesis of Diffuse Pollution Research in England and Wales funded by Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Environment Agency. UK: Demonstrating Catchment Management; 2011. http://www.demonstratingcatchmentmanagement.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/A-brief-review-of-diffuse-pollution-research-in-England-and-Wales.pdf webcite
• [12]Newell Price JP, Harris D, Taylor M, Williams JR, Anthony SG, Duethmann D, Gooday RD, Lord EI, Chambers BJ, Chadwick DR, Misselbrook TH: An Inventory of Mitigation Methods and Guide to their effects on Diffuse Water Pollution, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Ammonia Emissions from Agriculture. UK: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; 2011. http://randd.Defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=Menu&Module=More&Location=None&Completed=0&ProjectID=14421 webcite
• [13]Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Competition details and project specification: Project WT0965 Independent systematic review of impact of on-farm mitigation measures for delivering an improved water environment. UK: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; 2011.
• [14]Johnson D, Hodgkinson R, Lord E, Silgram M, Cottrill B, Gooday R, Morrow K, Smith S, Adele H: itrates Directive Consultation Document Environmental Impact of the 2009 Nitrates Action Programme and of potential further measures. UK: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; 2011. http://www.Defra.gov.uk/consult/files/20111220nitrates-directive-consult-evid1.pdf webcite
• [15]Shepherd MA: The effectiveness of cover crops during eight years of a UK sand land rotation. Soil Use and Manage 1999, 15:41-48.
• [16]Dabney SM, Delgado JA, Reeves DW: Using winter cover crops to improve soil and water quality. Commun in Soil Sci Plant Analysis 2009, 32:1221-1250.
• [17]Townsend LG: What evidence is there that the utilization of catch crops can reduce nitrate leaching in temperate Europe? MSc thesis. UK: Harper Adams University College; 2010.
• [18]Nisbet T, Silgram M, Shah N, Morrow K, Broadmeadow S: Woodland for Water: Woodland measures for meeting Water Framework Directive objectives. In In Forest Research Monograph 4. Surrey: Forest Research; 2011. http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/FRMG004_Woodland4Water.pdf/$file/FRMG004_Woodland4Water.pdf
• [19]Donnison L: The effects of farm grown trees on erosion and pollution in the local farmed environment. A review for the Woodland Trust by Harper Adams University College. UK: The Woodland Trust; 2011.
• [20]Hamza MA, Anderson WK: Soil compaction in cropping systems. A review of the nature, causes and possible solutions. Soil and Tillage Res 2005, 82:121-145.
• [21]Muscutt AD, Harris GL, Bailey SW, Davies DB: Buffer zones to improve water quality: a review of their potential use in UK agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environ 1993, 45:59-77.
• [22]Mayer PMR, McCutchen SK, Canfield MD, Timothy J: Meta-analysis of nitrogen removal in riparian buffers. J Environ Qual 2007, 36:1172-1180.
• [23]Fish R, Potschin M: Catchment Planning and the Ecosystems Approach: Progress towards Application LWEC Pilot Review. Contract Number: R8/H12/107. UK: Nottingham University; 2009. http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cem/pdf/Pilot%20Review%20R8H12107.pdf webcite
• [24]Guidelines for Systematic Review in Environmental Management. Version 4.0. Environmental Evidence; 2010: Guidelines for Systematic Review in Environmental Management. Version 4.0. Environ Evid 2010. www.environmentalevidence.org/Authors.htm webcite
• [25]Randall N, James K: The effectiveness of integrated farm management, organic farming and agri-environment schemes as interventions for conserving biodiversity in temperate Europe? Environ Evid 2011. www.environmentalevidence.org/SR35.html webcite
• [26]Correll DL: Principles of planning and establishment of buffer zones. Ecol Eng 2005, 24:433-439.
• [27]Stevens A, Milne R: The effectiveness revolution and public health. In Progress in Public Health. Edited by Scalley G. London: Royal Society for Medicine Press; 1997:197-225.
• [28]Pullin AS, Knight TM: Effectiveness in conservation practice: Pointers from medicine and public health. Conserv Biol 2001, 15:50-54.
• [29]Pullin AS, Knight TM: Support for decision making in conservation practice: An evidence-based approach. J Nat Conservation 2003, 11(2):83-90.