Storm Water Planning from the Ground Up—Connecting Plant–Soil System Best Management Practices to Site and Soil Conditions

Soil Horizons ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
T.A. Houser ◽  
J.D. Storer ◽  
S. Prebonick
Keyword(s):  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Storm Water ◽  
Soil Conditions ◽  
Water Planning ◽  
Soil System ◽  
Best Management ◽  
Plant Soil

scholarly journals Storm Water Best Management Practices that Maximize Aquifer Recharge

2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca A Larson ◽  
Steven I Safferman
Keyword(s):  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Management Practice ◽  
Storm Water ◽  
Aquifer Recharge ◽  
Detention Ponds ◽  
Filter Strips ◽  
Best Management ◽  
Separate Table ◽  
Porous Pavement

This article reviews and provides evaluation guidelines for six major storm water best management practices including bioretention areas, grassed swales/filter strips, infiltration trenches, porous pavement, rain barrels and wet detention ponds. A detailed table allows for quick and easy design comparisons, including a separate table which allows for site specific cost comparisons. A logic diagram is provided as a basic tool for screening the most feasible management practice.

Compliance with Silvicultural Best Management Practices on Harvested Sites in South Carolina

1994 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 163-167
Author(s):  
Tim O. Adams ◽  
Donal D. Hook
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Timber Harvesting ◽  
Soil Conditions ◽  
Management Zones ◽  
Best Management ◽  
Streamside Management Zones ◽  
Forestry Commission ◽  
Physiographic Regions

Abstract One-hundred-seventy-seven harvested sites in South Carolina were evaluated for compliance with Best Management Practices (BMPs). South Carolina Forestry Commission (SCFC)foresters evaluated the roads, road stream crossings, streamside management zones, harvest operations, and log decks. In addition, each site was evaluated for overall BMP compliance, which was based on the level of both off-site and on-site impacts. Overall BMP compliance was 84.7%. Compliance was highest for log decks (97.7%), roads (92.0%), and harvest operations (89.8%) and lowest for streamside management zones (72.4%) and road stream crossings (41.7%). Nineteen variables were analyzed to determine their influence on BMP compliance. Two variables were responsible for the 27 sites with inadequate ratings: (1) the presence of perennial and intermittent streams, and (2) logging under wet soil conditions. Compliance did not differ significantly among landowner categories or physiographic regions. To improve BMP compliance, landowners should identify sensitive sites and take adequate steps to protect them during timber harvesting. South. J. Appl. For. 18(4):163-167.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document