Restoration and Protection

River Protection and Restoration Actions

While there are many actions that individuals, businesses and governments may take to reduce pollution, below are the top priority protection and restoration actions needed to restore the James River to full health.

Wastewater Treatment Pollution
Reduction – 100% (10% 2-Year Change)

In 2008, wastewater treatment from sewage plants and industrial facilities met the goals for reductions for both nitrogen and phosphorus for the first time. The overall reductions are up from 90% two years ago. This accomplishment was achieved through strong regulatory requirements, major investments by the state, local governments and private industry and Virginia’s nutrient trading program.

AGRICULTURE – 44%
(3% 2-Year Change)

Because of its extensive land area and the nature of the operations, agriculture is both a major source of pollution, as well as a major part of the solution to a healthier James River. Below is the current status of the priority conservation practices that farmers can implement to reduce polluted runoff based on information available from the state. JRA tracks progress toward the goals for each practice set by the state in their plans to achieve the established pollution limits for the James River. Recent increases in the implementation of agricultural practices has been helped by the appropriation of $20 million each year for the past three years by the Governor and Virginia General Assembly.

Conservation Tillage – 93% (4% 2-Year Change)

On over 95,000 acres, conservation tillage and particularly continuous no-till helped improve soil quality, prevent erosion and reduce the loss of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers into the water.

Winter Cover Crops – 11% (-1% 2-Year Change)

In 2008, farmers enrolled 10,700 acres in the winter cover crop program to help prevent erosion and hold excess fertilizer on fields during the winter. The decline may be due to farmers electing to harvest their winter crop rather than manage it for conservation purposes.

Farm Nutrient Management – 35% (6% 2-Year Change)

Nutrient management plans were implemented on nearly 96,000 acres of farmland in the James River basin to minimize fertilizer applications of nitrogen and phosphorus and therefore reduce pollution.

Stream Protection – 38% (4% 2-Year Change)

Farmers fenced cattle out of 132,000 acres of pasture along streams in order to prevent stream bank erosion, filter pollution and in some cases improve the health of their herd.

DEVELOPMENT – 20%
(0% 2-Year Change)

Because of the drastic disturbances that development imposes on the land, great care must be taken both during and after construction to protect water quality. JRA tracks three key actions that can reduce the impact of development on the James River: stormwater management, urban nutrient management and local low impact development policies. Virginia is in the process of revising many of its stormwater programs and has an opportunity to improve the implementation of pollution controls on new and existing development.

Low Impact Development Policies – 45% (3% 2-Year Change)

With actions by some individual localities, local development policies have improved slightly in encouraging low impact
development practices.

Stormwater Management Practices – 13% (5% 2-Year Change)

Over 15,000 acres of urban stormwater management practices have been documented in the James River basin, although more undocumented practices likely exist. This is 13% of the goal.

Urban Nutrient Management – 3% (-8% 2-Year Change)

Only 3% of the targeted 554,000 acres have a nutrient management plan to guide proper fertilizer application rates and timing.

NATURAL AREA
CONSERVATION – 57%
(4% 2-Year Change)

Natural areas, particularly those along the river and its tributaries, are critical for providing habitat for wildlife and filtering pollution, in addition to scenic and recreational opportunities.

Riparian Buffer Restoration – 14%
(1% 2-Year Change)

Riparian buffers are one of the most cost-effective approaches to reduce polluted runoff and provide important wildlife habitat at the same time. To date, 14% of the 93,000 acres of riparian buffers needed to meet the James River’s pollution limits has been implemented. Although progress is being made, it has slowed in recent years.

Land Conservation – 100%
(7% 2-Year Change)

Over 20% of the James River basin has been protected from development through public land ownership or conservation easements, including an additional 100,000 acres in recent years. This meets the James River’s portion of the 20% land conservation goal set for Virginia and the Chesapeake Bay watershed in the Chesapeake Bay 2000 agreement. However, more land conservation is needed to meet local goals.