USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · ofr20051221

Grass buffers for playas in agricultural landscapes: An annotated bibliography

Abstract

This bibliography and associated literature synthesis (Melcher and Skagen, 2005) was developed for the Playa Lakes Joint Venture (PLJV). The PLJV sought compilation and annotation of the literature on grass buffers for protecting playas from runoff containing sediments, nutrients, pesticides, and other contaminants. In addition, PLJV sought information regarding the extent to which buffers may attenuate the precipitation runoff needed to fill playas, and avian use of buffers. We emphasize grass buffers, but we also provide information on other buffer types. There are a number of relatively synonymous terms that describe grass buffers for wetlands. They include: buffer strip, vegetated filter strip (VFS), grass buffer, grass filter, grass hedge, and grassed waterway (GW), among others (see McKague and others, 1996). Although some of these terms represent slightly different designs, placements, and/or purposes, they all perform similar functions. In this document, we use ‘buffer’ and VFS more or less interchangeably; other types are specified by name (e.g., grass hedges). Our bibliography is by no means exhaustive, as the body of literature potentially relevant to playas and wetland buffers is vast. Thus, we attempted to include and annotate at least 1–3 papers by numerous researchers heavily involved in buffer research and modeling. We also included single papers by other researchers to increase the spectrum of regional focus, watershed/wetland conditions, research approaches, researcher expertise, and the time over which buffer theories/practices have evolved. We found virtually no literature specific to buffers for playas (confirmed by D.A. Haukos, oral. commun., 2005); thus, we conducted interviews with playa scientists to glean information on possible buffer design and management specifically for playas. We did, however, find a significant body of literature on the results of controlled experiments designed to test buffer effectiveness, an important first step towards validating buffer effectiveness in real-world situations. Of the literature on playa ecology, flora, and wildlife, we found that most focuses on playa basins and wetlands rather than the surrounding uplands and grasslands; furthermore, most of the empirical work on playa ecology has taken place in the Southern High Plains (SHP; i.e., Texas and Oklahoma panhandles, southeastern Colorado, and southwestern Kansas) because many wetlands in other portions of the PLJV region (Fig. 1) were only recently recognized as playas. Finally, we found few papers on avian use of buffers; therefore, we focused on those that report on avian use of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) fields or lands enrolled in similar programs. References on best management practices (BMPs) for agricultural lands were included because certain BMPs are crucial for informing decisions about buffer design/ effectiveness and overall playa ecology. We also included various papers that increase the spectrum of time over which buffer theories and practices have evolved. An unannotated section lists references that we did not prioritize for annotation and references that may be helpful but were beyond the scope of this document. Finally, we provide notes on conversations we had with scientists, land managers, and other buffer experts whom we consulted, and their contact information. We conclude the bibliography with appendices of common and scientific names of birds and plants and acronyms used in both the bibliography. In the annotations, italicized text signifies our own editorial remarks. Readers should also note that much of the work on buffers has been designed using English units of measure rather than metrics; in most cases, their results have been converted to metrics for publication, explaining the seemingly odd or irregular buffer widths and other parameters reported.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Cynthia P. Melcher, Susan K. Skagen. 2005. Grass buffers for playas in agricultural landscapes: An annotated bibliography. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20051221

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 2, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 2 (April–June), 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov.

Open-File Report↗

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 1, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 1 (January–March) of 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov . One specific activity that the ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team closely monitored was a Landsat 8 Thermal Infrared Sensor encoder alerts anomaly. On March 18, 2026, the Thermal Infrared Sensor instrument’s mechanism control electronics board reset, driving several parameters to default power-on values. Subsequent telemetry and analysis determined that no persistent hardware misconfiguration was present and no radiometric or geometric degradation was observed.

Open-File Report↗

Floods of June 20–July 6, 2024, in the Big Sioux River, Rock River, Little Sioux River, Ocheyedan River, and Floyd River Basins, northwestern Iowa

Major flooding occurred on June 20–July 6, 2024, in northwestern Iowa affecting the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd River Basins. Heavy rain fell in northwestern Iowa, southwestern Minnesota, and southeastern South Dakota on June 20–22, 2024. Parts of northwestern Iowa recorded 2–6 inches of rainfall and localized amounts exceeding 12 inches. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 175,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Big Sioux River at Akron, Iowa (06485500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at four locations along the Big Sioux River between U.S. Interstate 29 at Sioux City, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 north of Hawarden, Iowa, a distance of 75.7 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 157,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Rock River near Rock Valley, Iowa (06483500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability of less than 0.2 percent. High-water marks were measured at eight locations along the Rock River between County Road B30 east of Hudson, South Dakota, upstream to Iowa Highway 9 at Rock Rapids, Iowa, a distance of 39.3 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 63,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Little Sioux River at Correctionville, Iowa (06606600), was recorded on June 24, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at 11 locations along the Little Sioux River between Iowa Highway 31 west of Correctionville, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 north of Spencer, Iowa, a distance of 134.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 24,500 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Ocheyedan River near Spencer, Iowa (06605000), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at three locations along the Ocheyedan River between County Road M38 west of Spencer, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 west of Everly, Iowa, a distance of 12.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 41,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Floyd River at Alton, Iowa (06600100), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 1–1.99 percent. High-water marks were measured at six locations along the Floyd River between Iowa Highway 3 at Le Mars, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 at Alton, Iowa, a distance of 27.5 river miles. The high-water marks were used to develop flood profiles for the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd Rivers.

Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota↗