Causal inference approaches reveal both positive and negative unintended effects of agricultural and urban management practices on instream biological condition.

Agricultural and urban management practices (MPs) are primarily designed and implemented to reduce nutrient and sediment concentrations in streams. However, there is growing interest in determining if MPs produce any unintended positive effects, or co-benefits, to instream biological and habitat conditions. Identifying co-benefits is challenging though because of confounding variables (i.

Estrogenic activity response to best management practice implementation in agricultural watersheds in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Best management practices (BMPs) have been predominantly used throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed (CBW) to reduce nutrients and sediments entering streams, rivers, and the bay. These practices have been successful in reducing loads entering the estuary and have shown the potential to reduce other contaminants (pesticides, hormonally active compounds, pathogens) in localized studies and modeled load estimates. However, further understanding of relationships between BMPs and non-nutrient contaminant reductions at regional scales using sampled data would be beneficial.

Environmental and anthropogenic drivers of contaminants in agricultural watersheds with implications for land management.

If not managed properly, modern agricultural practices can alter surface and groundwater quality and drinking water resources resulting in potential negative effects on aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Exposure to agriculturally derived contaminant mixtures has the potential to alter habitat quality and negatively affect fish and other aquatic organisms. Implementation of conservation practices focused on improving water quality continues to increase particularly in agricultural landscapes throughout the United States.