Changes in Brazil's Forest Code can erode the potential of riparian buffers to supply watershed services.

• Riparian buffers smaller than 8 m can act as a source of sediments to streams. • Forests are the best land use in riparian zones to protect streams from sediments. • The greater the forest buffer the greater the protection of streams. • BMP adoption at watershed scale is the best strategy for watershed services supply. • Compliance with NVPL will not guarantee watershed services supply in Brazil. In Brazil, the Forest Code requires landholders to maintain fixed-width buffers of native vegetation along watercourses – legally called Areas of Permanent Preservation (APPs). In 2012, agricultural activities started to be partially allowed in APPs, but only if best management practices on soil and water conservation are adopted and if a narrow buffer strip with native vegetation is restored adjacently to the watercourse. In this paper, we present a modeling framework to investigate the capacity of legal compliant APPs to supply watershed services (erosion control and stream bank stabilization) in a 2,200 ha watershed in São Paulo State, Brazil. Our results suggest that the narrower the riparian buffer the lower the control of soil erosion dynamic within APPs, and that riparian buffers smaller than 8 m can act as a source of sediments to streams. The adoption of best management practices can contribute to controlling soil erosion within APPs but the presence of native forests in the first 15 m is necessary to guarantee equivalent protection to streams when compared to APPs completely covered by forests. Moreover, we observed that forest restoration within APPs helped to reduce the average soil loss of the watershed by only 20 %, compared to a reduction of 55 % when best practices are implemented in all watershed agricultural areas. We conclude that (i) the reduced requirements for APP restoration may contribute to stream sedimentation, which will likely affect the supply of watershed services by stream ecosystems; (ii) the implementation of best management practices in APPs will not have the same effect as native forests to reduce stream sedimentation; and (iii) the adoption of best management practices in all agricultural production areas – and not only within APPs as required by law – is the best strategy to promote the supply of watershed services to society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]