Case study:River Nar Restoration Project: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 12: Line 12:
|Main contact surname=Watson
|Main contact surname=Watson
|Contact organisation=WWF-UK
|Contact organisation=WWF-UK
|Partner organisations=WWF-UK, Coca-Cola, Natural England, Environment Agency, Norfolk Rivers Drainage Board, Castle Acre Fishing Syndicate, West Acre Fishing Syndicate, private landowners, Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Mileham Common Charity Trus-tees
|Partner organisations=Coca-Cola, Natural England, Environment Agency, Norfolk Rivers Drainage Board, Castle Acre Fishing Syndicate, West Acre Fishing Syndicate, private landowners, Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Mileham Common Charity Trus-tees
|Name of parent multi-site project=The Trust's River Improvement Projects  
|Name of parent multi-site project=The Trust's River Improvement Projects
|Multi-site=Yes
|Multi-site=Yes
|Project summary=Chalk streams are a globally rare and threatened habitat. The Nar is 42 km long, the second longest chalk stream in Norfolk and designated a SSSI. This river catchment is in a rural area with intensive arable farming being the main land use. The upper half of the river flows over chalk, whilst the lower half descends into drained fenland, making the river catchment particularly diverse in form. The river fails to meet the standards of the Water Framework Directive for fish abundance, quantity and dy-namics of flow. Poor morphology and poor water quality underpin this failure and require addressing. This project aims to deliver three large-scale reach restorations, improving mor-phology, water quality, biodiversity and hence ecosystem function.
|Project summary=Chalk streams are a globally rare and threatened habitat. The Nar is 42 km long, the second longest chalk stream in Norfolk and designated a SSSI. This river catchment is in a rural area with intensive arable farming being the main land use. The upper half of the river flows over chalk, whilst the lower half descends into drained fenland, making the river catchment particularly diverse in form. The river fails to meet the standards of the Water Framework Directive for fish abundance, quantity and dy-namics of flow. Poor morphology and poor water quality underpin this failure and require addressing. This project aims to deliver three large-scale reach restorations, improving mor-phology, water quality, biodiversity and hence ecosystem function.

Revision as of 08:26, 7 June 2013

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

3.00
(one vote)


To discuss or comment on this case study, please use the discussion page.


Location: 52° 38' 26.03" N, 0° 21' 55.06" E
Loading map...
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.


Project overview

Edit project overview
Status In progress
Project web site
Themes Economic aspects, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Social benefits, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Mark
Main contact surname Watson
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation WWF-UK
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations Coca-Cola, Natural England, Environment Agency, Norfolk Rivers Drainage Board, Castle Acre Fishing Syndicate, West Acre Fishing Syndicate, private landowners, Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Mileham Common Charity Trus-tees
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
River Nar Castle Acre Common WEG project
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Chalk streams are a globally rare and threatened habitat. The Nar is 42 km long, the second longest chalk stream in Norfolk and designated a SSSI. This river catchment is in a rural area with intensive arable farming being the main land use. The upper half of the river flows over chalk, whilst the lower half descends into drained fenland, making the river catchment particularly diverse in form. The river fails to meet the standards of the Water Framework Directive for fish abundance, quantity and dy-namics of flow. Poor morphology and poor water quality underpin this failure and require addressing. This project aims to deliver three large-scale reach restorations, improving mor-phology, water quality, biodiversity and hence ecosystem function.

Monitoring surveys and results

This case study hasn’t got any Monitoring survey and results, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Lessons learnt

This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Catchment and subcatchment

Select a catchment/subcatchment



Site

Edit site
Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate
River corridor land use
Average bankfull channel width category
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category
Average channel gradient
Average unit stream power (W/m2)


Project background

Edit project background
Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design
Stakeholder engagement and communication
Works and works supervision
Post-project management and maintenance
Monitoring



Reasons for river restoration

Edit reasons for restoration
Mitigation of a pressure
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Edit Measures
Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement)
Other


Monitoring

Hydromorphological quality elements

Edit Hydromorphological
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Biological quality elements

Edit biological
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Physico-chemical quality elements

Edit Physico-chemical
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic

Edit Other responses
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative


Monitoring documents

Upload monitoring documents



Image gallery



Additional documents and videos

Upload additional documents


Additional links and references

Edit links and references
Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information