Case study:Long Preston Deeps Flood Plain Project

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

4.00

(one vote)

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

Location: 54° 2' 10.35" N, 2° 18' 0.68" W

Edit location

Loading map...

{"format":"googlemaps3","type":"HYBRID","minzoom":false,"maxzoom":false,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"limit":50,"offset":0,"link":"all","sort":[""],"order":[],"headers":"show","mainlabel":"","intro":"","outro":"","searchlabel":"... further results","default":"","import-annotation":false,"width":"auto","height":"400px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"visitedicon":"","wmsoverlay":false,"zoom":14,"layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview","rotate"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"resizable":false,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"cluster":false,"clustergridsize":60,"clustermaxzoom":20,"clusterzoomonclick":true,"clusteraveragecenter":true,"clusterminsize":2,"imageoverlays":[],"kml":[],"gkml":[""],"searchmarkers":"","fullscreen":false,"scrollwheelzoom":false,"showtitle":false,"hidenamespace":true,"template":"Location map popup","userparam":"","activeicon":"","pagelabel":false,"ajaxcoordproperty":"","ajaxquery":"","locations":[{"text":"\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cbr /\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EProject Title:\u003C/b\u003E Long Preston Deeps Flood Plain Project\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003ECountry:\u003C/b\u003E \u003Ca href=\"/wiki/index.php?title=England\" title=\"England\"\u003EEngland\u003C/a\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EProject Status:\u003C/b\u003E In progress\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EThemes:\u003C/b\u003E Water quality\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cbr /\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E","title":"Long Preston Deeps Flood Plain Project","link":"","lat":54.043692171401,"lon":-2.2907781600952,"icon":"/wiki/images/a/af/Red_marker.png"}]}

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	http://www.longprestonwetgrasslandproject.co.uk/
Themes	Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Social benefits, Water quality
Country	England
Main contact forename	Alison
Main contact surname	Whalley
Main contact user ID	User:Awhalley
Contact organisation	Environment Agency.
Contact organisation web site	http://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency
Partner organisations	Long Preston Wet Grassland Project Group
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects	No

Project picture

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.

The flood plain project is a combined flood plain and river restoration project. Main drivers for the project: UK: Site Special Scientific Interest remedies, UK Biodiversity Action Plan Targets, UK Climate Change adaptation, UK: Water Quality targets EU: Water Framework Directive.

Main Outcomes: Key Outcome 1: Long Preston Wet Grassland: Project achieved 97% (percent) of 765 hectares of floodplain into voluntary Environmental Stewardship Agreement using evidence based management plans. Science-based plan – See: Wet Grassland Hydrological Report (Long Preston Deeps SSSI) Partnership: Over 10 organisations (Public/Private and Charitable) set up in 2004 Partnership came together to develop vision. Between 2005 and 2013 the project achieved vision; 97% of 765 hectares of floodplain is now in some form of voluntary Environmental Stewardship Agreement achieving a sustainable current and future environmental and social resource. Baseline: The flood plain baseline indicated by Site of Special Scientific Interest monitoring. The site had high potential to support wading and over wintering birds but condition assessments indicated degraded habitat. Result: Ongoing monitoring indicated site is now nationally important for several species of breeding wading bird of conservation concern; at least 60 pairs breed there. More than 2500 individual overwintering waders and wildfowl have been counted in recent winters. 97& of 765 hectares of floodplain is now in some form of voluntary Environmental Stewardship Agreement. SSSI condition statement has highlighted site is now recovering. See website: - http://www.longprestonwetgrasslandproject.co.uk/, http://www.naturalengla nd.org/regions/yorkshire_and_the_humber/ourwork/riverribblerestoration.aspx Key Outcome 2: Long Preston Deeps River Restoration: Between 2009 and 2013 the partnership produced a strategic river restoration plan for 7km and implemented over 3.5 km of naturalisation and restoration with riverine floodplain improvements of >15 hectares. Science-based plan and monitoring information- See: River Naturalisation Detailed report (Long Preston Deeps SSSI) and website: http://www.naturalengland.org/regions/yorkshire _and_the_humber/ourwork/riverribblerestoration.aspx Naturalisation carried out to enable minimal future human intervention. Complementary strategic management projects include River Ribble Invasive Species Project: Monitoring: Wide range of monitoring techniques from standard SSSI conditions assessment, fish surveys, University of Salford hydrological monitoring, RSPB bird surveys, kite photography surveys, Archaeology watching briefs. University of Salford monitoring results demonstrate naturalisation techniques have been successful in reducing erosion and stabilising in channel morphology. Fish and Bird surveys indicate desirable species are increasing in number. Visitor number increasing utilising promotional materials e.g. website, local businesses, interpretation boards and organised events. Site used nationally as a case-study of WFD action implementation and river restoration conference sharing. See River Restoration Programme. Brief of how: Strong partnership, Variety of communication strategies, Excellent consultation, ambitious multi objective vision, utilisation of voluntary government supported eco and farming sensitive sustainable management, showcasing success, detailed monitoring, community events and resources, dedicated long standing project officer, naturalisation to enable minimal future river intervention, complementary projects, recording, sharing and learning from lessons learnt, planning for the future, expanding partnership to incorporate new objectives and funding sources.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.

Monitoring of the site has revealed changes to the in-channel morphology following several geomorphologically effective floods, recording sediment shoaling, riffle development and an overall slowing of erosion of the bed and banks. Reconnected palaeo features have been rejuvenated; reducing overall erosive forces in the previously confined main channel. Improved floodplain connectivity and increased floodplain area have led to more frequent inundation and the deposition of significant quantities of overbank fines. Wetter habitats are also developing across the floodplain.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.

Consultation and communication of the vision and the business plan is key to success. - Groups of individuals representing a stakeholder interest do not response to communication events equally. The communication style must be chosen to reflect differing responses to change and different personalities for example introverts do not respond to similar events as extroverts. - Professional communications teams should be used to establish methods. - Use experts; example a project manager should utilise an agricultural specialist to describe the benefits to farmers rather that assuming knowledge. - Detailed records of events and outcomes of consultations should be kept and widely shared. - More than one consultation event should be held and tailored to the required outcome. The event should specify what it is not consulting on as well as what it is. Techniques used: - There may be the need to revisit if monitoring results indicate methods have not been successful in delivering specified outcomes. Partners have a duty of care to landowners and riparian rights owners to ensure that if a risk based approach has been used and accepted, future tweaking may be required to achieve the desired outcome. Localism and Trust: - Those affected by the project need to trust those carrying out the project. They will still be farming the land in 20 years or fishing the banks. Trust is incredibly important. Local people should be utilised on the steering group and through the delivery of the project. Doing too much too quickly: - Delivering too much too quickly could cause problems for benefits realisations. River restoration is mostly constrained to seasonal work in channel and on the flood embankments due to ecology, social and working conditions. Establish working window and ensure if work cannot comfortably be completed before the window ends. Complete it next year or when funding is available. Trust should not be broken to deliver outcomes. Changing opportunities: - Constantly review opportunities of outcomes and funding options. New schemes, political agendas and ways of working rapidly change. Funding may not be available for some opportunities but working with a wide range of partners enabled shared use of skills and resources.

Image gallery

Edit Image gallery

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 Additional documents and videos Upload additional documents Additional links and references Edit links and references Link Description Supplementary Information Edit Supplementary Information