Case study:Tidal Dee Love my Estuary

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

0.00

(0 votes)

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

Location: 53° 14' 20.82" N, 2° 59' 38.51" 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 Tidal Dee Love my Estuary\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 Complete\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EThemes:\u003C/b\u003E Estuary\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cbr /\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E","title":"Tidal Dee Love my Estuary","link":"","lat":53.239116,"lon":-2.9940319,"icon":"/wiki/images/c/ce/Green_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	Complete
Project web site	http://www.cheshirewildlifetrust.org.uk/lovemyestuary
Themes	Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality, Urban
Country	England
Main contact forename	Sarah
Main contact surname	Bennett
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation	Cheshire Wildlife Trust
Contact organisation web site	http://www.cheshirewildlifetrust.org.uk/
Partner organisations
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects

Pollution Prevention Pack cover

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.

The Dee (N.Wales) transitional waterbody is currently at moderate potential, with levels of Dissolved Inorganic Nitrate (DIN) identified as the Reason for Not Achieving Good status. As a transitional waterbody, the vast majority of water quality issues are inherited from upstream. With only a short stretch of the River Dee sitting within our catchment partnership area, we focussed on reducing water pollution on the small coastal waterbodies sitting on the English side of the border: Finchetts Gutter, Shotwick Brook and Burton Brook, as well as the unclassified land bordering the eastern coast of the Estuary (West Wirral), which features a designated Bathing Water at West Kirby. The Estuary features designated Shellfish Waters (Dee (West) and Dee (East)) and is internationally important for wildlife; as reflected in its designations as an SAC, SPA and Ramsar site.

The Tidal Dee Catchment Partnership has identified misconnections and poorly managed septic tanks as a significant pollution issue within these waterbodies, particularly due to the lack of mains sewerage on Burton Brook and Shotwick Brook and due to the urban nature of Finchetts Gutter. These issues are reflected in the Reasons for Not Achieving Good Status for our 3 target waterbodies and the Dee (N.Wales) transitional waterbody. Finchetts Gutter also sits within a Nutrient Sensitive Area.

The Tidal Dee Catchment Partnership, through stakeholder engagement, has identified a general detachment from the estuary amongst local communities – particularly a lack of understanding of how personal actions affect the water environment. Learning from the successes of the Environment Agency/United Utilities/Keep Britain Tidy “Love my Beach” project, we want to use water pollution issues as a way to inspire stakeholders towards greater stewardship of the water environment as well as achieving a greater understanding of the importance of water quality on wildlife amongst local communities.

Whilst advice is available on water pollution issues with leaflets often offered, tailored advice packs for different sectors do not currently exist. Not knowing which organisation to seek what type of advice from often leads to issues with getting across simple, succinct and relevant advice.

We are aware that these issues are far from unique to this catchment, so we wish to utilise this as an opportunity to scope best practice in order to help towards the reduction of water pollution nationally.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.

A good coverage was achieved across all three waterbodies with nearly 80% of their total length covered by walkover surveys. This resulted in 293 recorded pollution sources, whether observed or potential. The vast majority of pollution sources noted only showed potential for impacting the waterbodies, with comparatively few (9 significant) having a significant impact on over 100 metres of watercourse.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.

Water pollution is a difficult topic to engage and enthuse members of the public about. More people were engaged about the topic when we held stands at already existing events that people would be going to rather than hoping people would attend an event specifically held by this project. We found that making the events aimed at homeowners targeted to families meant that more people attended and we could discuss general water management and water pollution with the adults whilst the children did craft activities. Relating water pollution to wildlife on the estuary (which is a prominent feature locally) meant it was easier to engage members of the public about the topic.

The walkover surveys were a success in gathering information to inform future delivery projects and in engaging partner organisations in Water Framework Directive project delivery.

The quality of the Pollution Prevention Pack was highly regarded by partners including stakeholders from other Catchment Partnerships. Enthusiasm for the packs has come from stakeholders in Devon, Gloucestershire, Northumberland, Derbyshire, Sussex, Shropshire and Bedfordshire. We know of two organisations from neighbouring Catchment Partnerships that are making minor amendments to the electronic version so they can use them locally.

Image gallery

Edit Image gallery

Catchment and subcatchment Select a catchment/subcatchment Edit the catchment and subcatchment details (affects all case studies in this 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 2015/01/01 Works started Works completed Project completed Total cost category Total cost (k€) Benefit to cost ratio Funding sources Catchment Partnership Action Fund 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 Water quality Hydromorphology Biology Physico-chemical Misconnected sewer pipes 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