Case study:The Babina Restoration Project: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
Within a few years a redevelopment of the site-specific biodiversity occurred and ecosystem services like nutrient retention and fish recruitment became obvious. Additionally, the reconnected polder enable reed harvesting, grazing, fishing and ecotourism. | Within a few years a redevelopment of the site-specific biodiversity occurred and ecosystem services like nutrient retention and fish recruitment became obvious. Additionally, the reconnected polder enable reed harvesting, grazing, fishing and ecotourism. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=Babina area before restoration.jpg | |||
|Caption=The Babina polder before restoration | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=The Babina polder - after restoration works.JPG | |||
|Caption=The Babina polder after restoration | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=Restored lake and Babina island.JPG | |||
|Caption=Restored lake and Babina Island | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=European mink - Mustela lutreola in the restored area.JPG | |||
|Caption=European mink (Mustela lutreola) in the restored area | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=European otter - Lutra lutra in the restored area.JPG | |||
|Caption=European otter (Lutra lutra) in the restored area | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=Little Egret- Egretta garzetta in the restored area.JPG | |||
|Caption=Little egret (Egretta garzetta) in the restored area | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=Satellite image of Babina area 1993.jpg | |||
|Caption=Satellite image of Babina area (1993) | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study image | |||
|File name=Satellite image of Babina area 1996.jpg | |||
|Caption=Satellite image of Babina area (1996) | |||
}} | |||
{{Image_gallery_end}} | |||
{{Toggle button}} | |||
{{Toggle content start}} | |||
{{Case study subcatchment | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
|Subcatchment=Chilia Branch | |Subcatchment=Chilia Branch | ||
Line 41: | Line 78: | ||
|Dominant substrate=Sand,Clay | |Dominant substrate=Sand,Clay | ||
|River corridor land use=Grassland, Wetland | |River corridor land use=Grassland, Wetland | ||
|Average bankfull channel width category= | |Average bankfull channel width category=10 - 50 m | ||
|Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m | |Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m | ||
|Avrg1 bankfull channel depth=1.95 | |Avrg1 bankfull channel depth=1.95 | ||
Line 78: | Line 114: | ||
{{Measures | {{Measures | ||
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Create breaches in the bank | |Bank and bed modifications measure=Create breaches in the bank | ||
|Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of | |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of wetland | ||
|Planform / Channel pattern=Reconnecting | |Planform / Channel pattern=Reconnecting polder, | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}} | ||
Line 172: | Line 208: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{End_table}} | {{End_table}} | ||
{{ | {{Other responses header}} | ||
{{ | {{Other response table row | ||
|Element= | |Element=Ecological tourism development | ||
|Monitored before=No | |||
|Monitored after=No | |||
|Qualitative monitoring=No | |||
|Quantitative monitoring=No | |||
|Control site used=No | |||
|Monitored before= | |Result=Improvement | ||
}} | |||
|Monitored after= | {{Other response table row | ||
|Element=Fish | |||
|Qualitative monitoring= | |Monitored before=No | ||
|Monitored after=Yes | |||
|Quantitative monitoring= | |Qualitative monitoring=No | ||
|Quantitative monitoring=No | |||
|Control site used= | |Control site used=No | ||
}} | |||
| | {{Other response table row | ||
|Element=Reed | |||
|Monitored before=No | |||
|Monitored after=Yes | |||
|Qualitative monitoring=No | |||
|Quantitative monitoring=No | |||
|Control site used=No | |||
}} | |||
{{Other response table row | |||
|Element=Pasture | |||
|Monitored before=No | |||
|Monitored after=Yes | |||
|Qualitative monitoring=No | |||
|Quantitative monitoring=No | |||
|Control site used=No | |||
}} | |||
{{Other response table row | |||
|Element=Medicinal plants | |||
|Monitored before=No | |||
|Monitored after=Yes | |||
|Qualitative monitoring=No | |||
|Quantitative monitoring=No | |||
|Control site used=No | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{End_table}} | {{End_table}} | ||
Line 204: | Line 261: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Monitoring_documents_end}} | {{Monitoring_documents_end}} | ||
{{Additional Documents}} | {{Additional Documents}} | ||
{{Case study documents | {{Case study documents | ||
Line 252: | Line 275: | ||
{{Supplementary_Information | {{Supplementary_Information | ||
|Information= | |Information= | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Case_study_upload}} | {{Case_study_upload}} | ||
{{Toggle content end}} |
Latest revision as of 09:45, 2 June 2017
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Habitat and biodiversity |
Country | Romania |
Main contact forename | Marian |
Main contact surname | Tudor |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | The Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, Tulcea |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.ddni.ro |
Partner organisations | The Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Authority |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
Until the 20th century vast areas of the Danube Delta faced only minimal human impacts
through extensive fishery and reed harvesting. Since then the Danube Delta has undergone
multiple human impacts like embankment, channelization and drainage. Moreover, large
areas were diked and the polders used for agriculture.
The Babina polder (2.100 ha) was reconnected to the Danube in 1994 and recovery has been monitored by the Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development.
Within a few years a redevelopment of the site-specific biodiversity occurred and ecosystem services like nutrient retention and fish recruitment became obvious. Additionally, the reconnected polder enable reed harvesting, grazing, fishing and ecotourism.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: The Cernovca Restoration Project
Site
Project background
Cost for project phases
Reasons for river restoration
Measures
MonitoringHydromorphological quality elements
Biological quality elements
Physico-chemical quality elements
Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic
Monitoring documents
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
Supplementary InformationEdit Supplementary Information
|