Case study:Keent: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 39: Line 39:
|Total1 cost=12000
|Total1 cost=12000
}}
}}
{{Motivations}}
{{Motivations
{{Measures}}
|Specific mitigation=Flood risk management,
|Hydromorphological quality elements=Flow velocities, Quantity & dynamics of flow,
}}
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Connection between river channel and former side branches, Riverbed dug out,
|Management interventions=Grazing
|Social measures=Creation of visitors centre, Exposition about the past of Keent
}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{End table}}
{{End table}}

Latest revision as of 15:17, 2 January 2019

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: 51° 46' 15.18" N, 5° 41' 44.93" 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 Complete
Project web site
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture
Country Netherlands
Main contact forename Rogier
Main contact surname Vogelij
Main contact user ID User:Rogier
Contact organisation Dienst Landelijk Gebied
Contact organisation web site http://www.dienstlandelijkgebied.nl/
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
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.


In Keent, a nature area was developped. The former river bed was partly dug out and connected to the Meuse River. Keent was made into an island, surrounded with water and nature. The result of the project is a wide gulley in the middle of forests, valleys, swamps and recreational facilities. Also the water level in the Meuse river was lowered by 3.5 cm. Horses and cows graze the area to combat the growth of trees and bushes.

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.


Image gallery


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Meuse
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body Yes
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present No
Invasive species present No
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate Clay
River corridor land use Intensive agriculture (arable)
Average bankfull channel width category more than 50 m
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category 100 - 1000 m³/s
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category
Average channel gradient
Average unit stream power (W/m2)


Project background

Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started 2007/01/01
Works started
Works completed
Project completed 2014/07/04
Total cost category 1000 - 5000 k€
Total cost (k€) 1200012,000 k€ <br />12,000,000 € <br />
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

Mitigation of a pressure Flood risk management
Hydromorphology Flow velocities, Quantity & dynamics of flow
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Connection between river channel and former side branches, Riverbed dug out
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions Grazing
Social measures (incl. engagement) Creation of visitors centre, Exposition about the past of Keent
Other


Monitoring

Hydromorphological quality elements

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

Biological quality elements

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

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

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


Monitoring documents



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description
http://www.bd.nl/regio/regio-oss-en-uden/oss/graphic-keent-7.549405 Info graphic by Brabant's dagblad (Dutch)

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information