Case study:Kanaal van Deurne: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Case study status |Approval status=Draft }} {{Location |Location=51.414437826787164, 5.868223589240755 }} {{Project overview |Project title=Kanaal van Deurne |Status=Complet...") |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project overview | {{Project overview | ||
|Status=Complete | |Status=Complete | ||
|Themes=Flood risk management | |Themes=Flood risk management | ||
Line 14: | Line 13: | ||
|Contact organisation=Waterschap Aa en Maas | |Contact organisation=Waterschap Aa en Maas | ||
|Contact organisation url=www.aaenmaas.nl | |Contact organisation url=www.aaenmaas.nl | ||
|Name of parent multi-site project=Building with nature measures in streams | |||
|Multi-site=No | |Multi-site=No | ||
| | |Project summary=The Channel of Deurne and the parallel Helenavaart transport water from the river Meuse. The channels were originally dug out to facilitate peat transport and now mainly serve to maintain a sufficiently high water level in the surrounding area. Floating debris caused flooding problems in downstream areas. Rather than mowing all the vegetation, the water authority decided to only mow a 4 meter wide strip of the main channel. | ||
|Monitoring surveys and results=The number of species causing an increase in upstream water level has declined. | |||
|Project title=Kanaal van Deurne | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | {{Image gallery}} | ||
Line 22: | Line 24: | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment}} | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site | ||
|Name=Kanaal van Deurne | |||
|WFD water body code=NL99_PEK | |||
|WFD (national) typology=M3 | |||
|WFD water body name=Peelkanaal | |||
|Pre-project morphology=Artificial channel, | |||
|Reference morphology=Artificial channel, | |||
|Desired post project morphology=Artificial channel, | |||
|Heavily modified water body=No | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
|Dominant substrate=Sand, | |||
|River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable), Improved/semi-improved grassland/pasture, Rough unimproved grassland/pasture, Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural), | |||
|Average bankfull channel width category=5 - 10 m | |||
|Mean discharge category=1 - 10 m³/s | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations}} |
Latest revision as of 16:18, 4 January 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Location: 51° 24' 51.98" N, 5° 52' 5.60" E
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Flood risk management |
Country | Netherlands |
Main contact forename | Bram |
Main contact surname | Spierings |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Waterschap Aa en Maas |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.aaenmaas.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.
The Channel of Deurne and the parallel Helenavaart transport water from the river Meuse. The channels were originally dug out to facilitate peat transport and now mainly serve to maintain a sufficiently high water level in the surrounding area. Floating debris caused flooding problems in downstream areas. Rather than mowing all the vegetation, the water authority decided to only mow a 4 meter wide strip of the main channel.
Monitoring surveys and results
Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.
The number of species causing an increase in upstream water level has declined.
Lessons learnt
This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchment
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
|