Case study:Wold Aa: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment}} | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site | ||
|Name=Wold Aa | |||
|WFD water body code=NL35_Wold_Aa | |||
|WFD (national) typology=R5 | |||
|WFD water body name=Wold Aa | |||
|Pre-project morphology=Straightened, | |||
|Reference morphology=Actively meandering, | |||
|Desired post project morphology=Straightened, | |||
|Heavily modified water body=Yes | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
|Dominant substrate=Sand, | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations}} |
Revision as of 15:52, 25 January 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Location: 52° 44' 29.05" N, 6° 18' 40.45" 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 | Environmental flows and water resources, Water quality |
Country | Netherlands |
Main contact forename | Sander |
Main contact surname | Verheijen |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Waterschap Drents Overijsselse Delta |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.wdodelta.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 Water Authority Drents Overijsselse Delta tried to increase the flow velocity in this stream to improve aquatic ecology and meet WFD criteria. Weed-cutting was limited to the main channel and the stream was divided into a blue and a green zone. The blue zone was regularly maintained to ensure flow continuity, while the green zone was maintained less often.
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
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
|