Case study:Wold Aa: Difference between revisions
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Case study status |Approval status=Draft }} {{Location |Location=52.74140412615049, 6.311236245353418 }} {{Project overview |Project title=Wold Aa |Status=Complete |Themes=E...") |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project overview | {{Project overview | ||
|Status=Complete | |Status=Complete | ||
|Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Water quality | |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Water quality | ||
Line 14: | Line 13: | ||
|Contact organisation=Waterschap Drents Overijsselse Delta | |Contact organisation=Waterschap Drents Overijsselse Delta | ||
|Contact organisation url=www.wdodelta.nl | |Contact organisation url=www.wdodelta.nl | ||
|Name of parent multi-site project=Building with nature measures in streams | |||
|Multi-site=No | |Multi-site=No | ||
| | |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. | ||
|Project title=Wold Aa | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | {{Image gallery}} | ||
Line 21: | Line 22: | ||
{{Toggle button}} | {{Toggle button}} | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
{{Site}} | |Subcatchment=Vecht (Overijssel) | ||
}} | |||
{{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}} |
Latest revision as of 13:12, 26 January 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
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 |
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
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Beentjesgraven, Beneden Regge, De Doorbraak, Deurningerbeek, Dinkel Noord, Jufferbeek, Living Vechte-Dinkel, Marswetering, Midden Regge, Oude Bornschebeek... further results
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
|