Case study:Kirkstone Beck River Restoration: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 11: Line 11:
|Main contact forename=Alice
|Main contact forename=Alice
|Main contact surname=James
|Main contact surname=James
|Main contact id=Alice.James
|Main contact id=AliceJames
|Contact organisation=The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty
|Contact organisation=The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty
|Contact organisation url=www.nationaltrust.org.uk/
|Contact organisation url=www.nationaltrust.org.uk/

Revision as of 17:09, 25 March 2024

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: 54° 29' 59.68" N, 2° 55' 39.33" W
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, Hydromorphology, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Alice
Main contact surname James
Main contact user ID User:AliceJames
Contact organisation The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty
Contact organisation web site http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project

Case_study:Ullswater Catchment Restoration

This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Project picture

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Located upstream of Brothers Water in the Ullswater valley, Kirkstone Beck runs through the valley bottom at Hartsop Hall Farm. The beck, and its tributaries, had been subjected to significant modifications, straightened and with large embankments completely disconnecting the channel from the floodplain.


However, Hartsop Hall Farm is one of the few farms in the Lake District which still produces all its own silage and hay on-farm. With limited valley bottom land, every little bit of floodplain is therefore vital to the success of the farm business. In 2019 the National Trust’s Riverlands project, part of a national programme of river and catchment restoration work, began working closely with the tenant farmer to develop a river restoration design which allowed the development of natural processes within a confined area, protecting the meadows that are relied upon to feed livestock over winter. Other partners in the scheme design included the Environment Agency and Natural England.


An interest in potential change was triggered by Storm Desmond in 2015, during which the only access bridge to the farmstead was damaged and a novel solution was sought. After consultation with the tenant farmer to agree which bits of land could be given over to the river, the resulting design aimed for a continuous thread of restoration along ~2km of channel. The aims of the project were to restore natural processes to this length of river, improve the SSSI condition of Brothers Water immediately downstream of the restored reach, and deliver a sustainable, flood resilient access solution to the farmstead.

The project was delivered in 2022. Embankments were set back from the channel, retaining protection for the meadows but allowing the river much more space. T-junction style tributary confluences were restored to wide, wandering systems, and the narrow single-span bridge was replaced with a wider double-span crossing. In the fens of Brothers Water, the design took a process-led approach, blocking the existing channel with large woody debris to encourage the natural evolution of an anastomosing system across the delta.

Initial analysis shows that the total river area has increased significantly, from 1,850m2 to 23,300m2; that’s more than 12 times as much river habitat available post-restoration compared to the baseline. Considering the level of compromise required on this project, these figures are impressive. Furthermore, flood events since construction have seen dynamic changes throughout the restored areas, with channels shifting through three large boulder wandering sections (semi-permanent gravel bar consisting of larger, boulder-type material). Large areas of open standing water have also been created, adding an important habitat which is so often missing from the landscape.

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


Kirkstone Beck pre-restoration, a snarrow, single thread channel with revetments, embankments and little diversity
The completed restoration of Kirkstone Beck, with a wider river channel and diversity of features
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate
River corridor land use
Average bankfull channel width category
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category
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) 20002,000 m <br />2 km <br />200,000 cm <br />
Project started 2019
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category 500 - 1000 k€
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Water Environment Grant, National Trust

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 to infrastructure (bridge)
Hydromorphology River restoration to restore natural process and floodplain reconnection - responding to physical modifications on the waterbody
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Embankment removal, Diversification of in-channel features
Floodplain / River corridor Rejuvination of river delta, widening of river channel
Planform / Channel pattern Widening to allow wandering sections
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) partnership working with organisations including the EA, NE & LDNPA, as well as the tenant farmer; site visits hosted to share project success and lessons
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

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information