Case study:March Burn at Riding Mill: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 27: Line 27:
{{Site}}
{{Site}}
{{Project background
{{Project background
|Project started=2012
|Project completed=2012/08/31
|Total cost category=10 - 50 k€
|Total cost category=10 - 50 k€
|Total1 cost=41000
|Total1 cost=41000

Revision as of 10:41, 30 January 2013

0.00
(0 votes)


To discuss or comment on this case study, please use the discussion page.


Location: 54° 56' 47.32" N, 1° 58' 48.19" 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 Fisheries
Country England
Main contact forename Paul
Main contact surname Atkinson
Main contact user ID User:NickRRC
Contact organisation Tyne Rivers Trust
Contact organisation web site http://tyneriverstrust.org/
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
mill weir on the March Burn before fish pass installation (picture courtesy of P.Atkinson from the Tyne Rivers Trust)

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The ageing mill weir at Riding Mill on the March Burn had become a serious barrier to fish migration. The difference in water levels upstream to downstream was 1000mm. Although large salmon can leap higher than this in certain circumstances, the very shallow water and the wide weir crest meant that the weir was virtually impassable.

In the summer of 2012 the Tyne Rivers Trust undertook work to improve fish passage. At this site electro fishing had highlighted poor salmon numbers and lower species diversity upstream of the obstruction. Following public consultation and using funding from DEFRA, contractors set about installing a full width rock ramp fish pass. This involved retaining the existing weir crest, with the addition of a series of rock ramps. The result is a series of pools constructed with 180 tonnes of stone which reduce the single large leap into several small cascades which are much more easily negotiated by all types of fish. Around 18 miles of river above the weir have become more accessible thanks to the work. Broomhaugh and Riding Parish Council had spent more than £10,000 on repairing the weir in the last decade alone. The River Restoration Centre would like to thank Paul Atkinson from the Tyne Rivers Trust for providing the information and photographs for this case study.

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.

Catchment and subcatchment

Select a catchment/subcatchment


Edit the catchment and subcatchment details
(affects all case studies in this subcatchment)

Subcatchment:Tyne


Site

Edit 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

Edit project background
Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started 2012
Works started
Works completed
Project completed 2012/08/31
Total cost category 10 - 50 k€
Total cost (k€) 4100041,000 k€ <br />41,000,000 € <br />
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources DEFRA, Broomhaugh and Riding Parish Council

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

Edit reasons for restoration
Mitigation of a pressure Barriers to fish migration
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Edit Measures
Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications rock ramp pool and fish pass construction
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement)
Other


Monitoring

Hydromorphological quality elements

Edit Hydromorphological
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Biological quality elements

Edit biological
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Physico-chemical quality elements

Edit 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

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


Monitoring documents

Upload monitoring documents



Image gallery


mill weir on the March Burn before fish pass installation (picture courtesy of P.Atkinson from the Tyne Rivers Trust)
mill weir on the March Burn after fish pass installation (picture courtesy of P.Atkinson from the Tyne Rivers Trust)


Additional documents and videos

Upload additional documents


Additional links and references

Edit links and references
Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information