Case study:Gunville Phase I: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Case study status
{{Case study status
|Approval status=Draft
|Approval status=Approved
}}
}}
{{Location
{{Location
Line 16: Line 16:
|Partner organisations=Environment Agency, Natural England, Wessex Water, Wiltshire Fishery Association,
|Partner organisations=Environment Agency, Natural England, Wessex Water, Wiltshire Fishery Association,
|Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Strategic Framework for Restoration of the River Avon (SFfRRA)
|Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Strategic Framework for Restoration of the River Avon (SFfRRA)
|Multi-site=Yes
|Multi-site=No
|Project picture=P6080078.JPG
|Project picture=P6080078.JPG
|Picture description=Gunville Phase I
|Picture description=Gunville Phase I
Line 27: Line 27:
}}
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Gunville restoration site old hatch section David Kelly 07.08.12.JPG
|Caption=Upstream of Gunville hatches, prior to project delivery
}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle button}}
Line 33: Line 37:
|Subcatchment=Hampshire Avon (Upper)
|Subcatchment=Hampshire Avon (Upper)
}}
}}
{{Site}}
{{Site
|WFD water body code=GB108043022350
|WFD water body name=Hampshire Avon (Upper)
|Heavily modified water body=No
|Protected species present=No
|Invasive species present=No
}}
{{Project background
{{Project background
|Reach length directly affected=750m
|Reach length directly affected=750m
Line 49: Line 59:
}}
}}
{{Measures
{{Measures
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Reintroduction of natural features i.e. meanders and gravel bed,
|Bank and bed modifications measure=Restoring gravel bed, Introducing large woody debris,
|Floodplain / River corridor=lowering river bank,  
|Floodplain / River corridor=lowering river bank, Wetland habitat,
|Planform / Channel pattern=Actively meandering,  
|Planform / Channel pattern=Enhancing flow diversity, Habitat restoration, Meandering channel,
|Management interventions=Installation of large woody debris to increase flow and habitat diversity. Allow floodplain communities to develop naturally., Flow management,  
|Management interventions=Flow management,
|Social measures=Awareness raising,  
|Social measures=Awareness raising,
}}
}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}

Latest revision as of 16:40, 2 January 2019

0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 51° 13' 14.48" N, 1° 46' 51.48" 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 Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology
Country England
Main contact forename Martijn
Main contact surname Antheunisse
Main contact user ID User:Martijnantheunisse
Contact organisation Wiltshire Wildlife Trust
Contact organisation web site http://www.wiltshirewildlife.org
Partner organisations Environment Agency, Natural England, Wessex Water, Wiltshire Fishery Association
Parent multi-site project

Case_study:Strategic Framework for Restoration of the River Avon (SFfRRA)

This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Gunville Phase I

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Commissioned by Wiltshire Wildlife Trust and funded through a successful Catchment Restoration Fund bid, Cain Bioengineering submitted a very professional interpretation for the 750m stretch of river, incorporating a mixture of geotextile and earth back-fill berms, brushwood sediment traps, gravel riffles, large woody debris and live tree hinging. The general theme of the works was remeandering, channel narrowing and bank regrading. The creation of off-line ponds provided fill for the geotextile berms and created valuable riparian habitat. Due to the nature of the site and the partners involved (being part of the MoD training estate, with fishing rights given to theServicesDry Fly Fishing Association (SDFFA)), stakeholder consultation was crucial in the on-going development of the project. As a result of this consultation and mitigation for Water vole (Arvicola terrestris), designs had to be adapted several times during the project, leading to a bespoke, dynamic restoration which should be readily able to withstand the variety of pressures faced by the river.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


Monitoring consists of invertebrate surveys, electro-fish surveys and fixed-point photography. Data was collected throughout 2013 and 2014 through volunteer effort. Results have yet to be analysed.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


Future projects should incorporate time for delays such as flooding, water vole mitigation and other potential difficulties. Despite not being public land, improved communications with local residents would have made progress much smoother.


Image gallery


Upstream of Gunville hatches, prior to project delivery
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district South West
River basin Hampshire Avon

Subcatchment

River name Hampshire Avon (Upper)
Area category 100 - 1000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 200 - 500 m
Maximum altitude (m) 212212 m <br />0.212 km <br />21,200 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Arable and Horticulture
Waterbody ID GB108043022350



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Longstreet A 91a, River Avon Habitat Enhancement, Fifield, River Avon at East Chisenbury, West Amesbury


Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB108043022350
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name Hampshire Avon (Upper)
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body No
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present No
Invasive species present No
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) 750m0.75 km <br />75,000 cm <br />
Project started 2012/06/01
Works started 2012/10/10
Works completed 2012/11/16
Project completed 2012/12/13
Total cost category 100 - 500 k€
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Catchment Restoration Fund

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
Hydromorphology Over-wide, over-deep dredged channel with little flow variability
Biology Poor species diversity
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project Impoundment from downstream hatch structure


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Restoring gravel bed, Introducing large woody debris
Floodplain / River corridor lowering river bank, Wetland habitat
Planform / Channel pattern Enhancing flow diversity, Habitat restoration, Meandering channel
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions Flow management
Social measures (incl. engagement) Awareness raising
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