Case study:Boldersbeek: Difference between revisions
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project overview | {{Project overview | ||
|Status=Complete | |Status=Complete | ||
|Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Water quality | |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Water quality | ||
Line 14: | Line 13: | ||
|Contact organisation=Waterschap Rijn en Ijssel | |Contact organisation=Waterschap Rijn en Ijssel | ||
|Contact organisation url=www.wrij.nl | |Contact organisation url=www.wrij.nl | ||
|Name of parent multi-site project=Building with nature measures in streams | |||
|Multi-site=No | |Multi-site=No | ||
| | |Project summary=The Boldersbeek is a small tributary of the Groenlose Slinge. In 1999, two retention basins were created in this stream's catchment. The stream flows through one of these basins and next to the other basin. | ||
|Monitoring surveys and results=The ecology of the main stream has improved, but bank vegetation did not respond as intended. The banks turned out to be too narrow and too steep, leaving very little room for an adapted vegetation to develop. The retention basins are prone to getting filled in with vegetation and sediment. They require a lot of maintenance just to prevent them from turning into carrs (Dutch: elzenbroekbos) through plant succession. This makes the basins less suitable for water retention. However, some of the carrs that have started to grow are in fact desirable and contribute to a more varied landscape. | |||
|Lessons learn=Researchers of Alterra (now Wageningen Environmental Research) state that the basins would not have ondergone such rapid plant succession if they had been made a bit deeper. | |||
|Project title=Boldersbeek | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | {{Image gallery}} | ||
Line 21: | Line 24: | ||
{{Toggle button}} | {{Toggle button}} | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
|Subcatchment=Berkel | |||
}} | |||
{{Site | {{Site | ||
|Name=Boldersbeek | |Name=Boldersbeek |
Latest revision as of 10:05, 9 February 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Water quality |
Country | Netherlands |
Main contact forename | John |
Main contact surname | Lenssen |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Waterschap Rijn en Ijssel |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.wrij.nl |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
The Boldersbeek is a small tributary of the Groenlose Slinge. In 1999, two retention basins were created in this stream's catchment. The stream flows through one of these basins and next to the other basin.
Monitoring surveys and results
The ecology of the main stream has improved, but bank vegetation did not respond as intended. The banks turned out to be too narrow and too steep, leaving very little room for an adapted vegetation to develop. The retention basins are prone to getting filled in with vegetation and sediment. They require a lot of maintenance just to prevent them from turning into carrs (Dutch: elzenbroekbos) through plant succession. This makes the basins less suitable for water retention. However, some of the carrs that have started to grow are in fact desirable and contribute to a more varied landscape.
Lessons learnt
Researchers of Alterra (now Wageningen Environmental Research) state that the basins would not have ondergone such rapid plant succession if they had been made a bit deeper.
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Beekherstel Eefsebeek, Beekherstel Leerinkbeek, Beekherstel Ramsbeek, Beekherstel Willinkbeek, Beneden-Berkel
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
|