Case study:Jufferbeek: Difference between revisions
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
|Name of parent multi-site project=Building with nature measures in streams | |Name of parent multi-site project=Building with nature measures in streams | ||
|Multi-site=No | |Multi-site=No | ||
|Project summary=In 2006, dead wood was introduced in this stream. The purpose of this exercise was to restore the circulation of organic detritus and provide a habitat for particular species. It was also meant to raise the streambed and increase the retention capacity. | |Project summary=The Jufferbeek is a very small stream with an irregular discharge. It is a tributary of the Deurningerbeek and Regge. Parts of the stream are still meandering, but other parts, that are close to urban or industrial areas, have been straightened. In 2006, dead wood was introduced in this stream. The purpose of this exercise was to restore the circulation of organic detritus and provide a habitat for particular species. It was also meant to raise the streambed and increase the retention capacity. | ||
|Monitoring surveys and results=Water levels downstream of the wood packages are higher and fluctuate more downstream of the wood package. This may be caused by the increased flow resistance due to the dead wood, leading to a higher water level for the same discharge. Water level peaks downstream of the wood package are smaller relative to the average water levels. This may because of water retention by the wood packages. As a result of the introduction of dead wood, sandy substrates have become less dominant and silty substrates have become more prominent. No change in nutrient levels was observed. A change in species composition was observed, but this change was short-lived. A subtle change in macroinvertebrate composition remained for a longer period afterwards. | |||
|Project title=Jufferbeek | |Project title=Jufferbeek | ||
}} | }} | ||
Line 22: | Line 23: | ||
{{Toggle button}} | {{Toggle button}} | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
{{Site}} | |Subcatchment=Vecht (Overijssel) | ||
}} | |||
{{Site | |||
|Name=Jufferbeek | |||
|WFD water body code=NL05 Oudebornschebeek, | |||
|WFD (national) typology=R6 | |||
|WFD water body name=Oude Bornsche Beek | |||
|Pre-project morphology=Actively meandering, Straightened, | |||
|Reference morphology=Actively meandering, | |||
|Desired post project morphology=Actively meandering, Straightened, | |||
|Heavily modified water body=Yes | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
|Dominant substrate=Sand, | |||
|River corridor land use=Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural), Grassland, Intensive agriculture (arable), Parklands garden, | |||
|Average bankfull channel width category=Less than 2 m | |||
|Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m | |||
|Average channel gradient category=0.001 - 0.01 | |||
|Avrg channel gradient=0.0016 | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations}} |
Latest revision as of 14:26, 10 March 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Habitat and biodiversity, Water quality |
Country | Netherlands |
Main contact forename | Maarten |
Main contact surname | Zonderwijk |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Waterschap Vechtstromen |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.vechtstromen.nl |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
The Jufferbeek is a very small stream with an irregular discharge. It is a tributary of the Deurningerbeek and Regge. Parts of the stream are still meandering, but other parts, that are close to urban or industrial areas, have been straightened. In 2006, dead wood was introduced in this stream. The purpose of this exercise was to restore the circulation of organic detritus and provide a habitat for particular species. It was also meant to raise the streambed and increase the retention capacity.
Monitoring surveys and results
Water levels downstream of the wood packages are higher and fluctuate more downstream of the wood package. This may be caused by the increased flow resistance due to the dead wood, leading to a higher water level for the same discharge. Water level peaks downstream of the wood package are smaller relative to the average water levels. This may because of water retention by the wood packages. As a result of the introduction of dead wood, sandy substrates have become less dominant and silty substrates have become more prominent. No change in nutrient levels was observed. A change in species composition was observed, but this change was short-lived. A subtle change in macroinvertebrate composition remained for a longer period afterwards.
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, Living Vechte-Dinkel, Marswetering, Midden Regge, Oude Bornschebeek, Oude Diep... 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
|