Case study:Hurdalselva - River Hurdalselv: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project overview | {{Project overview | ||
|Status=Complete | |Status=Complete | ||
|Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity | |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity | ||
| Line 12: | Line 11: | ||
|Main contact forename=Bjørn Otto | |Main contact forename=Bjørn Otto | ||
|Main contact surname=Dønnum | |Main contact surname=Dønnum | ||
|Main contact id=Arolam | |||
|Multi-site=No | |Multi-site=No | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | |||
{{Image gallery end}} | |||
{{Toggle button}} | |||
{{Toggle content start}} | |||
{{Case study subcatchment | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
|Subcatchment=002-1568-R | |Subcatchment=002-1568-R | ||
| Line 28: | Line 32: | ||
|Average bankfull channel width category=10 - 50 m | |Average bankfull channel width category=10 - 50 m | ||
|Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m | |Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m | ||
|Mean discharge category=1 - 10 m³/s | |||
|Average channel gradient category=more than 0.1 | |Average channel gradient category=more than 0.1 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background | ||
|Reach length directly affected=1100 | |||
|Total1 cost=32 | |||
|Funding sources=Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE), private funding, Local fishing associations, | |||
|Invst and design cost=5 | |||
|Investigation and design Lead organisation=NJFF-Akershus | |||
|Investigation and design Other contact forename=Bjørn Otto | |||
|Investigation and design Other contact surname=Dønnum | |||
|stk engagement cost=1 | |||
|Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Hurdal JFF | |||
|Wrk and supervision cost=26 | |||
|Works and supervision Lead organisation=NVE | |||
|Supplementary funding information=This was..... | |||
}} | |||
{{Motivations | {{Motivations | ||
|Specific mitigation=Flow channelization | |Specific mitigation=Flow channelization | ||
| Line 46: | Line 64: | ||
{{Monitoring documents}} | {{Monitoring documents}} | ||
{{Monitoring documents end}} | {{Monitoring documents end}} | ||
{{Additional Documents}} | {{Additional Documents}} | ||
{{Additional Documents end}} | {{Additional Documents end}} | ||
| Line 55: | Line 71: | ||
|Information=The works in this particular river stretch was initiated to test different restoration techniques in a rather high gradient river (part of the river section has a gradient of 1,5%). Two days after completion of the in-river works, a large flood (estimated to be a 1:50-year return flood) destroyed part of the constructions. Not very encouraging for the local angling club, because the project was meant to be part of a larger project. Funding however stopped after the trial, and there has not been any attempt to restart the project. | |Information=The works in this particular river stretch was initiated to test different restoration techniques in a rather high gradient river (part of the river section has a gradient of 1,5%). Two days after completion of the in-river works, a large flood (estimated to be a 1:50-year return flood) destroyed part of the constructions. Not very encouraging for the local angling club, because the project was meant to be part of a larger project. Funding however stopped after the trial, and there has not been any attempt to restart the project. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Toggle content end}} | |||
Latest revision as of 13:32, 1 November 2018
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Location: 60° 25' 9.39" N, 11° 3' 37.75" E
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.
Project overview
| Status | Complete |
|---|---|
| Project web site | |
| Themes | Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity |
| Country | Norway |
| Main contact forename | Bjørn Otto |
| Main contact surname | Dønnum |
| Main contact user ID | User:Arolam |
| Contact organisation | |
| Contact organisation web site | |
| Partner organisations | |
| Parent multi-site project | |
| This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.
Project summary
This case study hasn’t got any project summary, you can add some by editing the project overview.
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
|
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Site
Project background
Cost for project phases
Supplementary funding informationThis was.....
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 The works in this particular river stretch was initiated to test different restoration techniques in a rather high gradient river (part of the river section has a gradient of 1,5%). Two days after completion of the in-river works, a large flood (estimated to be a 1:50-year return flood) destroyed part of the constructions. Not very encouraging for the local angling club, because the project was meant to be part of a larger project. Funding however stopped after the trial, and there has not been any attempt to restart the project.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||