Case study:Dove Weir removal: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 211: Line 211:
{{Additional_Documents}}
{{Additional_Documents}}
{{Additional_Documents_end}}
{{Additional_Documents_end}}
{{Additional_links_and_references_header}}
{{Additional links and references header}}
{{Additional links and references
|Link=www.therrc.co.uk/case_studies/dove%20at%20dovedale.pdf
|Description=River Restoration Centre Case Study
}}
{{Additional_links_and_references_footer}}
{{Additional_links_and_references_footer}}
{{Supplementary_Information
{{Supplementary_Information

Revision as of 08:50, 9 August 2012

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

0.00
(0 votes)


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


Location: 53° 2' 0.13" N, 1° 45' 39.48" 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 Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Spatial planning
Country England
Main contact forename Nick
Main contact surname Elbourne
Main contact user ID User:NickRRC
Contact organisation River Restoration Centre
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations Leek and District Fly Fishing Association
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
River Dove downstream of weir removal, with introduced woody debris

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The Leek and District Fly Fishing Association (LDFFA) undertook work to remove an artificial weir in an attempt to restore a more natural flow to the river. The river was also 're-wilded' to introduce woody debris and other material to enhance fish habitats.

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)

Catchment

River basin district Anglian
River basin Broadland Rivers

Subcatchment

River name Dove
Area category 100 - 1000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category Less than 100 m
Maximum altitude (m) 6969 m <br />0.069 km <br />6,900 cm <br />
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Arable and Horticulture
Waterbody ID GB105034045710



Site

Edit site
Name Dovedale
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology Single channel, Impounded, High width:depth, Embanked
Reference morphology Single channel, Pool-riffle
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body Yes
National/international site designation UK - Site of Special Scientific Interest
Local/regional site designations Area of Special Conservation Interest
Protected species present No
Invasive species present No
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology Artificially regulated
Dominant substrate Gravel, Silt
River corridor land use Woodland, Extensive agriculture
Average bankfull channel width category 10 - 50 m
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category 5 - 10 m
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) 1000 m1 km <br />100,000 cm <br />
Project started 2010/07/01
Works started
Works completed 2010/08/01
Project completed
Total cost category Less than 10 k€"Less than 10 k€" is not in the list (Less than 1 k€, 1 - 10 k€, 10 - 50 k€, 50 - 100 k€, 100 - 500 k€, 500 - 1000 k€, 1000 - 5000 k€, 5000 - 10000 k€, more than 10000 k€) of allowed values for the "Total cost category" property.
Total cost (k€) 2 k€2,000 € <br />
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Leek and District Fly Fishing Association

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design Leek and District Fly Fishing Association
Stakeholder engagement and communication Leek and District Fly Fishing Association
Works and works supervision Leek and District Fly Fishing Association
Post-project management and maintenance Leek and District Fly Fishing Association
Monitoring Leek and District Fly Fishing Association



Reasons for river restoration

Edit reasons for restoration
Mitigation of a pressure Reservoir impoundment, Abundant weirs
Hydromorphology Substrate conditions, Channel pattern/planform, Quantity & dynamics of flow
Biology Fish: Species composition, Fish: Abundance
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project Improvement of ecological value, Enhancement of natural flow


Measures

Edit Measures
Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Vegetation cut back
Floodplain / River corridor Trees felled, Natural debris introduced
Planform / Channel pattern Removal of a weir, Increase in sinuousity
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement) Warning signs provided to stop public removing debris or rebuilding weirs
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
Substrate conditions Yes Yes Yes Improvement

Biological quality elements

Edit biological
quality elements
Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative
Fish: Species composition Yes Yes Yes Awaiting results
Fish: Abundance Yes Yes Yes Awaiting results

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



Additional documents and videos

Upload additional documents


Additional links and references

Edit links and references
Link Description
http://www.therrc.co.uk/case studies/dove%20at%20dovedale.pdf River Restoration Centre Case Study

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information