Case study:Burton Weir (Upper) Fish Pass Project

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: none specified

Edit location

Project overview

Edit project overview

Status	Complete
Project web site
Themes	Habitat and biodiversity
Country	England
Main contact forename	Julie
Main contact surname	Wozniczka
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation	Trent Rivers Trust
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations	Environment Agency, East Staffordshire Borough Council
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

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.

Many fish species such as the salmon, sea trout and eel have to migrate hundreds of miles from the sea to the headwaters of rivers such as the Trent to spawn. Other coarse fish such as the barbel, chub, roach and perch do not migrate from the sea but they do need to be able to swim up and downstream to reach different parts of the river that will provide suitable habitat so that they can complete their lifecycle. Weirs, such as this one, can prevent them from migrating to upstream and into the many tributaries of the Trent system. They create barriers that divide up a river into isolated sections. As a result, wildlife, water, silts and gravels are no longer able to move freely through the river corridor which in turn means that it no longer functions effectively as a healthy river ecosystem. Burton Bridge weir falls within the ‘River Trent from Anker/Mease confluence to River Dove’ water body. It is classified as having poor ecological potential. This poor potential is due to diatoms being assessed as being at poor quali-ty, with fish and invertebrates at moderate quality. By improving fish passage along the River Trent, we will help the river to move towards good ecological potential.

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)

Site

Edit site

Name	Burton Bridge
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body	Yes
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

Edit project background

Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources

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

Edit reasons for restoration

Mitigation of a pressure
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project

Measures

Edit Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement)
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

Biological quality elements

Edit biological
quality elements

Element	When monitored		Type of monitoring		Control site used	Result
	Before measures	After measures	Qualitative	Quantitative

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

Edit Image gallery

Additional documents and videos

Upload additional documents

Additional links and references

Edit links and references

Link	Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information