Case study:Little Don Catchment Case Study

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° 29' 58.91" N, 1° 40' 10.60" W

Edit location

Loading map...

{"format":"googlemaps3","type":"HYBRID","minzoom":false,"maxzoom":false,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"limit":50,"offset":0,"link":"all","sort":[""],"order":[],"headers":"show","mainlabel":"","intro":"","outro":"","searchlabel":"... further results","default":"","import-annotation":false,"width":"auto","height":"400px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"visitedicon":"","wmsoverlay":false,"zoom":14,"layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview","rotate"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"resizable":false,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"cluster":false,"clustergridsize":60,"clustermaxzoom":20,"clusterzoomonclick":true,"clusteraveragecenter":true,"clusterminsize":2,"imageoverlays":[],"kml":[],"gkml":[""],"searchmarkers":"","fullscreen":false,"scrollwheelzoom":false,"showtitle":false,"hidenamespace":true,"template":"Location map popup","userparam":"","activeicon":"","pagelabel":false,"ajaxcoordproperty":"","ajaxquery":"","locations":[{"text":"\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cbr /\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EProject Title:\u003C/b\u003E Little Don Catchment Case Study\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003ECountry:\u003C/b\u003E \u003Ca href=\"/wiki/index.php?title=England\" title=\"England\"\u003EEngland\u003C/a\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EProject Status:\u003C/b\u003E Complete\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EThemes:\u003C/b\u003E Environmental flows and water resources\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cbr /\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E","title":"Little Don Catchment Case Study","link":"","lat":53.499696916496,"lon":-1.669610789694,"icon":"/wiki/images/a/af/Red_marker.png"}]}

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	Environmental flows and water resources
Country	England
Main contact forename	sarah
Main contact surname	Hyde
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation	Environment Agency
Contact organisation web site	http://https://www.catchmentbasedapproach.org/index.php?option=com k2&view=item&layout=item&id=29&Itemid=244
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects	No

Project picture

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.

• • Brief Outline of Scheme

The Little Don rises in the Peak District National Park and joins the River Don just south of Stocksbridge town, a river length of about 20km. Flow in the watercourses are heavily regulated and managed by three reservoirs and several smaller impounding weirs. The reservoirs are operated by Yorkshire Water, with Langsett and Midhope reservoirs being operated for water storage, and Underbank reservoir for a compensation flow release. Langsett and Midhope reservoirs modify the downstream flow regimes by buffering the range and magnitude of flows. As a result the baseflow is lower than would be expected naturally and the timing and magnitude of autumn/winter high flows is dependent on the levels in the reservoirs during this time. A compensating flow is released from Underbank reservoir (the bottom reservoir of the group), although analysis of catchment inflows and rainfall patterns has shown this to be too high, a legacy of the industrial use of the Don catchment. Other Yorkshire Water reservoir compensation flow release trials have demonstrated that modifying flows to more naturally flow regimes can improve the quantity and diversity of the ecological community. The Little Don is defined as a Heavily Modified Water Body (HMWB) under the Water Framework Directive and assessed at moderate ecological potential, with an objective to improve to good ecological potential by 2027; this WFD objective is the main driver for the scheme.

Barriers along the Little Don have been observed to significantly reduce ecological connectivity with large proportions of the watercourses under-used by trout and other fish. Whilst the barriers restrict the movement of coarse sediment, studies were inconclusive on the extent of the problem. Additional pressures within the catchment include water pollution (including minewater discharges) and invasive non-native species (such as the New Zealand mud snail).

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

Edit Image gallery

Catchment and subcatchment Select a catchment/subcatchment Site Edit site Name WFD water body codes WFD (national) typology WFD water body name Pre-project morphology Reference morphology Desired post project morphology Heavily modified water body National/international site designation Local/regional site designations Protected species present Invasive species present 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 Abstraction 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 Additional documents and videos Upload additional documents Additional links and references Edit links and references Link Description Supplementary Information Edit Supplementary Information