Case study:North Norfolk Coast: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment}} | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site | ||
|Heavily modified water body=No | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations}} |
Revision as of 14:28, 8 November 2018
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | http://www.therrc.co.uk/sites/default/files/projects/47_northnorfolk.pdf |
Themes | Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Social benefits, Water quality |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Oliver |
Main contact surname | Burns |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Environment Agency |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency |
Partner organisations | Natural England, National Trust, RSPB, Norfolk Wildlife Trust |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
The North Norfolk coast has a high landscape, biodiversity and geodiversity value, with a range of statutory designations. The risk of saline flooding to farmland, freshwater/wet grassland conservation sites and property and infrastructure is managed through a suite of measures including seawalls and natural barriers. A series of schemes have been developed in the past 15 years driven by the Shoreline Management Plan and other initiatives that work with natural processes.
Between 2002 and 2015 a series of projects have restored more natural function to around 8km (18%) of the North Norfolk coast (Map 1). These locations showed good resilience to the 2013 storm surge. For example, the now naturally functioning shingle ridge at Cley, although breached in the event, closed naturally within weeks despite initial concerns that it would need artificial manipulation.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchment
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
|