Case study:Tungelroyse Beek (Downstream): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
|Dominant substrate=Sand, | |Dominant substrate=Sand, | ||
|River corridor land use=Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural), Grassland, Intensive agriculture (arable), | |River corridor land use=Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural), Grassland, Intensive agriculture (arable), | ||
|Average bankfull channel width category=10 - 50 m | |||
|Avrg bankfull channel width=12 | |||
|Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m | |||
|Avrg1 bankfull channel depth=1.4 | |||
|Mean discharge category=1 - 10 m³/s | |Mean discharge category=1 - 10 m³/s | ||
|Mn discharge= | |Mn discharge=1 | ||
|Average channel gradient category=Less than 0.001 | |||
|Avrg channel gradient=0.00024 | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} |
Revision as of 15:53, 15 March 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Location: 51° 14' 26.87" N, 5° 55' 11.69" 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 | Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - forestry, Water quality |
Country | Netherlands |
Main contact forename | Arnoud |
Main contact surname | Soetens |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Waterschap Limburg |
Contact organisation web site | http://waterschaplimburg.nl |
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
Edit project overview to modify the project summary.
Sixty dead oaks were introduced into this stream.
Monitoring surveys and results
Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.
The indroduction of large quantities of wood has increased the variation in substrate. Plant growth has been observed between the dead wood fragments, but there has been no positive effect on biodiversity. In some parts of the stream, there has been a stagnation of the flow and a silt accumulation due to the presence of watermills.
Lessons learnt
This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.
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
|