Case study:Bures Mill fish by-pass: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 35: Line 35:
|River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable),  
|River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable),  
}}
}}
{{Project background}}
{{Project background
|Works completed=2010/05/01
}}
{{Motivations
{{Motivations
|Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration,  
|Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration,  

Revision as of 09:36, 10 May 2013

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: 51° 58' 1.59" N, 0° 46' 51.97" E
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 Fisheries
Country England
Main contact forename Darren
Main contact surname Tansley
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Essex Wildlife Trust
Contact organisation web site http://www.essexwt.org.uk/
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Bures Mill fish by-pass

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The Bures Mill fish by-pass was installed to allow fish passage upstream of the Bures Mill automatic gate on the River Stour downstream of Lamarsh

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)

Subcatchment:Stour, Kent


Site

Edit site
Name Bures Mill
WFD water body codes GB105036040942
WFD (national) typology Low, Medium, Calcareous
WFD water body name Stour DS Lamarsh
Pre-project morphology Straightened
Reference morphology Straightened
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 Groundwater
Dominant substrate Clay, Gravel, Silt
River corridor land use Intensive agriculture (arable)
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 2010/05/01
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 Barriers to fish migration
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Edit Measures
Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other Fish by-pass channel
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


The Bures Mill Automatic Gate
Looking downstream of the automatic gate


Additional documents and videos

Upload additional documents


Additional links and references

Edit links and references
Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information