Case study:Sherborne Windrush Restoration Project: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 21: Line 21:
The river suffers from a degraded habitat aris-ing from insensitive dredging which has removed river bed gravels and built up banks causing a disconnect from the water meadows as well as suppressing in stream habitat varia-tion. There are also problems caused by dif-fuse agricultural pollution and areas of over sharing. These issues are preventing this stretch of water from meeting the required standards under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). This project will build on the work already completed by addressing the following issues: inadequate levels of fish spawning gravels; lack of in-stream habitat variation; pollution from agricultural run off; poaching of the banks by cattle; lack of hydrological connectivity with the flood plain; over shading by streamside vegetation.
The river suffers from a degraded habitat aris-ing from insensitive dredging which has removed river bed gravels and built up banks causing a disconnect from the water meadows as well as suppressing in stream habitat varia-tion. There are also problems caused by dif-fuse agricultural pollution and areas of over sharing. These issues are preventing this stretch of water from meeting the required standards under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). This project will build on the work already completed by addressing the following issues: inadequate levels of fish spawning gravels; lack of in-stream habitat variation; pollution from agricultural run off; poaching of the banks by cattle; lack of hydrological connectivity with the flood plain; over shading by streamside vegetation.
}}
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Map.JPG
}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Case study subcatchment
{{Case study subcatchment
|Subcatchment=River Windrush
|Subcatchment=River Windrush
Line 52: Line 60:
{{Monitoring documents}}
{{Monitoring documents}}
{{Monitoring documents end}}
{{Monitoring documents end}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Case study image
|File name=Map.JPG
}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Additional Documents}}
{{Additional Documents}}
{{Case study documents
{{Case study documents
Line 66: Line 69:
{{Additional links and references footer}}
{{Additional links and references footer}}
{{Supplementary Information}}
{{Supplementary Information}}
{{Toggle content end}}

Revision as of 16:32, 6 September 2013

0.00
(0 votes)


To discuss or comment on this case study, please use the discussion page.


Location: 51° 49' 52.00" N, 1° 44' 51.66" W
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 In progress
Project web site
Themes Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Vaughan
Main contact surname Lewis
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Cotswold Flyfishers
Contact organisation web site http://www.cotswoldsriverstrust.org
Partner organisations National Trust; Environment Agency; Defra; River Restoration Centre
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
River Windrush

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The Sherborne Windrush Restoration Project is a partnership project that will use CRF funds to improve the River Windrush and the Sherborne Brook in the Sherborne area of Gloucestershire.

The river suffers from a degraded habitat aris-ing from insensitive dredging which has removed river bed gravels and built up banks causing a disconnect from the water meadows as well as suppressing in stream habitat varia-tion. There are also problems caused by dif-fuse agricultural pollution and areas of over sharing. These issues are preventing this stretch of water from meeting the required standards under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). This project will build on the work already completed by addressing the following issues: inadequate levels of fish spawning gravels; lack of in-stream habitat variation; pollution from agricultural run off; poaching of the banks by cattle; lack of hydrological connectivity with the flood plain; over shading by streamside vegetation.

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


Map.JPG
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Subcatchment:River Windrush


Site

Name River Windrush
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology Re-connection to the meadows
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body No
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 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

Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category 100 - 500 k€
Total cost (k€) 109.636109.636 k€ <br />109,636 € <br />
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

Mitigation of a pressure
Hydromorphology Continuity for organisms, Structure & condition of riparian/lake shore zones
Biology
Physico-chemical Specific synthetic pollutants
Other reasons for the project Recreation


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

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

Biological quality elements

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

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

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


Monitoring documents



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information