Case study:Upper Main catchment restoration: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Image gallery}} | |||
{{Image gallery end}} | |||
{{Toggle button}} | |||
{{Toggle content start}} | |||
{{Case study subcatchment | {{Case study subcatchment | ||
|Subcatchment=Rhine | |Subcatchment=Rhine | ||
Line 37: | Line 42: | ||
{{Monitoring documents}} | {{Monitoring documents}} | ||
{{Monitoring documents end}} | {{Monitoring documents end}} | ||
{{Additional Documents}} | {{Additional Documents}} | ||
{{Additional Documents end}} | {{Additional Documents end}} | ||
Line 44: | Line 47: | ||
{{Additional links and references footer}} | {{Additional links and references footer}} | ||
{{Supplementary Information}} | {{Supplementary Information}} | ||
{{Toggle content end}} |
Revision as of 18:01, 6 September 2013
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology |
Country | Germany |
Main contact forename | Nick |
Main contact surname | Elbourne |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | River Restoration Centre |
Contact organisation web site | |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
The Regional Water Authority Kronach was responsible for restoration measures undertaken. Starting in 1990, areas along the river were purchased in preparation for future restoration plans. Bank paving was removed and channel width increased to allow for the formation of highly diverse marginal habitats such as gravel bars and backwater areas. This also included reconnection of historic meanders, creation of multi-thread channels and increasing connectivity to floodplains. Overall a great increase was seen in geomorphological diversity and habitat potential. Between 1992 and 2008 the total length of restored sections reached 18km, and a floodplain area of 120ha.
The reasons for the particular success of this project are that restoration was not constrained by the usual site or catchment scale problems centred around land use and in usual difficulty in re-connecting flood plain and backwater areas due to land ownership.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Image gallery
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Amerongse Bovenpolder, Bakenhof Dyke reconstruction, Blauwe Kamer, Room for the River, Ruppoldingen
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
|