Case study:Lower Woodsford: Difference between revisions
Alymaxwell (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Alymaxwell (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
{{Additional Documents}} | {{Additional Documents}} | ||
{{Case study documents | {{Case study documents | ||
|File name=Woodsford | |File name=2e Lower Woodsford Project Record DRAFT.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Additional Documents end}} | {{Additional Documents end}} | ||
{{Additional links and references header}} | {{Additional links and references header}} |
Revision as of 15:33, 8 July 2014
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | In progress |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Aly |
Main contact surname | Maxwell |
Main contact user ID | User:Alymaxwell |
Contact organisation | Environment Agency |
Contact organisation web site | |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
The upper reach of the Lower Woodsford Channel has been historically straightened but there are now signs of recovery. The option for this reach is for ‘Assisted Natural Recovery’. Riffles and berms are developing which are improving the channel condition.
Dredging in the lower reaches has removed in channel features such as riffles and glides resulting in a low variety of flow patterns. This also limits the range of habitats and species that the river can support.
A deep drainage ditch had been created in the 1970’s running parallel and south to the river for nearly 1800m’s. The material this generated was used to embank the river to reduce flood flows.
There’s a lack of riparian trees and shrubs in this management unit. Trees provide habitat at the river banks for insects and birds. Trees also provide shade which helps reduces the river temperature creating better conditions for fish.
The majority of floodplain land to the south of the river has been in arable production since the drainage activities. This limits the river corridor habitat value and allows sediment runoff to enter the river affecting in channel ecology. Soils and silts enter the channel covering gravels that Salmon and Trout spawn on, which reduce their reproductive success.
Proposed works will consist of:
• riparian tree planting
• introduction of large woody debris
• embankment removal
• removal of hard bank protection
• ditch reprofiling
• channel and scrape creation
Monitoring surveys and results
Several monitoring technqiues will be employed as part of this project including:
Fixed point photography SEdiment sampling Electro Fishing Aerial Photography
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
|