Case study:Enler River enhancement project

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: none specified

Edit location

Project overview

Edit project overview

Status	Complete
Project web site
Themes	Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology
Country	Northern Ireland
Main contact forename	Judith
Main contact surname	Bankhead
Main contact user ID	User:Judithbankhead
Contact organisation	Rivers Agency, Northern Ireland (DARDNI)
Contact organisation web site	http://www.dardni.gov.uk/rivers
Partner organisations	Rivers Agency, DCAL Inland Fisheries, Castlereagh Borough Council
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects	No

finished reach Enler River

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.

The Enler River is a typical arterially drained channel with laminar flow, regular depth and silt deposition. Compensation money from a fish kill prosecution allowed fishery enhancement measures to be planned and implemented. These included deflector groynes to narrow the channel and creat a thalweg, addition of spawning gravels and plums, and the creation of deeper water via a small cross river groyne

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.

Pre works fishery assessment and river habitat assessment were carried out, along with photographs. Post works photographs have been taken and this will continue. One year plus fishery assessment and habitat assessment planned for 2015.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.

Opportunisitc work due to compensation monies and public land ownership. The proximity of the Greenway cycle way, and high value market gardening land meant that the reach length had to be limited, and work constrained within the current channel dimensions. Lunkers that had been obtained for inlcusion in the scheme could not be used due to size issues - used elsewhere.

Image gallery

Edit Image gallery

pre works channel

addition of spawning gravel

channel narrowing

scour pool

groyne and plums

Catchment and subcatchment Select a catchment/subcatchment Site Edit site Name Enler River WFD water body codes GBNI1NE050504080 WFD (national) typology WFD water body name Comber Pre-project morphology Over deepened, Over-widened, Straightened, Single channel Reference morphology Desired post project morphology Low gradient passively meandering Heavily modified water body No National/international site designation Local/regional site designations None Protected species present No Invasive species present No Species of interest Salmonids Dominant hydrology Artificially regulated Dominant substrate Clay River corridor land use Grassland, Intensive agriculture (arable) Average bankfull channel width category 2 - 5 m Average bankfull channel width (m) Average bankfull channel depth category 0.5 - 2 m Average bankfull channel depth (m) Mean discharge category 1 - 10 m³/s Mean annual discharge (m3/s) Average channel gradient category 0.01 - 0.1 Average channel gradient Average unit stream power (W/m2) Project background Edit project background Reach length directly affected (m) 200200 m <br />0.2 km <br />20,000 cm <br /> Project started 2013/11/04 Works started 2014/03/10 Works completed 2014/04/18 Project completed 2014/04/25 Total cost category 10 - 50 k€ Total cost (k€) Benefit to cost ratio Funding sources Compensation monies due to fih kill, plus Rivers Agency maintenance budget Cost for project phases Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname Investigation and design Less than 1 k€ DCAL Inland Fisheries John Kane Stakeholder engagement and communication Less than 1 k€ Department of Agriculture & Rural Development Rivers Agency Judith Bankhead Works and works supervision 10 - 50 k€ Department of Agriculture & Rural Development Rivers Agency Ryan Deegan Post-project management and maintenance Less than 1 k€ Department of Agriculture & Rural Development Rivers Agency Judith Bankhead Monitoring Less than 1 k€ NIEA Mary Toland Reasons for river restoration Edit reasons for restoration Mitigation of a pressure Hydromorphology Biology Physico-chemical Other reasons for the project Measures Edit 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 Edit Hydromorphological quality elements Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative Channel pattern/planform Yes Yes No Yes No Improvement Freshwater flow regime Yes Yes Yes No No Improvement Width & depth variation Yes Yes No No No Improvement 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 Additional documents and videos Upload additional documents Additional links and references Edit links and references Link Description Supplementary Information Edit Supplementary Information