Case study:Inchewan Burn Bed restoration: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Measures | {{Measures | ||
|Bank and bed modifications measure= | |Bank and bed modifications measure=Removal of artificial wire/stone bed. Replicated upstream boulder bed step/pool sequence | ||
|Floodplain / River corridor=Timber extraction of non-native conifer plantation. Planting of native broadleaf tree species | |||
|Planform / Channel pattern=In-channel placement of boulders to provide flow diversity | |||
|Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Local school children helped to plant the native broadleaf tree species | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Hydromorphological_quality_elements_header}} | {{Hydromorphological_quality_elements_header}} |
Revision as of 16:15, 5 October 2012
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology |
Country | Scotland |
Main contact forename | Nick |
Main contact surname | Elbourne |
Main contact user ID | User:NickRRC |
Contact organisation | River Restoration Centre |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.therrc.co.uk |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
During the creation of a bypass by the river, the burn was engineered by encasing it in gabion baskets to provide structural protection for the roadway piers. Reno mattresses were also used to prevent down-cutting by the burn. In the high-energy environment of the burn, the reno mattresses' protective PVC layer was eroded and the galvanised coating of the mattresses exposed, causing them to split open and the withheld material released. The remaining wire became a hazard for fish, snaring many. Additionally, the downstream gabions would often block surface water in low-flow conditions, with water simply flowing 'through' them in the gaps in between. Accordingly, fish migration was often blocked.
The restoration saw the removal of the reno mattresses and the introduction of boulders to create pools, diversify flow and collect sediment. These boulders were set in concrete to prevent their movement in high flows.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Catchment and subcatchment
Edit the catchment and subcatchment details
(affects all case studies in this subcatchment)
Catchment
River basin district | Tay |
---|---|
River basin | Inchewan |
Subcatchment
River name | Inchewan Burn |
---|---|
Area category | |
Area (km2) | |
Maximum altitude category | |
Maximum altitude (m) | |
Dominant geology | Siliceous |
Ecoregion | Great Britain |
Dominant land cover | Urban, Woodland |
Waterbody ID |
Site
Name | Birnam |
---|---|
WFD water body codes | |
WFD (national) typology | |
WFD water body name | |
Pre-project morphology | Single channel, Straight, Embanked, Revetments |
Reference morphology | Step-pool, Pool-riffle, Single channel |
Desired post project morphology | |
Heavily modified water body | Yes |
National/international site designation | |
Local/regional site designations | |
Protected species present | Yes |
Invasive species present | No |
Species of interest | atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) |
Dominant hydrology | Quick run-off |
Dominant substrate | Bedrock |
River corridor land use | Urban, Woodland |
Average bankfull channel width category | 5 - 10 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
Reach length directly affected (m) | 100 m0.1 km <br />10,000 cm <br /> |
---|---|
Project started | 2007/09/01 |
Works started | |
Works completed | 2007/11/01 |
Project completed | |
Total cost category | 50 - 100 k€ |
Total cost (k€) | 100 k€100,000 € <br /> |
Benefit to cost ratio | |
Funding sources | SEPA, Perth Council, SNH |
Cost for project phases
Phase | cost category | cost exact (k€) | Lead organisation | Contact forename | Contact surname |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Investigation and design | Perth Council | John | Monteith | ||
Stakeholder engagement and communication | Perth Council | John | Monteith | ||
Works and works supervision | Perth Council | ||||
Post-project management and maintenance | Perth Council | ||||
Monitoring | Perth Council | John | Monteith |
Reasons for river restoration
Measures
Structural measures
| |
---|---|
Bank/bed modifications | Removal of artificial wire/stone bed. Replicated upstream boulder bed step/pool sequence |
Floodplain / River corridor | Timber extraction of non-native conifer plantation. Planting of native broadleaf tree species |
Planform / Channel pattern | In-channel placement of boulders to provide flow diversity |
Other | |
Non-structural measures
| |
Management interventions | |
Social measures (incl. engagement) | |
Other | Local school children helped to plant the native broadleaf tree species |
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 | |||
Fish: Abundance | No | No | No | No | No | Improvement |
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
Image gallery
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
Link | Description |
---|---|
http://www.therrc.co.uk/rrc case studies1.php?csid=52 | River Restoration Centre Case Study |
http://www.therrc.co.uk/case studies/sepa article inchewan%20burn.pdf | SEPA article |
http://www.therrc.co.uk/2012%20Conference/Outputs/Gilvear%202%20Final.pdf | Inchewan Burn Post Project Appraisal: David Gilvear's presentation from the RRC 2012 Conference |
Supplementary Information
Edit Supplementary Information
RRC visit notes (2008):
The new bed has enabled free passage to the upper burn and has had a dramatic impact on the visual ‘eyesore’ previously viewed by users of the popular pathway. The construction of a step-pool bedrock and boulder bed has added stability to the channel and now allows a much freer movement of bed sediment.
The concept of needing to anchor the ‘key’ boulders into the engineered bed but burying this structural element under 500mm+ of placed material allowed concerns over structural stability, morphology and aesthetics to be integrated into a common solution.