Case study:Tweed Catchment Management Plan: Difference between revisions
Hazel Wilson (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Hazel Wilson (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Case study status | {{Case study status | ||
|Approval status= | |Approval status=Approved | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Location | {{Location | ||
Latest revision as of 13:27, 2 March 2016
Project overview
| Status | In progress |
|---|---|
| Project web site | |
| Themes | Economic aspects, Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Land use management - forestry, Monitoring, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Water quality |
| Country | England, Scotland |
| Main contact forename | Luke |
| Main contact surname | Comins |
| Main contact user ID | User:Luke Comins |
| Contact organisation | Tweed Forum |
| Contact organisation web site | http://www.tweedforum.org |
| Partner organisations | |
| This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
Project summary
Drainage, habitat loss, agricultural intensification, development, and invasive species are just some of the issues that have taken their toll on the condition of the river over the years. The goal, as set out in the CMP, is ‘to conserve, enhance and, where appropriate restore the total river environment through effective land and resources planning across the Tweed catchment’. For this reason, our work covers source to sea and focuses as much on managing land as the river itself, as rivers are very much a function of the land they flow through.
Whilst we have carried out restoration work in all areas of the catchment, we tend to focus our work in sub catchments which have specific issues - such as diffuse pollution, poor morphology, flood risk, degraded habitats etc. Working with local farmers and land managers, we use the following prescriptions, often in combination:
• Wetland restoration – restoration of peatlands through ditch blocking, tree removal and stock reduction; creation of ponds and scrapes
• Riparian enhancement through fencing and planting.
• Channel planform restoration – through re-meandering and placement of large wood debris.
• Innovative bank protection using logs, filtrexx and willow,
• Access – improving access to the river is a key deliverable
• Education – with schools, colleges, local interest groups etc
• Training – with Training colleges (Scotland’s Rural College), SNH, RRC, etc on-site best practice
• Awareness raising – Agricultural shows, newsletters, press, conferences, talks etc
• Research – strong portfolio of co-operative research partnerships delivering innovative solutions and impact across a range of topics, and ecosystem services
• Piloting the national Land Use Strategy using an Ecosystem Approach
• Science in to Policy – we work with statutory agencies and policy makers to improve the legislation, providing the evidence and test-bed for the acceptability and applicability of new initiatives environmentally, economically and socially.
• Partnership building – working with individuals and organisations (NFU, Scottish Land and Estates, Country Landowners Association, EA, SEPA, SNH, NE, etc) to build trust and deliver their agendas for the Tweed, alongside ours.
In the last 5 years (not including the large achievements of the Tweed Rivers Heritage Project – see brochure attached) we have restored and enhanced over 60km of river through fencing off and planting, remeandering (2km), installation of over 100 engineered woody debris features; planting of 230ha of riparian woodland; 30 ponds/wetlands; 125ha of raised bog enhanced.
The Tweed Rivers Heritage Project – a complex, multi-disciplinary project aiming to conserve and enhance the natural, built and cultural heritage of the Tweed. This £9 million scheme involved 50 separate projects and over 60 different funding partners – see attached brochure for details. Tweed Invasives Project (ongoing) – a catchment wide project controlling invasive non native plant species across 300 miles of river. Now in its 13th year the project has successfully reduced Giant Hogweed, Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam. Total cost - £1milion to date and includes a great deal of in kind and voluntary support. Detailed botanical monitoring has shown 100% eradication on some of the worst sites that were dense monocultures when we started. Eye Water Diffuse Pollution control project (ongoing) – a targeted project to buffer livestock from water courses on a priority waterbody. Fencing carried out on 11 farms amounting to £100k. The designated bathing water at the mouth of the Eye has gone from a fail to good quality. Eddleston Water Project (ongoing) – a project aiming to restore a channelised river to achieve good ecological status under the WFD and also attenuate flood flows through slowing down flow and increasing storage. To date 1.8km of river have been re-meandered; 66ha of woodland planted; 16,000m of riparian fencing; 54 woody debris dams; 13 wetlands/ponds created; 70,000 trees planted. Whilst we have not had a big flood event to test the flood attenuation impact, there are very clear habitat/biodiversity improvements including aquatic invertebrates, salmon (through increased channel length and diversity; visual redd counts) and designated species such as otter (visual sightings and spraint density). WFD has gone from ‘poor’ to ‘bad’ and will shortly be at ‘moderate’. Bowmont Project (ongoing) – a project aiming to restore the river after a series of devastating floods and rebuild the resilience of the catchment to withstand such events in the future. 50ha of riparian planting, 64 engineered log structures; 365m of innovative bank protection demonstrating many differing techniques. Some stabilisation of gravel already recorded by JHI. Till Wetland Restoration Project – a £300k scheme aiming to reconnect the river with its floodplain – 7km of flood bank removed, 130ha of floodplain enhanced, 80ha of wetland created/enhanced. Large increase in wading bird and wildfowl populations registered. Gala Water – (ongoing) over 50ha of riparian planting and fencing in the headwaters aiming to attenuate floods and improve biodiversity. Craik project – 0.5 km remeandering (400% increase in channel length) and floodplain woodland (8000 trees) on the upper Borthwick Water. The local fishery biologist said that increasing channel length would likely give a corresponding increase in fish numbers. Other - Peatland restoration (ditch blocking, stock reduction, tree removal) at numerous sites across the catchment. Working with Scottish Water to improve water quality in the catchment surrounding their reservoir assets. The majority of these sites are open to viewing/visits at any time through the Forum and we spend a good deal of time showing people the work on the ground and sharing best practice/lessons learnt.
Monitoring surveys and results
Our performance in delivering against the whole CMP is reviewed every 4-5 years, and a popular review document is produced that measures progress on the main targets within.
With each project we monitor at different levels. At its most basic we use fixed point photography. This combined with the monitoring carried out by the agencies for WFD classification purposes and site condition monitoring, gives a good indication of how the status of the watercourse has changed at the landscape scale over time. (e.g good ecological status; favourable site condition).
At the other end of the scale we carry out very detailed monitoring such as on the Eddleston and the Bowmont Water. On the former we have installed, in conjunction with Dundee University, SEPA, Forest Research and British Geological Survey, one of the most detailed hydrological/groundwater monitoring networks in the UK. This is complemented by detailed hydro-geomorphological and ecological surveys (in-stream habitats, sediments, invertebrates, macrophytes, electrofishing), so we accurately assess the effects of each intervention and the totality of all the restoration work we are doing at both reach and catchment scale.
Lessons learnt
Challenges:
Landowner engagement and persuading farmers to lose productive ground or change the way they do things. Tweed Forum is able to overcome such barriers because it has become known as a trusted intermediary. We have no statute and can only do things through good will, persuasion, education and enthusiasm. We can speak the language of and know how to integrate restoration measures without impinging on the farm business and cut through the paperwork and manage the works.
Working at a bigger scale also can prove challenging. For example the re-meandering at the Cringletie and Lake Wood involved 6 different landowners with the river acting as the boundary. Thus, moving the physical entity that acts as the property boundary is more than just a practical problem.
Regulation – For example, re-meandering requires consent from SEPA under the controlled activity regulations, consent from SNH due to it being a designated site, planning permission from the local authority because it is deemed an engineering operation. All of these come with a raft of assessments for impact on flood risk, salmonids, ranunculus, otter etc.
Funding – an ever present challenge. Some of the works are expensive and often there are no bespoke funding streams.
Image gallery
.jpg)
|
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Eddleston water
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
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||