Case study:Wylrebeek: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Bas Wullems (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
{{Toggle content start}} | {{Toggle content start}} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment}} | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site | ||
|Name=Wylrebeek (Wilderbeek) | |||
|Heavily modified water body=Yes | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
|Dominant substrate=Sand | |||
|River corridor land use=Urban, Parklands garden, | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations}} |
Revision as of 14:42, 19 March 2021
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Location: 51° 21' 9.90" N, 6° 9' 9.07" E
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Spatial planning |
Country | Netherlands |
Main contact forename | Arnoud |
Main contact surname | Soetens |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | Waterschap Limburg |
Contact organisation web site | http://waterschaplimburg.nl |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.
Project summary
Edit project overview to modify the project summary.
This stream had to be rerouted because of the construction of highway A73. It was constructed in a wide sandy strip. The sand was kept in place with wooden boards until vegetation was sufficiently developed to keep the sediment fixated.
Monitoring surveys and results
Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.
The boards kept the sediment in its desired place. Once a sufficient vegetation cover was established, the stream could flow freely without regulation or undesirable erosion.
Lessons learnt
This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.
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
|