Case study:Inchewan Burn Bed restoration

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: 56° 33' 23.45" N, 3° 34' 53.83" W

Edit location

Loading map...

{"format":"googlemaps3","type":"HYBRID","minzoom":false,"maxzoom":false,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"limit":50,"offset":0,"link":"all","sort":[""],"order":[],"headers":"show","mainlabel":"","intro":"","outro":"","searchlabel":"... further results","default":"","import-annotation":false,"width":"auto","height":"400px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"visitedicon":"","wmsoverlay":false,"zoom":14,"layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview","rotate"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"resizable":false,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"cluster":false,"clustergridsize":60,"clustermaxzoom":20,"clusterzoomonclick":true,"clusteraveragecenter":true,"clusterminsize":2,"imageoverlays":[],"kml":[],"gkml":[""],"searchmarkers":"","fullscreen":false,"scrollwheelzoom":false,"showtitle":false,"hidenamespace":true,"template":"Location map popup","userparam":"","activeicon":"","pagelabel":false,"ajaxcoordproperty":"","ajaxquery":"","locations":[{"text":"\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cbr /\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EProject Title:\u003C/b\u003E Inchewan Burn Bed restoration\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003ECountry:\u003C/b\u003E \u003Ca href=\"/wiki/index.php?title=Scotland\" title=\"Scotland\"\u003EScotland\u003C/a\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EProject Status:\u003C/b\u003E Complete\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cb\u003EThemes:\u003C/b\u003E Hydromorphology\n\u003C/p\u003E\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cbr /\u003E\n\u003C/p\u003E","title":"Inchewan Burn Bed restoration","link":"","lat":56.557404403885,"lon":-3.5792074799538,"icon":"/wiki/images/a/af/Red_marker.png"}]}

Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.

Project overview

Edit project overview

Status	Complete
Project web site	http://therrc.co.uk/rrc_case_studies1.php?csid=52
Themes	Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - fisheries"Land use management - fisheries" is not in the list (Economic aspects, Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydropower, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Land use management - forestry, Monitoring, ...) of allowed values for the "Theme" property.
Country	Scotland
Main contact forename	John
Main contact surname	Monteith
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects	No

The restored Inchewan Burn

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the 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

This case study hasn’t got any Monitoring survey and results, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Lessons learnt

This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Catchment and subcatchment

Select a catchment/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

Edit 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	true
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology	Quick run-off
Dominant substrate	Bedrock
River corridor land use	Urban, Woodland
Average bankfull channel width category	2 - 5 m
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category	Less than 0.5 m
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category
Average channel gradient
Average unit stream power (W/m2)

Project background

Edit 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

Edit reasons for restoration

Mitigation of a pressure
Hydromorphology	Quantity & dynamics of flow, continuity of sediment transport, Flow velocities
Biology	Restore free passage for fish and promote fish spawning (ie. salmonids).
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project	Landscape enhancement

Measures

Edit Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications	Native tree planting, placement of boulders - set in concrete.
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

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

Image gallery

Edit Image gallery

Additional documents and videos

Upload additional documents

Additional links and references

Edit links and references

Link	Description

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.