Case study:Rookery Brook Pollution Prevention Project
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | In progress |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Water quality |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Nicola |
Main contact surname | Hall |
Main contact user ID | User:RADA |
Contact organisation | |
Contact organisation web site | http://www.reaseheath.ac.uk/businesses/rada/projects-and-partners/ |
Partner organisations | |
Parent multi-site project | |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) status of the Rookery Brook has deteriorated from ‘MODERATE’ (2009) to ‘POOR’ (2014). It primarily fails for phosphorus (P) with 88% of this attributed to livestock. Phosphorous is transported to watercourses in solution and also attached to sediment. Pesticides within the watercourse are also elevated, their application and transport pathways will be included within this assessment.
Through better on-farm nutrient management (feeds, fertilisers and manures) the source (P) availability can be reduced and with better water and soil management the pathway from source to receptor can be minimised. The majority of sediment loss from agricultural land occurs during high rainfall events, therefore mitigation measures will be targeted to reduce the impact of such events. Features developed to reduce surface water run-off and/or store water will also reduce the peak flow in the watercourses and therefore the flood risk downstream
There is variable engagement within the farming to these water quality issues and what farmers and land managers can do to improve the situation. Therefore, there needs to be an engagement programme that will enable the mitigations to sustain over time.
The concept of this project has developed from our appreciation that: 1. Current work to engage the farming community with WFD mitigations elsewhere in the region is largely successful, but we do not know the impacts of this work on water quality. There is therefore a need to monitor the development of water quality at the field/farm/sub-catchment scales in order to track the success of mitigations. 2. The majority of sediment is transported following peak events. This is currently not specifically being accounted for in mitigation thinking within our diffuse pollution projects. 3. Near-farm water quality data will be powerful in engaging the farming community further and deeper to own and act upon the catchment action plans to improve water quality within the WFD. 4. Integrating farmer engagement, mitigation advice, peak event thinking and water quality monitoring would provide for more effective and longer lasting impacts as we drive towards WFD targets.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
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
|