Case study:Inchewan Burn Bed restoration
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
Status | Complete |
---|---|
Project web site | http://therrc.co.uk/rrc_case_studies1.php?csid=52 |
Themes | Hydromorphology |
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 |
Project summary
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 | 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
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 | 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
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 |
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 |
---|
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.