Case study:River Nar Restoration Project
Project overview
Status | In progress |
---|---|
Project web site | |
Themes | Economic aspects, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Social benefits, Water quality |
Country | England |
Main contact forename | Mark |
Main contact surname | Watson |
Main contact user ID | |
Contact organisation | WWF-UK |
Contact organisation web site | |
Partner organisations | Coca-Cola, Natural England, Environment Agency, Norfolk Rivers Drainage Board, Castle Acre Fishing Syndicate, West Acre Fishing Syndicate, private landowners, Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Mileham Common Charity Trus-tees |
This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
River Nar Castle Acre Common WEG project |
Project summary
Chalk streams are a globally rare and threatened habitat. The Nar is 42 km long, the second longest chalk stream in Norfolk and designated a SSSI. This river catchment is in a rural area with intensive arable farming being the main land use. The upper half of the river flows over chalk, whilst the lower half descends into drained fenland, making the river catchment particularly diverse in form. The river fails to meet the standards of the Water Framework Directive for fish abundance, quantity and dynamics of flow. Poor morphology and poor water quality underpin this failure and require addressing. This project aims to deliver three large-scale reach restorations, improving morphology, water quality, biodiversity and hence ecosystem function.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Catchment and subcatchment
Site
Name | River Nar |
---|---|
WFD water body codes | |
WFD (national) typology | |
WFD water body name | |
Pre-project morphology | |
Reference morphology | |
Desired post project morphology | |
Heavily modified water body | No |
National/international site designation | |
Local/regional site designations | |
Protected species present | No |
Invasive species present | No |
Species of interest | |
Dominant hydrology | |
Dominant substrate | |
River corridor land use | Intensive agriculture (arable) |
Average bankfull channel width category | |
Average bankfull channel width (m) | |
Average bankfull channel depth category | |
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) | |
---|---|
Project started | |
Works started | |
Works completed | |
Project completed | |
Total cost category | 500 - 1000 k€ |
Total cost (k€) | 900900 k€ <br />900,000 € <br /> |
Benefit to cost ratio | |
Funding sources | Catchment Restoration Funds |
Cost for project phases
Phase | cost category | cost exact (k€) | Lead organisation | Contact forename | Contact surname |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Investigation and design | |||||
Stakeholder engagement and communication | |||||
Works and works supervision | |||||
Post-project management and maintenance | |||||
Monitoring |
Reasons for river restoration
Measures
Structural measures
| |
---|---|
Bank/bed modifications | |
Floodplain / River corridor | Floodplain reconnection |
Planform / Channel pattern | Channel naturalisation; Creation of new meandering channel |
Other | |
Non-structural measures
| |
Management interventions | |
Social measures (incl. engagement) | Some maintenance of completed restored sections is carried out by local fisherman. This allows them to contribute to the health of the catchment. A sense of wider public ownership is fostered by river walks, talks and consultations. A River Nar Conservation Group has also been organised to encourage community involvement in the River Nar restoration project, where we have discussed ideas such as getting school children involved with monitoring fresh water invertebrates. |
Other | The Project Officer is working with farmers to help them put in place measures to retain soils and prevent run-off of nutrients and pesticides. |
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 | |||
Fish | No | Yes | No | No | No | Awaiting results |
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