Case study:Shaping and protecting water-mud biotopes in Garwolin Forest division through development of small retention
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
| Status | Complete |
|---|---|
| Project web site | |
| Themes | Environmental flows and water resources, Habitat and biodiversity |
| Country | Poland |
| Main contact forename | Ignacy, Tomasz, Tomasz, Waldemar |
| Main contact surname | Kardel, Okruszko, Stańczyk, Mioduszewski |
| Main contact user ID | |
| Contact organisation | GWP Eastern Europe |
| Contact organisation web site | http://www.gwp.org/en/GWP-CEE/ |
| Partner organisations | |
| Parent multi-site project | |
| This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
When the project in the Garwolin forest was designed, it was based upon the assumption that the design of the
previous water management programmes had been flawed, having negative effects on the forest. Bearing this
in mind, the aims of the new project were to improve water conditions by decreasing water outflow from the
forest area, and restoring the mid-forest water reservoirs and wetlands.
An important factor was to inhibit water outflow from the forest, collect and store water in reservoirs and in soils, to minimise negative impacts of potential water deficit during the summer.
The basic objective of the project was to improve the water balance by constructing small retention reservoirs that could collect snowmelt, and which also limit the fast runoff of rainwater. These measures will allow restoration and maintenance of the protected biotopes of flora and fauna connected with the water – mud environment. An additional aim of the project was to construct watering holes for forest animals. These watering holes could also be used for water collection by fire fighters in case of there would be a fire in the forest.
The effect of the implementation of the project was restoration of nearly 50 reservoirs (aquatic ecosystems) and three wetlands with the total area of 32 ha. Estimated retention capacity of the system is 523 000 m3. Retention reservoirs and other investments are scattered on an area of approximately 10 000 ha. The key feature of the project is twenty-three damming valves that aim to regulate water flows, and preserve as much water as possible in the forest.
Special attention has been given to designing the damming valves in order to increase the biodiversity of forests, and improve habitats. This has been done by ensuring that slopes are not to steep, but still allow access to water for animals, creation of islands in reservoirs to serve as breeding sites for birds, and construction of irregular shaped shore line that create favourable conditions for amphibians breeding.
Water reservoirs were located in terrain denivelations. Some of them were created by water damming and flooding of the terrain, but most of them were excavated. The damming devices were commonly concrete or wooden constructions, with valves made of wood.
Monitoring surveys and results
It is hard to evaluate how the implemented investments contributed to flood protection. However, it is beyond
doubt that the investments increased the groundwater level, and increased the soil humidity. Today, less water flows out from the forest areas. The implemented measures thus caused significant ecological effects,
especially:
• restoration and maintenance of flora biotopes and animals connected with aquatic and wetlands environments;
• appearance of endangered fauna species;
• diversification of the migration trails of migrating birds in the vicinity of the Vistula valley;
• the damming devices fulfil various ecological functions such as functioning as watering holes for animals, feeding sites, breeding and rest sites for birds;
• restoration and maintenance of the biotopes of many species of fauna important to the EU e.g. fire – bellied toad, crested newt, black stork, white – tailed eagle, crane, kingfisher, European beaver, otter.
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
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||