Case study:Removal of the migration barriers for aquatic organisms on the river Wisłoka and its tributaries – Ropa and Jasiołka

From RESTORE
Revision as of 08:39, 12 March 2020 by KarCie (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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: 49° 39' 16.62" N, 21° 9' 34.68" E
Loading map...
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 In progress
Project web site http://wislokabezbarier.com/
Themes Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity
Country Poland
Main contact forename Piotr Sobieszczyk
Main contact surname Karol Ciezak
Main contact user ID User:KarCie
Contact organisation
Contact organisation web site http://krakow.wody.gov.pl/
Partner organisations
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
Ropica Polska – Ropa River

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Aim of the project The aim of the project is a restoration of the possibility of free migration of fish and other aquatic organisms down and up the river Wisłoka and its tributaries, with the simultaneous maintenance of the stability of water intake and other elements of the infrastructure. The strategic aim of the project is an improvement of the ecological state of the Wisłoka water according to the requirements of the Water Framework Directive. This is one of the statutory duties of the Regional Water Management Board in Cracow and is an element of the Plan of the water management in the area of the upper Vistula basin.

Origin of the project One of the characters of the natural river environment is a patency of the watercourse, it means lack of the barriers preventing the migration of fish and aquatic organisms. Fish in particular year seasons and life periods migrate along the river in search of food, appropriate shelters and places for spawning. Partition of the river with weir or other artificial barrier disturbs these processes what negatively affects number and condition of fish, and in extreme cases when access to spawning areas situated upstream is cut off, can lead to extinction of the whole populations.

The construction of damming buildings and regulation works carried out in riverbeds in the second half of the XX century lead to vanishing of the specific habitats necessary for spawning, spawn incubation, fry growth and also feeding and wintering of adult organisms. It finally resulted in the extinction of sturgeon, salmon, sea trout and vimba whereas the populations of other fish species requiring shorter, one-environment migration were heavily cut down. For this reason it is necessary to restore the patency of the flow what in practice means the necessity of removal or modernization of the weirs in a such way that they don’t cause an obstacle for aquatic organisms.

Planned actions Some of these building have fish passes but they don’t ensure possibility of migration of different fish species in various age both in high and low water levels. Hence necessity of their modernization. The project includes the following ventures:

Dębica (km 56+180 river Wisłoka) – modernization of existing chamber fish pass with a building of stone ramp at the dam;

Mokrzec (km 69+720 river Wisłoka) – building of bypass;

Gorlice I (km 32+300 river Ropa) – building of a fish pass designed as bottom ramp and slope with embedded boulder bars;

Gorlice II (km 34+250 river Ropa) – building of a fish pass in the form of stone ramp;

Ropica Polska (km 39+400 river Ropa) – building of a fish pass designed as bottom ramp and slope;

Jedlicze (km 19+100 river Jasiołka) – building of a fish pass in the form of stone ramp;

Szczepańcowa (km 27+960 river Jasiołka) – building of bypass.

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.


Image gallery


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate
River corridor land use
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
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design
Stakeholder engagement and communication Department of Ecological Researches Roman Konieczny Małgorzata Siudak
Works and works supervision Department of Ecological Researches Roman Zurek Karol Ciężak, Jacek Engel
Post-project management and maintenance National Water Management Polish Waters Regional Water Management Board in Krakow
Monitoring Department of Ecological Researches Roman Zurek Karol Ciężak, Jacek Engel

Supplementary funding information

Total cost of the project: 28.7 milion Polish zloty including the European Union support of 24.4 milion Polish zloty (85%) from the Cohesion Fund under Operational Program Infrastructure and Environment 2014-2020.

Duration of the project: 2018-2021



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure Barriers to fish migration
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
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



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information