Case study:Koningsdiep

From RESTORE
Revision as of 13:54, 1 February 2021 by Bas Wullems (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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: 53° 2' 26.51" N, 6° 3' 3.28" 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 Complete
Project web site http://www.fryslan.frl/beleidsthemas/gebiedsontwikkelingsprojecten_3553/item/koningsdiep_1846.html
Themes Environmental flows and water resources, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Water quality
Country Netherlands
Main contact forename Koos
Main contact surname Koops
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Wetterskip Fryslân
Contact organisation web site http://www.wetterskipfryslan.nl
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project

Building with nature measures in streams

This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


Stream restoration measures in the Koningsdiep aim to create a larger habitat for the species present. The stream discharge was reduced through the creation of a meander, so that a culvert does not have to be closed to prevent downstream water damage. This culvert is important to ensure animals' ability to migrate in the area. A fish passage was created in the meander. Dead wood trunks and branches were introduced in the newly dug-out part to narrow the stream.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


The meander has started to get overgrown because of the high nutrient load in the water. The water authority has chosen not to intervene yet, as they expect that this a temporary situation to which the stream will eventually adjust.

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

Catchment

River basin district Rijn
River basin Rijndelta

Subcatchment

River name Friese Wateren
Area category 1000 - 10000 km²
Area (km2) 25002,500 km² <br />250,000 ha <br />
Maximum altitude category Less than 100 m
Maximum altitude (m) 2626 m <br />0.026 km <br />2,600 cm <br />
Dominant geology Siliceous, Organic
Ecoregion Central Plains
Dominant land cover Grassland
Waterbody ID NL02L1



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Linde


Site

Name Koningsdiep
WFD water body codes NL02L4
WFD (national) typology R5
WFD water body name Koningsdiep
Pre-project morphology Actively meandering
Reference morphology Straightened
Desired post project morphology Low gradient passively meandering
Heavily modified water body Yes
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present No
Invasive species present No
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate Sand
River corridor land use Grassland, Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural), Moorland/heathland
Average bankfull channel width category
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category 0.1 - 1.0 m³/s
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category Less than 0.001
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
Works and works supervision
Post-project management and maintenance
Monitoring



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure
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