Case study:Boldersbeek

From RESTORE
Revision as of 10:05, 9 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: 52° 0' 6.69" N, 6° 46' 33.76" 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
Themes Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Water quality
Country Netherlands
Main contact forename John
Main contact surname Lenssen
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Waterschap Rijn en Ijssel
Contact organisation web site http://www.wrij.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.


The Boldersbeek is a small tributary of the Groenlose Slinge. In 1999, two retention basins were created in this stream's catchment. The stream flows through one of these basins and next to the other basin.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


The ecology of the main stream has improved, but bank vegetation did not respond as intended. The banks turned out to be too narrow and too steep, leaving very little room for an adapted vegetation to develop. The retention basins are prone to getting filled in with vegetation and sediment. They require a lot of maintenance just to prevent them from turning into carrs (Dutch: elzenbroekbos) through plant succession. This makes the basins less suitable for water retention. However, some of the carrs that have started to grow are in fact desirable and contribute to a more varied landscape.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


Researchers of Alterra (now Wageningen Environmental Research) state that the basins would not have ondergone such rapid plant succession if they had been made a bit deeper.


Image gallery


ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district Rijn
River basin Rijndelta

Subcatchment

River name Berkel
Area category 100 - 1000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category Less than 100 m
Maximum altitude (m) 2323 m <br />0.023 km <br />2,300 cm <br />
Dominant geology Siliceous
Ecoregion Central Plains
Dominant land cover Grassland, Intensive agriculture (arable), Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural)
Waterbody ID NL07_0016



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Beekherstel Eefsebeek, Beekherstel Leerinkbeek, Beekherstel Ramsbeek, Beekherstel Willinkbeek, Beneden-Berkel


Site

Name Boldersbeek
WFD water body codes NL07_0020
WFD (national) typology R5
WFD water body name Groenlose Slinge
Pre-project morphology Actively meandering
Reference morphology Straightened
Desired post project morphology Actively 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 Intensive agriculture (arable), Grassland
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
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