Case study:Deculverting Djupsund stream

From RESTORE
Revision as of 09:22, 16 February 2021 by Tbgmiseg (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: 59° 7' 13.71" N, 10° 15' 42.78" 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
Themes Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits, Spatial planning
Country Norway
Main contact forename Miguel Angel
Main contact surname Segarra Valls
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Vannområde Horten-Larvik
Contact organisation web site http://https://www.vannportalen.no/vannregioner/vestfold-og-telemark/vannomrader/horten---larvik/
Partner organisations Sandefjord Forvaltningsråd for Anadrom Laksefisk
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Project picture

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The Djupsund stream is a very small but very important stram for sea trout in the fjord Mefjorden (Sandefjord municipality), and it has been described as "a small sea trout machine". The upper part of the stream was culverted with pipes that were too small, and this caused problems for crossing way when strong rainfall episodes occurred. Around 80 m of the stream were daylighted, and a new 1 m diameter pipe was installed under the way in December 2020. Gravel was used to cover parts of daylighted stream and the bottom of the pipe under the crossing way.

We intend to restore the riparian vegetation along the daylighted stream during spring 2021, in cooperation with pupils from a nearby school.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


The recolonization of the new stream stretch by sea trout will be monitored from 2021.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


New research shows that the ideal amount of spawning gravel in a stream is 20 % of the habitat (https://lakseelver.no/nb/news-2019/utlegg-av-gytegrus). We covered much more of the reopened stream, and will consider to take measures in order to increase the habitat variation.


Image gallery


Djupsund stream after deculvering. Picture: Miguel A. Segarra Valls
Djupsund stream after deculvering. Picture: Miguel A. Segarra Valls
New pipe under way that crosses Djupsund stream. Picture by Miguel A. Segarra Valls
Sea tout at the opening of the old culvert in Djupsund stream (before restauration).Picture by Miguel A. Segarra Valls
Description restauration project in Djupsund Stream. Record: Norconsult
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name Djupsundbekken
WFD water body codes EU-ID:NO015-1467-R
WFD (national) typology R110
WFD water body name Djupsundbekken
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
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 2020/01/15
Works started 2021/02/15
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Miljødirektoratet

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design 1.21.2 k€ <br />1,200 € <br />
Stakeholder engagement and communication
Works and works supervision 99 k€ <br />9,000 € <br />
Post-project management and maintenance 33 k€ <br />3,000 € <br />
Monitoring 55 k€ <br />5,000 € <br />



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure
Hydromorphology Continuity for organisms
Biology Fish
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Re-introducing spawning gravel
Floodplain / River corridor Bigger diameter pipe under way
Planform / Channel pattern
Other Deculverting
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