Case study:Slow the Flow, Broadland Rivers, Norfolk

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: none specified

Edit location

Project overview

Edit project overview

Status	Complete
Project web site
Themes	Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Water quality
Country	England
Main contact forename	Rory
Main contact surname	Sanderson
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation
Contact organisation web site
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
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.

Installation of low tech, low cost structures designed to capture, slow and improve the quality of run-off from fields and rural roads: Rural sustainable drainage systems(SuDs) slow down or prevent the transport of pollutants to watercourse by breaking the delivery pathway between the pollutant source and the receptor. This project was funded by DEFRA's Catchment Partnership Action Fund, supported by the environment programme team. There are 42 water bodies in the broadland rivers catchment that are not achieving good ecological due to diffuse pollution.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.

By intercepting run off and trapping sediment, all these schemes will help achieve better water quality by preventing the loss of soil, chemicals, nutrients, and faecal organisms. A further benefit is their ability to temporarily capture water and slow down flow. This can reduce localised flooding. 66 Landowners were engaged through a workshop and series of presentations to identify suitable sites, raising the profile of the effectiveness of rural SuDs schemes. 6 schemes were then taken forward and simple measures installed to reduce run-off. Some of the schemes were completed under a regulatory position statement related to the disposal of waste sediment from distilling. This ensured that regulation was proportionate to the risk, reflecting the small scale of the scheme and the overall environmental benefit.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.

With close liaison with permitting and enforcement colleagues it is essential to apply the relevant legislation appropriately. This is used as a pilot scheme for other projects which are linked with WWF/Waterlife/Coca Cola over the next 3 years.

Image gallery

Edit Image gallery

Catchment and subcatchment Select a catchment/subcatchment Edit the catchment and subcatchment details (affects all case studies in this subcatchment) Catchment River basin district Humber River basin Dove Subcatchment River name Rolleston Bk Catchment (trib of Dove) Area category 10 - 100 km² Area (km2) Maximum altitude category 100 - 200 m Maximum altitude (m) 146146 m <br />0.146 km <br />14,600 cm <br /> Dominant geology Calcareous Ecoregion Great Britain Dominant land cover Arable and Horticulture Waterbody ID GB104028046530 Site Edit site Name WFD water body codes GB30535981, GB105034055700, GB105034055730, GB30536989, GB105034055881 WFD (national) typology WFD water body name 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 Edit 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 more than 10000 k€ 3100031,000 k€ <br />31,000,000 € <br /> Stakeholder engagement and communication Works and works supervision Post-project management and maintenance Monitoring Reasons for river restoration Edit reasons for restoration Mitigation of a pressure Hydromorphology Biology Physico-chemical Other reasons for the project Measures Edit 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 Edit Hydromorphological quality elements Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative Biological quality elements Edit biological quality elements Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative Physico-chemical quality elements Edit 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 Edit Other responses Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative Monitoring documents Upload monitoring documents Additional documents and videos Upload additional documents Additional links and references Edit links and references Link Description Supplementary Information Edit Supplementary Information