Case study:'t Merkske

From RESTORE
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: 51° 25' 4.63" N, 4° 50' 29.21" 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 Environmental flows and water resources, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Water quality
Country Belgium, Netherlands
Main contact forename Martin
Main contact surname Stamhuis
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Waterschap Brabantse Delta
Contact organisation web site http://www.brabantsedelta.nl
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project

Building with nature measure 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.


Het Merkske is a river in a southern tip of the Dutch province Noord-Brabant and forms part of the border with Belgium. This area has an important ecological function and is home to large numbers of river animals. Further improvement of the river's ecological quality has been pursued through Building with Nature measures. Regular maintenance of the river's edges has been suspended so that branches and fallen trees remain in or near the stream, as long as this does not impede the flow too much. Additonally, dead wood has been introduced at fifteen locations, in various forms: branches, stubs and trunks.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


There is an undeniable positive effect on stream ecology, with macroinvertebrates conforming to a Good Ecological Status. In 2018, the number of fish was still lower than would be expected for a stream with a Good Ecological Status. Local backwater effects have been observed, with water levels locally rising about 5 cm. These effects quickly diminish in the upstream direction and are confined to the natural areas.

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 Meuse
River basin Maas

Subcatchment

River name Mark
Area category 100 - 1000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category Less than 100 m
Maximum altitude (m)
Dominant geology Siliceous
Ecoregion Western Plains
Dominant land cover Intensive agriculture (arable), Grassland, Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural)
Waterbody ID NL25_13



Other case studies in this subcatchment: 't Merkske, Bijloop


Site

Name 't Merkske
WFD water body codes NL25-62
WFD (national) typology R4a
WFD water body name Merkske
Pre-project morphology Actively meandering
Reference morphology Actively meandering
Desired post project morphology Actively meandering
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 Sand
River corridor land use Broadleaf/mixed woodland (semi natural)
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
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