Case study:East Devon Diffuse Pollution Project

From RESTORE
Jump to: navigation, search
0.00
(0 votes)


To discuss or comment on this case study, please use the discussion page.


Location: 50° 46' 36", -3° 19' 22"
Edit location
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 Land use management - agriculture, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Lisa
Main contact surname Schneidau
Main contact user ID User:Lisa Schneidau
Contact organisation Devon Wildlife Trust
Contact organisation web site http://www.devonwildlifetrust.org
Partner organisations
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 East Devon Rural Diffuse Pollution Project was a one-year initiative aimed at reducing the diffuse pollution arising from rural land use, in particular the growing of maize, in the East Devon river catchments of Clyst, Axe and Otter.

The primary driver for the Catchment Based Approach is the need for the UK to meet its water quality obligations under the Water Framework Directive.

This is an approach to avoid detrimental damage to our drinking and bathing water supplies, by stopping pollutants entering watercourses. This project supports farmers who are based upstream of key water supplies, providing them with advice to manage their farms and businesses with clean water, and avoid negative environmental impacts.

The project aims to identify and address potential sources of pollution on farmland, in order to protect water quality and wildlife habitats. The project is helping farmers reduce the amount of pesticides and fertiliser they use on their fields, constructing riverside fences, better drainage to prevent run-off into adjacent streams, soil management strategies, and habitat enhancement.

Initial visits by contractors to the farms in the catchment focused on analysing soil maps and discussing the farmers' plan for field management following harvest season.

Monitoring surveys and results

This case study hasn’t got any Monitoring survey and results, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Lessons learnt

Edit project overview to modify the lessons learnt.


Timing of the project - advice would have been more beneficial if delivered during 2015 earlier in the season. Also, the length of the project limits the scope of work which can be carried out.


Image gallery


CPAF.png
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
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 2015/08/19
Works started
Works completed
Project completed 2016/08/01
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Environment Agency Catchment Partnership Action Fund

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 Diffuse pollution
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical To improve water quality
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor Restored species-rich wet grasslands
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