Case study:Hainburg River Restoration

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


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


Location: 48° 8' 47", 16° 55' 39"
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 http://www.donauauen.at/?story_id=1713
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology
Country Austria
Main contact forename Stefan
Main contact surname Schneeweihs
Main contact user ID User:Nationalpark Donau-Auen
Contact organisation Nationalpark Donau-Auen
Contact organisation web site http://http://www.donauauen.at/?area=nationalpark&language=english
Partner organisations via donau
Parent multi-site project

Case_study:National Park Danube-Auen

This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Hainburg River Restoration, courtesy of Donau-Auen National Park

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


This project involved the removal of all artificial elements strengthening the banks of a river section on the Danube's left bank across from the city Hainburg. In the entire lower section of the project area, all stone and boulder supports were removed from a length of around 2.1 km. Because the upper section exhibited a nascent overhanging bank character, it was necessary to safeguard the embankment at the height of the regulated low water level, heeding however navigational requirements. In the long term, the new riverbank should

  • allow a natural and structurally multi-facetted riverbank landscape to develop
  • bring about a continuous lateral shift of the bank edge and thus cultivate the associated erosion, siltation, and fluctuation zones and keep these in dynamic interplay in the long run
  • work to counteract the formation of riverbank formations
  • intensify the extent to which high water can replenish the riparian woods, inflow channels and bodies of water
  • improve the groundwater connection between main stem and wetlands and keep it open in the years to come.

Indeed, shortly after construction had ended, the restoration potential of the landscape became clear: the flowing water had caused the river bank line to recede. After only a few months, the first signs of riverine habitat rejuvenation were observed in the flat sections of the inside bends. In particular the pioneer sites, the early succession stages and the wetland meadows were aided. Thus the highly-endangered species which find their home in these wetland habitats will be able to utilise them for a long time to come.

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

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 Danube
River basin Danube

Subcatchment

River name Danube
Area category more than 10000 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category Less than 100 m
Maximum altitude (m)
Dominant geology
Ecoregion
Dominant land cover
Waterbody ID



Other case studies in this subcatchment: Conservation of alluvial, INTERREG MED WETNET - Memoradum on Participation in Wetland Conservation in Ljubljansko Barje Nature Park, Marsh protection in Egyek–Pusztakócs, National Park Danube-Auen, Regelsbrunner Aue, The Bulgarian Wetlands Restoration and Pollution Reduction Project, Witzelsdorf Pilot Project


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
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