Case study:Pumlumon Peatland Restoration for Floodwater Management

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


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


Location: 52° 26' 30", -3° 46' 13"
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 In progress
Project web site http://www.therrc.co.uk/sites/default/files/projects/37_pumlumon.pdf
Themes Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Water quality
Country Wales
Main contact forename Liz
Main contact surname Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust
Contact organisation web site http://www.montwt.co.uk/
Partner organisations Defra, Natural Resources Wales, Powys County Council, Ceredigion County Council, Communities First Mahynlleth, Ecodyfi and Pentir Pumlumon, Dyfi Biosphere, Cambrian Mountains Initiative, Leeds University, Bangor University, RSPB, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Welsh Government
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 Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust has been running the Pumlumon Living Landscape Project (Photo 1 and Map 1) since 2005, during which time it has developed and demonstrated the benefits of an ecosystem approach to landscape, people, the economy and wildlife. Rewetting upland peat bogs, through the blocking of drainage ditches, improves their condition and water retention capability, creates new areas for wildlife, and helps reduce climate affecting emissions. The Pumlumon project recognises that the future for upland farming is threatened; however, there is also awareness that the uplands of Wales offer vital economic opportunities both in terms of carbon and floodwater. • The Pumlumon Living Landscape Project has identified a number of ditch blocking methods to support floodwater management works across of range of sites. • The capital works cost to carry out effective flood water management techniques on degraded bog is minimal. However, it represents a potentially valuable economic opportunity for upland landowners. • The data collected to date have been analysed by CEH Wallingford. The hydrological restoration carried out on Glaslyn has raised the water table by 5cm.

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



Site

Name Severn, Rheidol, Dyfi and Leri
WFD water body codes
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

Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started 2000
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€) £1.9m
"£" is not declared as a valid unit of measurement for this property.
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 Flood risk management
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other Moorland restoration, Surface drainage systems improved
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