Case study:Source to Sea Programme – 1. Leighton Moss Resource Protection

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
4.00
(one vote)


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


Location: 54° 10' 3.49" N, 2° 47' 30.97" W
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 Economic aspects, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Social benefits, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Richard
Main contact surname Cooper
Main contact user ID User:S2S-PO
Contact organisation RSPB
Contact organisation web site http://www.rspb.org.uk/reserves/guide/l/leightonmoss/about.aspx
Partner organisations RSPB, Cumbria Wildlife Trust, Cumbria Woodlands, Lune Rivers Trust, Morecambe Bay Partnership, Arnside & Silverdale AONB Partnership, South Cumbria Rivers Trust
Parent multi-site project

Case_study:Source to Sea Programme

This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
Leighton Moss: habitats, wildlife, and problems

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


This project will deliver a series of measures identified in the Leighton Moss and Haweswater Diffuse Water Pollution (DWP) plan to benefit Leighton Moss SSSI, SPA and Hawes Water SSSI / SAC / NNR. Currently Leighton Moss is failing to meet its WFD objectives. The SSSI / SPA recovering condition is on the basis of the existence of the DWP plan. Delivery of this plan is now required to ensure that SSSI/ SPA status genuinely improves to favourable.

Working with the Environment Agency, Natural England and local farmers and landowners, the project will implement the DWP delivering the following: • Deployment of resource protection farm advisors, to be part of detailed and ongoing discussions with a neighbouring estate, its tenant farmers and a number of private farms, to identify land use change and measures to be implemented. This includes drawing up detailed and costed individual farm plans – this work is crucial to allow discussions to move forward, so implications are fully understood, with the objective of getting these farms into ELS / HLS management. Contract administered by the Arnside & Silverdale AONB Partnership. • Feasibility study for use of constructed wetlands – current catchment studies have identified possible suitable locations for constructed wetlands. Further work is needed to look into the full design, engineering and implications of these. • Implementation of constructed wetlands – once the feasibility work and discussions with neighbouring landowners are complete, capital works are needed to create constructed wetlands. • Capital grant for on-farm infrastructure measures (e.g. slurry pits, roofing) – to complement and extend what was made available via earlier Catchment Sensitive Farming project.

Works include: On-farm remedial measures e.g. separation of foul and rain water.

Monitoring surveys and results

Edit project overview to modify the Monitoring survey and results.


Each month seven water samples are collected by the RSPB on the Leighton Reedbed and six at Hawes Water. Each quarter this is extended to include three on Barrow Scout and two on Silverdale Moss (18 in total). Samples are sent off for analysis.

Lessons learnt

This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.


Image gallery


New deep flow gutters needed on traditional buildings to take water to new clean water drain
New gutters to take roof water out to water course
New cross drain to be installed to prevent rainwater running into dirty yard.
New cross drain to collect rainwater before it runs in to cattle yard and becomes contaminated
Piping the clean water drain into the ditch
Ditch after new pipe installed and back filled
Excavation for new dirty water tank
Ground re-instated after tank installed
New sluice (prior to eel pass fitting) at Barrow Scout
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district North West
River basin Kent or Leven

Subcatchment

River name Myer's Dyke
Area category
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category Less than 100 m
Maximum altitude (m)
Dominant geology Calcareous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Wetland
Waterbody ID



Site

Name Leighton Moss catchments
WFD water body codes GB112073071032, GB31229647
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name The Pool, Hawes Water
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body No
National/international site designation All - multiple designations across the site
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present Yes
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 2012/07/30
Works started 2014/01/02
Works completed
Project completed 2015/03/31
Total cost category 100 - 500 k€
Total cost (k€) 210210 k€ <br />210,000 € <br />
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources Catchment Restoration Funds

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 Quantity & dynamics of flow, Continuity for organisms, Continuity of sediment transport
Biology Fish
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications Tree planting
Floodplain / River corridor Creation of wetland, Barrier removal
Planform / Channel pattern
Other Agricultural/Farming improvements
Non-structural measures
Management interventions Farm advice and plans
Social measures (incl. engagement)
Other Engagement activities will include face-to-face contact.


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