Case study:Source to Sea Programme – 6. Roeburn Ford easement

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


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


Location: 54° 3' 39.62" N, 2° 36' 41.64" 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 Complete
Project web site
Themes Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Water quality
Country England
Main contact forename Sarah
Main contact surname Littlefield
Main contact user ID
Contact organisation Lune Rivers Trust
Contact organisation web site http://www.riverconservation.org.uk/
Partner organisations Cumbria Wildlife Trust, Cumbria Woodlands, RSPB, Lune Rivers Trust, South Cumbria Rivers Trust, Arnside & Silverdale AONB Partnership, Morecambe Bay Partnership
Parent multi-site project

Case_study:Source to Sea Programme

This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
River Roeburn - Replacement road crossing - fish easement

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The geomorphological assessment of this section of the River Roeburn is poor. Migratory fish are only ever able to get above this ford if floods coincide with the time they wish to run (which is rare).

The Source to Sea funded project was put together to replace one of the pipes with an over deep box culvert which will allow migratory fish to pass through and gravels substrate to move downstream improving habitat there. This project will meet the WFD requirement to remove/ease manmade barriers, and ensure this section of the river is in good ecological condition.

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.


Despite all approvals and permissions being in place it was only when the contractors came to the site it was discovered that the only viable access to the site was over bridges with a limited weight capacity. this meant changing designs from six 3-metre square culverts to twelve half-size ones. All approvals and permissions then had to be re-sought against tight time limits, and with the weather deteriorating - the River Roeburn can rise extremely quickly.


Image gallery


Old river crossing - with fish passes that do not work!
Digging out old culverts
Culverts arrive
Culverts being lifted into place
Lowering the culverts into position
Reprofiling the Roeburn upstream
Roeburn finished upstream
Installed
New over-deepened box culverts in place
Old and new culverts
New culverts in situ
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment

Catchment

River basin district North West
River basin Lune

Subcatchment

River name River Roeburn
Area category 10 - 100 km²
Area (km2)
Maximum altitude category 500 - 1000 m
Maximum altitude (m) 533533 m <br />0.533 km <br />53,300 cm <br />
Dominant geology Siliceous
Ecoregion Great Britain
Dominant land cover Bog
Waterbody ID GB112072066020



Site

Name
WFD water body codes GB112072066020
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name River Roeburn
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 2012/06/28
Works started 2013/09/16
Works completed 2013/10/11
Project completed 2015/03/31
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 Barriers to fish migration
Hydromorphology
Biology Fish
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor Ford easement
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