https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=Ascarr 2026-04-07T12:28:20Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.39.7 https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Cotom_in_the_Elms&diff=51893 2026-03-03T20:02:44Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.73531, -1.64055<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Urban, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Ruth<br /> |Main contact surname=Needham<br /> |Contact organisation=Trent Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.trentriverstrust.org<br /> |Partner organisations=The Environment Agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Restoring the River Mease Catchment<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project summary=170m of tributary restoration including 0.07 ha riparian habitat. Bank reprofiling on the Pessall Brook to create 2 stage channel bays, to add a diversity of habitat to a village amenity grass area, add greater capacity for higher flows, and replace old wooden bank protection with coir rolls.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Pre-works invertebrate sampling undertaken, pre-works hydromorph geomorphology survey undertaken, fixed point photography.<br /> |Lessons learn=Greater public engagement, showcasing Himalayan balsam removal, river fly monitoring and a catchment-based approach using the catchment model. <br /> <br /> Improved focus on communication, including social media, the Mease website and press releases to promote the work and highlight successes.<br /> |Project title=Coton in the Elms<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gilwiskaw Brook from Source to River Mease<br /> }}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background}}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Southern_Water_Lukely_Brook&diff=51892 2026-03-03T20:00:39Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Toggle content start}}{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=50.69087, -1.31091<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Dempster<br /> |Main contact id=Southern Water Catchment Team<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.southernwater.co.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=AtkinsRéalis, FiveRivers<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Lukely Brook.png<br /> |Picture description=Lukely Brook upstream of Clatterford<br /> |Project summary=The Lukely Brook is a Chalk winterbourne stream located on the Isle of Wight, flowing from the rural central downs north through Carisbrooke and into the Medina Estuary in Newport.<br /> <br /> Southern Water operates two groundwater abstractions near to the Lukely Brook, which supply a large proportion of the Isle of Wight with clean drinking water. Southern Water has had a number of environmental regulatory undertakings as part of its AMP6 NEP (National Environment Programme) and AMP7 WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme), which aim to ensure that groundwater abstractions are environmentally sustainable in the long-term, and seeks to mitigate any quantified impacts resulting from water company abstraction on watercourses and the valuable ecological habitats they support. <br /> <br /> Under the AMP6 NEP and AMP7 WINEP, Southern Water have undertaken a programme of ecological and hydro-geomorphological improvement works on the Lukely Brook between 2020 and 2024 to improve the ecological resilience of this chalk winterbourne stream and adjacent ecologically designated floodplain meadows. The environmental enhancement works include the removal of a weir, installation of three fish passes, two ‘Stage Zero’ floodplain reconnection schemes, realignment and reprofiling of a historically modified section of channel, and removal of a weir along with reprofiling of banks in a town centre public amenity space. The final element completed in 2024 was restoration of the river channel though a disused highways ford next to Southern Waters water supply works in Carisbrooke. Successful delivery of the scheme has been achieved through partnership working with the Island Rivers/Newport Rivers Group and continued positive engagement and consultation with landowners and other local stakeholders.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results='''The monitoring network:'''<br /> <br /> Monitoring took place at the various schemes at a variety of spatial scales and frequencies. Under the AMP6 impact assessment investigation and HMWB WINEP implementation project a monitoring network was established from 2017 comprising groundwater and surface water levels, flow, water quality, fish and macroinvertebrates. This monitoring was continued, and additional monitoring was undertaken on the schemes delivered in the AMP7 WINEP which added to longer term monitoring established previously. A summary of the monitoring is detailed below (note that following completion of the AMP7 WINEP, this monitoring programme is being continued at a reduced frequency to 2030).<br /> <br /> '''Horse Paddock and Plaish Meadows Stage Zero schemes:'''<br /> <br /> *Hydrometric monitoring at 5 surface water locations (stilling wells) and 5 shallow groundwater monitoring locations in the floodplain was undertaken to monitor impacts of the Phase 1 Schemes on water levels:<br /> #June 2017 - ongoing: 3 surface water monitoring locations, 2 groundwater monitoring locations and 1 barometer were installed in June 2017 as part of AMP6 WINEP Investigation. Automatic water level monitoring devices were installed along with regular stage board (for surface water level) and manual dip readings (for groundwater level). Monitoring of these sites was continued through AMP7 and is now extended to 2030.<br /> #May 2022 - ongoing: 2 further surface water, 3 further groundwater and 1 further barometric monitoring locations were added, to inform design and assess post-construction functioning of the AMP7 WINEP schemes.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone, as well as time lapse and fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of the Stage Zero schemes in the channel and floodplain. <br /> *Water quality data collected at 6 locations quarterly from March 2023 to track any changes in water quality over time.<br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation as a result of the Phase 1 Schemes.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly following the construction of the schemes from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> The following open-source datasets were also used to supplement the site data:<br /> *Daily rainfall data from Carisbrooke rainfall gauge (Station ID: 333195) <br /> *Hourly barometric pressure from Met Office weather station at Saint Catherine’s Point.<br /> For the other schemes at Sheep Dip Field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond:<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of all Phase 2 Schemes. <br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation in Sheep Dip Field only.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone (Sheep Dip Field only), as well as fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly prior to the construction of the Sheep Dip Field from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> A comprehensive monitoring report was produced in early 2025 which provided a detailed analysis of the changes that have occurred since the implementation of the schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Key findings to date:'''<br /> <br /> '''Water level monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> The highly different antecedent conditions between May 2022 and October 2024 make it difficult to separate the impacts of the scheme from the overall hydrological signal, especially for sites with limited baseline data. Floodplain inundation in Horse Paddock occurred during a lower magnitude rainfall event and water was stored on the floodplain for longer duration post-scheme, than was seen in the baseline monitoring period. Extended periods of floodplain inundation have occurred since the scheme construction. Whilst the Plaish Meadow scheme may locally be extending the duration of elevated shallow groundwater levels in the floodplain into the summer months, this may simply be a reflection of the wetter conditions after the scheme has been implemented. Extended wetter conditions since the construction of the woody features suggests an increasingly wetter floodplain in both above and below ground water levels, but it is difficult to separate the effects of the scheme from the extraordinarily high rainfall between October 2023 and March 2024.<br /> <br /> '''Visual imagery:'''<br /> <br /> Drone imagery and fixed-point photography have provided visual evidence of changes at each site. This was particularly pronounced at Horse Paddock where the floodplain vegetation has changed to become more aquatic and creating a diversity of flow types on the floodplain. The drone imagery was particularly effective here with shorter vegetation on the floodplain than Plaish Meadows. Floodplain inundation in Plaish Meadows was more responsive to high rainfall events, reconnecting temporarily in the local area surrounding the ford and Lukely Brook woody feature. The drone imagery also showed the woody features on the drains effectively working to slow and store flow, with macrophyte vegetation establishing in the channel. Drone imagery was less effective at this site as the tall vegetation made it difficult to see the extent of floodplain inundation. At Froglands Stream, the drone imagery has shown the recovery of bank and in-channel vegetation in response to the restoration showing clearly how the vegetation has narrowed flow, creating faster flowing riffle features. Fixed-point photos of Spring Lane and Towngate Pond have shown how the schemes have recovered following the disturbance of construction with vegetation establishment coming quickly following the implementation of both schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Aquatic ecology – macroinvertebrate monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Drought conditions were experienced before the implementation of schemes followed by wetter conditions afterwards. Thus, some initial changes in the macroinvertebrates are likely to show a gradual recovery over time with increased flows and sedimentation. There were notable differences in the macroinvertebrate community found at Horse Paddock compared to the other Lukely Brook sites, with Horse Paddock communities more associated with slower flows and a greater abundance of fine sediment. The majority of species were common, but the samples yielded a total of five nationally scarce species (the caddisfly Limnephilus hirsutus, long-horned soldierfly Vanoyia tenuicornis, pygmy soldier fly Oxycera pygmaea, white-barred soldier fly O. morrisii and the riffle beetle Riolus subviolaceus). At three sampling sites nationally scarce species (soldierfly, Oxycera pygmaea; white-barred soldierfly, Oxycera morrisii; the caddisfly: Limnephilus hirsutus and the long-horned soldierfly: Vanovia tenuicornis) were recorded at the sites for the first time following scheme construction and are associated with wetlands and marshes. Following an initial drop in taxon richness, macroinvertebrate indices from the re-meandered Froglands Stream increased post restoration showing a gradual recovery to pre-restoration levels and an improvement in habitat quality. Interesting changes were observed rapidly at Spring Lane following the tree removal and coppicing. Implementation of this scheme was later and hence the further monitoring will show how the scheme has responded to the additional narrowing. Following the removal of the weir at Towngate Pond, samples show an increase in diversity of mayflies, caddisfly taxa and riffle beetles, particularly in April 2024, perhaps due to favourable flow conditions. The increase in post-restoration LIFE scores indicates an increase in flow velocity likely resulting from the weir removal.<br /> <br /> '''Water quality:'''<br /> <br /> In general, concentrations of both phosphorus and nitrogen species were highest at the upstream end of Lukely Brook (at Horse Paddock and Plaish Farm monitoring sites), lowest at Plaish Meadows, and increased at Clatterford Shute, at the downstream end of the reach. The Fishpond Stream (which comes in on Plaish Meadows was noted as having good quality and potentially improving water quality downstream. The largest improvements in water quality were noted downstream of Plaish Meadows but is difficult to disentangle whether this was due to the schemes or whether this was primarily due to the improved water quality of the Fishpond Stream. <br /> <br /> '''Vegetation monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Little evidence of any significant changes to National Vegetation Classification communities although it was noted that communities could take time for a visible change to occur following the implementation of the various schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Bird counts:'''<br /> <br /> The wetter floodplains have attracted birds that have been previously absent such as Jack Snipe, Common Snipe, Little Egret, Shelduck and Moorhen. <br /> The monitoring is continuing for all schemes delivered in the second WINEP namely Horse Paddock, Plaish Meadow, Sheep Dip field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond. Monitoring is scheduled to continue until 2030 but at reduced frequency. Currently, the monitoring report is being updated with the 2025 monitoring results.<br /> |Lessons learn=To add<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> <br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2017-01-01<br /> |Works started=2020-11-01<br /> |Works completed=2024-07-31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Southern Water WINEP<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Lukely Brook<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Abstraction, Barriers to fish migration, Drinking water storage and supply<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Invertebrates, Macrophytes<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Lukely Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB107101006250<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Southern_Water_Lukely_Brook&diff=51891 2026-03-03T19:47:19Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Toggle content start}}{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=50.69087, -1.31091<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Dempster<br /> |Main contact id=Southern Water Catchment Team<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.southernwater.co.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=AtkinsRéalis, FiveRivers<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Lukely Brook.png<br /> |Picture description=Lukely Brook upstream of Clatterford<br /> |Project summary=The Lukely Brook is a Chalk winterbourne stream located on the Isle of Wight, flowing from the rural central downs north through Carisbrooke and into the Medina Estuary in Newport.<br /> <br /> Southern Water operates two groundwater abstractions near to the Lukely Brook, which supply a large proportion of the Isle of Wight with clean drinking water. Southern Water has had a number of environmental regulatory undertakings as part of its AMP6 NEP (National Environment Programme) and AMP7 WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme), which aim to ensure that groundwater abstractions are environmentally sustainable in the long-term, and seeks to mitigate any quantified impacts resulting from water company abstraction on watercourses and the valuable ecological habitats they support. <br /> <br /> <br /> Under the AMP6 NEP and AMP7 WINEP, Southern Water have undertaken a programme of ecological and hydro-geomorphological improvement works on the Lukely Brook between 2020 and 2024 to improve the ecological resilience of this chalk winterbourne stream and adjacent ecologically designated floodplain meadows. The environmental enhancement works include the removal of a weir, installation of three fish passes, two ‘Stage Zero’ floodplain reconnection schemes, realignment and reprofiling of a historically modified section of channel, and removal of a weir along with reprofiling of banks in a town centre public amenity space. The final element completed in 2024 was restoration of the river channel though a disused highways ford next to Southern Waters water supply works in Carisbrooke. Successful delivery of the scheme has been achieved through partnership working with the Island Rivers/Newport Rivers Group and continued positive engagement and consultation with landowners and other local stakeholders.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results='''The monitoring network:'''<br /> <br /> Monitoring took place at the various schemes at a variety of spatial scales and frequencies. Under the AMP6 impact assessment investigation and HMWB WINEP implementation project a monitoring network was established from 2017 comprising groundwater and surface water levels, flow, water quality, fish and macroinvertebrates. This monitoring was continued, and additional monitoring was undertaken on the schemes delivered in the AMP7 WINEP which added to longer term monitoring established previously. A summary of the monitoring is detailed below (note that following completion of the AMP7 WINEP, this monitoring programme is being continued at a reduced frequency to 2030).<br /> <br /> '''Horse Paddock and Plaish Meadows Stage Zero schemes:'''<br /> <br /> *Hydrometric monitoring at 5 surface water locations (stilling wells) and 5 shallow groundwater monitoring locations in the floodplain was undertaken to monitor impacts of the Phase 1 Schemes on water levels:<br /> #June 2017 - ongoing: 3 surface water monitoring locations, 2 groundwater monitoring locations and 1 barometer were installed in June 2017 as part of AMP6 WINEP Investigation. Automatic water level monitoring devices were installed along with regular stage board (for surface water level) and manual dip readings (for groundwater level). Monitoring of these sites was continued through AMP7 and is now extended to 2030.<br /> #May 2022 - ongoing: 2 further surface water, 3 further groundwater and 1 further barometric monitoring locations were added, to inform design and assess post-construction functioning of the AMP7 WINEP schemes.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone, as well as time lapse and fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of the Stage Zero schemes in the channel and floodplain. <br /> *Water quality data collected at 6 locations quarterly from March 2023 to track any changes in water quality over time.<br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation as a result of the Phase 1 Schemes.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly following the construction of the schemes from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> The following open-source datasets were also used to supplement the site data:<br /> *Daily rainfall data from Carisbrooke rainfall gauge (Station ID: 333195) <br /> *Hourly barometric pressure from Met Office weather station at Saint Catherine’s Point.<br /> For the other schemes at Sheep Dip Field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond:<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of all Phase 2 Schemes. <br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation in Sheep Dip Field only.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone (Sheep Dip Field only), as well as fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly prior to the construction of the Sheep Dip Field from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> A comprehensive monitoring report was produced in early 2025 which provided a detailed analysis of the changes that have occurred since the implementation of the schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Key findings to date:'''<br /> <br /> '''Water level monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> The highly different antecedent conditions between May 2022 and October 2024 make it difficult to separate the impacts of the scheme from the overall hydrological signal, especially for sites with limited baseline data. Floodplain inundation in Horse Paddock occurred during a lower magnitude rainfall event and water was stored on the floodplain for longer duration post-scheme, than was seen in the baseline monitoring period. Extended periods of floodplain inundation have occurred since the scheme construction. Whilst the Plaish Meadow scheme may locally be extending the duration of elevated shallow groundwater levels in the floodplain into the summer months, this may simply be a reflection of the wetter conditions after the scheme has been implemented. Extended wetter conditions since the construction of the woody features suggests an increasingly wetter floodplain in both above and below ground water levels, but it is difficult to separate the effects of the scheme from the extraordinarily high rainfall between October 2023 and March 2024.<br /> <br /> '''Visual imagery:'''<br /> <br /> Drone imagery and fixed-point photography have provided visual evidence of changes at each site. This was particularly pronounced at Horse Paddock where the floodplain vegetation has changed to become more aquatic and creating a diversity of flow types on the floodplain. The drone imagery was particularly effective here with shorter vegetation on the floodplain than Plaish Meadows. Floodplain inundation in Plaish Meadows was more responsive to high rainfall events, reconnecting temporarily in the local area surrounding the ford and Lukely Brook woody feature. The drone imagery also showed the woody features on the drains effectively working to slow and store flow, with macrophyte vegetation establishing in the channel. Drone imagery was less effective at this site as the tall vegetation made it difficult to see the extent of floodplain inundation. At Froglands Stream, the drone imagery has shown the recovery of bank and in-channel vegetation in response to the restoration showing clearly how the vegetation has narrowed flow, creating faster flowing riffle features. Fixed-point photos of Spring Lane and Towngate Pond have shown how the schemes have recovered following the disturbance of construction with vegetation establishment coming quickly following the implementation of both schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Aquatic ecology – macroinvertebrate monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Drought conditions were experienced before the implementation of schemes followed by wetter conditions afterwards. Thus, some initial changes in the macroinvertebrates are likely to show a gradual recovery over time with increased flows and sedimentation. There were notable differences in the macroinvertebrate community found at Horse Paddock compared to the other Lukely Brook sites, with Horse Paddock communities more associated with slower flows and a greater abundance of fine sediment. The majority of species were common, but the samples yielded a total of five nationally scarce species (the caddisfly Limnephilus hirsutus, long-horned soldierfly Vanoyia tenuicornis, pygmy soldier fly Oxycera pygmaea, white-barred soldier fly O. morrisii and the riffle beetle Riolus subviolaceus). At three sampling sites nationally scarce species (soldierfly, Oxycera pygmaea; white-barred soldierfly, Oxycera morrisii; the caddisfly: Limnephilus hirsutus and the long-horned soldierfly: Vanovia tenuicornis) were recorded at the sites for the first time following scheme construction and are associated with wetlands and marshes. Following an initial drop in taxon richness, macroinvertebrate indices from the re-meandered Froglands Stream increased post restoration showing a gradual recovery to pre-restoration levels and an improvement in habitat quality. Interesting changes were observed rapidly at Spring Lane following the tree removal and coppicing. Implementation of this scheme was later and hence the further monitoring will show how the scheme has responded to the additional narrowing. Following the removal of the weir at Towngate Pond, samples show an increase in diversity of mayflies, caddisfly taxa and riffle beetles, particularly in April 2024, perhaps due to favourable flow conditions. The increase in post-restoration LIFE scores indicates an increase in flow velocity likely resulting from the weir removal.<br /> <br /> '''Water quality:'''<br /> <br /> In general, concentrations of both phosphorus and nitrogen species were highest at the upstream end of Lukely Brook (at Horse Paddock and Plaish Farm monitoring sites), lowest at Plaish Meadows, and increased at Clatterford Shute, at the downstream end of the reach. The Fishpond Stream (which comes in on Plaish Meadows was noted as having good quality and potentially improving water quality downstream. The largest improvements in water quality were noted downstream of Plaish Meadows but is difficult to disentangle whether this was due to the schemes or whether this was primarily due to the improved water quality of the Fishpond Stream. <br /> <br /> '''Vegetation monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Little evidence of any significant changes to National Vegetation Classification communities although it was noted that communities could take time for a visible change to occur following the implementation of the various schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Bird counts:'''<br /> <br /> The wetter floodplains have attracted birds that have been previously absent such as Jack Snipe, Common Snipe, Little Egret, Shelduck and Moorhen. <br /> The monitoring is continuing for all schemes delivered in the second WINEP namely Horse Paddock, Plaish Meadow, Sheep Dip field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond. Monitoring is scheduled to continue until 2030 but at reduced frequency. Currently, the monitoring report is being updated with the 2025 monitoring results.<br /> |Lessons learn=To add<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2017-01-01<br /> |Works started=2020-11-01<br /> |Works completed=2024-07-31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Southern Water WINEP<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Lukely Brook<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Abstraction, Barriers to fish migration, Drinking water storage and supply<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Invertebrates, Macrophytes<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Lukely Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB107101006250<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Southern_Water_Lukely_Brook&diff=51890 2026-03-03T19:45:29Z

<p>Ascarr: Reverted edits by Ascarr (talk) to last revision by Southern Water Catchment Team</p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Dempster<br /> |Main contact id=Southern Water Catchment Team<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.southernwater.co.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=AtkinsRéalis, FiveRivers<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Lukely Brook.png<br /> |Picture description=Lukely Brook upstream of Clatterford<br /> |Project summary=The Lukely Brook is a Chalk winterbourne stream located on the Isle of Wight, flowing from the rural central downs north through Carisbrooke and into the Medina Estuary in Newport.<br /> <br /> Southern Water operates two groundwater abstractions near to the Lukely Brook, which supply a large proportion of the Isle of Wight with clean drinking water. Southern Water has had a number of environmental regulatory undertakings as part of its AMP6 NEP (National Environment Programme) and AMP7 WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme), which aim to ensure that groundwater abstractions are environmentally sustainable in the long-term, and seeks to mitigate any quantified impacts resulting from water company abstraction on watercourses and the valuable ecological habitats they support. <br /> <br /> <br /> Under the AMP6 NEP and AMP7 WINEP, Southern Water have undertaken a programme of ecological and hydro-geomorphological improvement works on the Lukely Brook between 2020 and 2024 to improve the ecological resilience of this chalk winterbourne stream and adjacent ecologically designated floodplain meadows. The environmental enhancement works include the removal of a weir, installation of three fish passes, two ‘Stage Zero’ floodplain reconnection schemes, realignment and reprofiling of a historically modified section of channel, and removal of a weir along with reprofiling of banks in a town centre public amenity space. The final element completed in 2024 was restoration of the river channel though a disused highways ford next to Southern Waters water supply works in Carisbrooke. Successful delivery of the scheme has been achieved through partnership working with the Island Rivers/Newport Rivers Group and continued positive engagement and consultation with landowners and other local stakeholders.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results='''The monitoring network:'''<br /> <br /> Monitoring took place at the various schemes at a variety of spatial scales and frequencies. Under the AMP6 impact assessment investigation and HMWB WINEP implementation project a monitoring network was established from 2017 comprising groundwater and surface water levels, flow, water quality, fish and macroinvertebrates. This monitoring was continued, and additional monitoring was undertaken on the schemes delivered in the AMP7 WINEP which added to longer term monitoring established previously. A summary of the monitoring is detailed below (note that following completion of the AMP7 WINEP, this monitoring programme is being continued at a reduced frequency to 2030).<br /> <br /> '''Horse Paddock and Plaish Meadows Stage Zero schemes:'''<br /> <br /> *Hydrometric monitoring at 5 surface water locations (stilling wells) and 5 shallow groundwater monitoring locations in the floodplain was undertaken to monitor impacts of the Phase 1 Schemes on water levels:<br /> #June 2017 - ongoing: 3 surface water monitoring locations, 2 groundwater monitoring locations and 1 barometer were installed in June 2017 as part of AMP6 WINEP Investigation. Automatic water level monitoring devices were installed along with regular stage board (for surface water level) and manual dip readings (for groundwater level). Monitoring of these sites was continued through AMP7 and is now extended to 2030.<br /> #May 2022 - ongoing: 2 further surface water, 3 further groundwater and 1 further barometric monitoring locations were added, to inform design and assess post-construction functioning of the AMP7 WINEP schemes.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone, as well as time lapse and fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of the Stage Zero schemes in the channel and floodplain. <br /> *Water quality data collected at 6 locations quarterly from March 2023 to track any changes in water quality over time.<br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation as a result of the Phase 1 Schemes.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly following the construction of the schemes from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> The following open-source datasets were also used to supplement the site data:<br /> *Daily rainfall data from Carisbrooke rainfall gauge (Station ID: 333195) <br /> *Hourly barometric pressure from Met Office weather station at Saint Catherine’s Point.<br /> For the other schemes at Sheep Dip Field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond:<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of all Phase 2 Schemes. <br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation in Sheep Dip Field only.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone (Sheep Dip Field only), as well as fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly prior to the construction of the Sheep Dip Field from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> A comprehensive monitoring report was produced in early 2025 which provided a detailed analysis of the changes that have occurred since the implementation of the schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Key findings to date:'''<br /> <br /> '''Water level monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> The highly different antecedent conditions between May 2022 and October 2024 make it difficult to separate the impacts of the scheme from the overall hydrological signal, especially for sites with limited baseline data. Floodplain inundation in Horse Paddock occurred during a lower magnitude rainfall event and water was stored on the floodplain for longer duration post-scheme, than was seen in the baseline monitoring period. Extended periods of floodplain inundation have occurred since the scheme construction. Whilst the Plaish Meadow scheme may locally be extending the duration of elevated shallow groundwater levels in the floodplain into the summer months, this may simply be a reflection of the wetter conditions after the scheme has been implemented. Extended wetter conditions since the construction of the woody features suggests an increasingly wetter floodplain in both above and below ground water levels, but it is difficult to separate the effects of the scheme from the extraordinarily high rainfall between October 2023 and March 2024.<br /> <br /> '''Visual imagery:'''<br /> <br /> Drone imagery and fixed-point photography have provided visual evidence of changes at each site. This was particularly pronounced at Horse Paddock where the floodplain vegetation has changed to become more aquatic and creating a diversity of flow types on the floodplain. The drone imagery was particularly effective here with shorter vegetation on the floodplain than Plaish Meadows. Floodplain inundation in Plaish Meadows was more responsive to high rainfall events, reconnecting temporarily in the local area surrounding the ford and Lukely Brook woody feature. The drone imagery also showed the woody features on the drains effectively working to slow and store flow, with macrophyte vegetation establishing in the channel. Drone imagery was less effective at this site as the tall vegetation made it difficult to see the extent of floodplain inundation. At Froglands Stream, the drone imagery has shown the recovery of bank and in-channel vegetation in response to the restoration showing clearly how the vegetation has narrowed flow, creating faster flowing riffle features. Fixed-point photos of Spring Lane and Towngate Pond have shown how the schemes have recovered following the disturbance of construction with vegetation establishment coming quickly following the implementation of both schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Aquatic ecology – macroinvertebrate monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Drought conditions were experienced before the implementation of schemes followed by wetter conditions afterwards. Thus, some initial changes in the macroinvertebrates are likely to show a gradual recovery over time with increased flows and sedimentation. There were notable differences in the macroinvertebrate community found at Horse Paddock compared to the other Lukely Brook sites, with Horse Paddock communities more associated with slower flows and a greater abundance of fine sediment. The majority of species were common, but the samples yielded a total of five nationally scarce species (the caddisfly Limnephilus hirsutus, long-horned soldierfly Vanoyia tenuicornis, pygmy soldier fly Oxycera pygmaea, white-barred soldier fly O. morrisii and the riffle beetle Riolus subviolaceus). At three sampling sites nationally scarce species (soldierfly, Oxycera pygmaea; white-barred soldierfly, Oxycera morrisii; the caddisfly: Limnephilus hirsutus and the long-horned soldierfly: Vanovia tenuicornis) were recorded at the sites for the first time following scheme construction and are associated with wetlands and marshes. Following an initial drop in taxon richness, macroinvertebrate indices from the re-meandered Froglands Stream increased post restoration showing a gradual recovery to pre-restoration levels and an improvement in habitat quality. Interesting changes were observed rapidly at Spring Lane following the tree removal and coppicing. Implementation of this scheme was later and hence the further monitoring will show how the scheme has responded to the additional narrowing. Following the removal of the weir at Towngate Pond, samples show an increase in diversity of mayflies, caddisfly taxa and riffle beetles, particularly in April 2024, perhaps due to favourable flow conditions. The increase in post-restoration LIFE scores indicates an increase in flow velocity likely resulting from the weir removal.<br /> <br /> '''Water quality:'''<br /> <br /> In general, concentrations of both phosphorus and nitrogen species were highest at the upstream end of Lukely Brook (at Horse Paddock and Plaish Farm monitoring sites), lowest at Plaish Meadows, and increased at Clatterford Shute, at the downstream end of the reach. The Fishpond Stream (which comes in on Plaish Meadows was noted as having good quality and potentially improving water quality downstream. The largest improvements in water quality were noted downstream of Plaish Meadows but is difficult to disentangle whether this was due to the schemes or whether this was primarily due to the improved water quality of the Fishpond Stream. <br /> <br /> '''Vegetation monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Little evidence of any significant changes to National Vegetation Classification communities although it was noted that communities could take time for a visible change to occur following the implementation of the various schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Bird counts:'''<br /> <br /> The wetter floodplains have attracted birds that have been previously absent such as Jack Snipe, Common Snipe, Little Egret, Shelduck and Moorhen. <br /> The monitoring is continuing for all schemes delivered in the second WINEP namely Horse Paddock, Plaish Meadow, Sheep Dip field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond. Monitoring is scheduled to continue until 2030 but at reduced frequency. Currently, the monitoring report is being updated with the 2025 monitoring results.<br /> |Lessons learn=To add<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2017-01-01<br /> |Works started=2020-11-01<br /> |Works completed=2024-07-31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Southern Water WINEP<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=50.69087, -1.31091<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Toggle content start}}{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Lukely Brook<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Abstraction, Barriers to fish migration, Drinking water storage and supply<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Invertebrates, Macrophytes<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Lukely Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB107101006250<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Southern_Water_Lukely_Brook&diff=51889 2026-03-03T19:44:49Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=50.69087, -1.31091<br /> }}<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Dempster<br /> |Main contact id=Southern Water Catchment Team<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.southernwater.co.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=AtkinsRéalis, FiveRivers<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Lukely Brook.png<br /> |Picture description=Lukely Brook upstream of Clatterford<br /> |Project summary=The Lukely Brook is a Chalk winterbourne stream located on the Isle of Wight, flowing from the rural central downs north through Carisbrooke and into the Medina Estuary in Newport.<br /> <br /> Southern Water operates two groundwater abstractions near to the Lukely Brook, which supply a large proportion of the Isle of Wight with clean drinking water. Southern Water has had a number of environmental regulatory undertakings as part of its AMP6 NEP (National Environment Programme) and AMP7 WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme), which aim to ensure that groundwater abstractions are environmentally sustainable in the long-term, and seeks to mitigate any quantified impacts resulting from water company abstraction on watercourses and the valuable ecological habitats they support. <br /> <br /> <br /> Under the AMP6 NEP and AMP7 WINEP, Southern Water have undertaken a programme of ecological and hydro-geomorphological improvement works on the Lukely Brook between 2020 and 2024 to improve the ecological resilience of this chalk winterbourne stream and adjacent ecologically designated floodplain meadows. The environmental enhancement works include the removal of a weir, installation of three fish passes, two ‘Stage Zero’ floodplain reconnection schemes, realignment and reprofiling of a historically modified section of channel, and removal of a weir along with reprofiling of banks in a town centre public amenity space. The final element completed in 2024 was restoration of the river channel though a disused highways ford next to Southern Waters water supply works in Carisbrooke. Successful delivery of the scheme has been achieved through partnership working with the Island Rivers/Newport Rivers Group and continued positive engagement and consultation with landowners and other local stakeholders.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results='''The monitoring network:'''<br /> <br /> Monitoring took place at the various schemes at a variety of spatial scales and frequencies. Under the AMP6 impact assessment investigation and HMWB WINEP implementation project a monitoring network was established from 2017 comprising groundwater and surface water levels, flow, water quality, fish and macroinvertebrates. This monitoring was continued, and additional monitoring was undertaken on the schemes delivered in the AMP7 WINEP which added to longer term monitoring established previously. A summary of the monitoring is detailed below (note that following completion of the AMP7 WINEP, this monitoring programme is being continued at a reduced frequency to 2030).<br /> <br /> '''Horse Paddock and Plaish Meadows Stage Zero schemes:'''<br /> <br /> *Hydrometric monitoring at 5 surface water locations (stilling wells) and 5 shallow groundwater monitoring locations in the floodplain was undertaken to monitor impacts of the Phase 1 Schemes on water levels:<br /> #June 2017 - ongoing: 3 surface water monitoring locations, 2 groundwater monitoring locations and 1 barometer were installed in June 2017 as part of AMP6 WINEP Investigation. Automatic water level monitoring devices were installed along with regular stage board (for surface water level) and manual dip readings (for groundwater level). Monitoring of these sites was continued through AMP7 and is now extended to 2030.<br /> #May 2022 - ongoing: 2 further surface water, 3 further groundwater and 1 further barometric monitoring locations were added, to inform design and assess post-construction functioning of the AMP7 WINEP schemes.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone, as well as time lapse and fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of the Stage Zero schemes in the channel and floodplain. <br /> *Water quality data collected at 6 locations quarterly from March 2023 to track any changes in water quality over time.<br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation as a result of the Phase 1 Schemes.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly following the construction of the schemes from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> The following open-source datasets were also used to supplement the site data:<br /> *Daily rainfall data from Carisbrooke rainfall gauge (Station ID: 333195) <br /> *Hourly barometric pressure from Met Office weather station at Saint Catherine’s Point.<br /> For the other schemes at Sheep Dip Field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond:<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of all Phase 2 Schemes. <br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation in Sheep Dip Field only.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone (Sheep Dip Field only), as well as fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly prior to the construction of the Sheep Dip Field from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> A comprehensive monitoring report was produced in early 2025 which provided a detailed analysis of the changes that have occurred since the implementation of the schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Key findings to date:'''<br /> <br /> '''Water level monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> The highly different antecedent conditions between May 2022 and October 2024 make it difficult to separate the impacts of the scheme from the overall hydrological signal, especially for sites with limited baseline data. Floodplain inundation in Horse Paddock occurred during a lower magnitude rainfall event and water was stored on the floodplain for longer duration post-scheme, than was seen in the baseline monitoring period. Extended periods of floodplain inundation have occurred since the scheme construction. Whilst the Plaish Meadow scheme may locally be extending the duration of elevated shallow groundwater levels in the floodplain into the summer months, this may simply be a reflection of the wetter conditions after the scheme has been implemented. Extended wetter conditions since the construction of the woody features suggests an increasingly wetter floodplain in both above and below ground water levels, but it is difficult to separate the effects of the scheme from the extraordinarily high rainfall between October 2023 and March 2024.<br /> <br /> '''Visual imagery:'''<br /> <br /> Drone imagery and fixed-point photography have provided visual evidence of changes at each site. This was particularly pronounced at Horse Paddock where the floodplain vegetation has changed to become more aquatic and creating a diversity of flow types on the floodplain. The drone imagery was particularly effective here with shorter vegetation on the floodplain than Plaish Meadows. Floodplain inundation in Plaish Meadows was more responsive to high rainfall events, reconnecting temporarily in the local area surrounding the ford and Lukely Brook woody feature. The drone imagery also showed the woody features on the drains effectively working to slow and store flow, with macrophyte vegetation establishing in the channel. Drone imagery was less effective at this site as the tall vegetation made it difficult to see the extent of floodplain inundation. At Froglands Stream, the drone imagery has shown the recovery of bank and in-channel vegetation in response to the restoration showing clearly how the vegetation has narrowed flow, creating faster flowing riffle features. Fixed-point photos of Spring Lane and Towngate Pond have shown how the schemes have recovered following the disturbance of construction with vegetation establishment coming quickly following the implementation of both schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Aquatic ecology – macroinvertebrate monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Drought conditions were experienced before the implementation of schemes followed by wetter conditions afterwards. Thus, some initial changes in the macroinvertebrates are likely to show a gradual recovery over time with increased flows and sedimentation. There were notable differences in the macroinvertebrate community found at Horse Paddock compared to the other Lukely Brook sites, with Horse Paddock communities more associated with slower flows and a greater abundance of fine sediment. The majority of species were common, but the samples yielded a total of five nationally scarce species (the caddisfly Limnephilus hirsutus, long-horned soldierfly Vanoyia tenuicornis, pygmy soldier fly Oxycera pygmaea, white-barred soldier fly O. morrisii and the riffle beetle Riolus subviolaceus). At three sampling sites nationally scarce species (soldierfly, Oxycera pygmaea; white-barred soldierfly, Oxycera morrisii; the caddisfly: Limnephilus hirsutus and the long-horned soldierfly: Vanovia tenuicornis) were recorded at the sites for the first time following scheme construction and are associated with wetlands and marshes. Following an initial drop in taxon richness, macroinvertebrate indices from the re-meandered Froglands Stream increased post restoration showing a gradual recovery to pre-restoration levels and an improvement in habitat quality. Interesting changes were observed rapidly at Spring Lane following the tree removal and coppicing. Implementation of this scheme was later and hence the further monitoring will show how the scheme has responded to the additional narrowing. Following the removal of the weir at Towngate Pond, samples show an increase in diversity of mayflies, caddisfly taxa and riffle beetles, particularly in April 2024, perhaps due to favourable flow conditions. The increase in post-restoration LIFE scores indicates an increase in flow velocity likely resulting from the weir removal.<br /> <br /> '''Water quality:'''<br /> <br /> In general, concentrations of both phosphorus and nitrogen species were highest at the upstream end of Lukely Brook (at Horse Paddock and Plaish Farm monitoring sites), lowest at Plaish Meadows, and increased at Clatterford Shute, at the downstream end of the reach. The Fishpond Stream (which comes in on Plaish Meadows was noted as having good quality and potentially improving water quality downstream. The largest improvements in water quality were noted downstream of Plaish Meadows but is difficult to disentangle whether this was due to the schemes or whether this was primarily due to the improved water quality of the Fishpond Stream. <br /> <br /> '''Vegetation monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Little evidence of any significant changes to National Vegetation Classification communities although it was noted that communities could take time for a visible change to occur following the implementation of the various schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Bird counts:'''<br /> <br /> The wetter floodplains have attracted birds that have been previously absent such as Jack Snipe, Common Snipe, Little Egret, Shelduck and Moorhen. <br /> The monitoring is continuing for all schemes delivered in the second WINEP namely Horse Paddock, Plaish Meadow, Sheep Dip field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond. Monitoring is scheduled to continue until 2030 but at reduced frequency. Currently, the monitoring report is being updated with the 2025 monitoring results.<br /> |Lessons learn=To add<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2017-01-01<br /> |Works started=2020-11-01<br /> |Works completed=2024-07-31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Southern Water WINEP<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Toggle content start}}{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Lukely Brook<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Abstraction, Barriers to fish migration, Drinking water storage and supply<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Invertebrates, Macrophytes<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Lukely Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB107101006250<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:River_Ecclesbourne_Restoration_Project&diff=51808 2026-02-25T14:24:02Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=53.015, -1.54275<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Barrier removal, Creation of fish pass, Erosion Repair, Introducing sediment<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Floodplain reconnection<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Channel realignment, Creation of new channel<br /> |Management interventions=Removal of invasive species, Riparian tree planting, Livestock exclusion<br /> |Social measures=Environmental education activities with local schools, Community Education, Interpretation boards, interacting with farmers<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Continuity for organisms<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=16000<br /> |Project started=2018-12-06<br /> |Works started=2022-08-01<br /> |Works completed=2024-07-01<br /> |Project completed=2025-03-31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Government Grant in Aid, Private Company, Charitable Funds<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=River Ecclesbourne<br /> |WFD water body code=GB104028052720<br /> |WFD (national) typology=River<br /> |WFD water body name=Ecclesbourne Catchment<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Impounded, Straightened, Over deepened<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Actively meandering, Pool-riffle, Run-glide<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), Brown trout (Salmo trutta), grayling (Thymallus thymallus), Brook lamprey<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Quick run-off<br /> |Dominant substrate=Gravel<br /> |River corridor land use=Improved/semi-improved grassland/pasture, Urban<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=River Ecclesborne catchment (trib of R Derwent)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Urban, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Jennifer<br /> |Main contact surname=Kril<br /> |Contact organisation=Derbyshire Wildlife Trust<br /> |Partner organisations=Wild Trout Trust, Environment Agency, Nestle Waters &amp; Premium Beverages, Chatsworth Estate<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project summary=The River Ecclesbourne Restoration Project (Derbyshire, England) is a six‑plus year, partnership‑led programme to restore river health and reconnect migratory fish to upstream habitat.<br /> It targeted two major barriers: Snake Lane Weir (2.5 m) and Postern Mill Weir (2 m), delivering a phased approach, removal and rock‑ramp installation at Snake Lane (Phase 1, winter 2022) and a 400 m re-meander and paleochannel reconnection at Postern Mill (Phase 2, winter 2023 – spring 2024).<br /> The work was driven by long‑term evidence showing severe fragmentation (20+ years of Environment Agency surveys) and by the return of migratory salmon to the Derwent after earlier catchment improvements.<br /> Interventions emphasised working with natural processes: regrading channels, creating riffle–pool sequences, restoring sediment continuity, and reconnecting floodplain and paleochannel to allow dynamic morphological adjustment.<br /> Delivery combined technical design, regulatory oversight and blended funding from partners including Derbyshire Wildlife Trust (lead for Postern Mill), Wild Trout Trust (lead for Snake Lane), the Environment Agency, Nestlé Waters &amp; Premium Beverages and Chatsworth Estate. Community engagement, volunteer habitat work and education were integral throughout.<br /> The project cost exceeded £1.1 million (Snake Lane ~£500k; Postern Mill ~£460k) and completed physical works in 2025, with complimentary wider catchment restoration (Invasive species control, tree planting and biodiversity enhancements, with monitoring funded through 2029. The scheme sits within a coordinated catchment strategy (Derbyshire Derwent Catchment Partnership, Humber River Basin Management Plan and Derbyshire Derwent Fish Passage Project) and contributes to wider ambitions to reopen the Derwent and Trent catchments to migratory fish.<br /> “The River Ecclesbourne Restoration Project is the result of more than six years of dedicated partnership work to improve river health and restore fish passage across the catchment.&quot;<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Monitoring is multimethod and repeatable, designed to measure habitat change, species response and connectivity. Core elements are: annual electrofishing at six historic EA sites to track species composition, abundance, biomass and age structure; eDNA sampling for early detection of low‑density or cryptic species; redd counts each autumn/winter to map salmon spawning distribution; fixed‑point photography and drone surveys to document geomorphic evolution; trail cameras to record wildlife use; and UKHab assessments to classify habitat condition.<br /> Additional techniques included non‑EA electric fishing surveys, repeat visits to assess rust‑fungus biocontrol trials for invasive plants, and hydraulic/flow modelling used both in design and post‑event evaluation.<br /> These complementary methods provide quantitative and qualitative lines of evidence for adaptive management and are repeated on a defined schedule to allow before/after and upstream/downstream comparisons.<br /> <br /> Results:<br /> The project reopened previously inaccessible habitat and produced clear biological responses: salmon recolonised upstream reaches within months of Snake Lane works (a spawned‑out hen found 1 km upstream), and by 2025 an Atlantic salmon parr plus several newly recorded coarse fish species were documented at Postern Mill, confirming reconnection. Electrofishing and eDNA confirm return and movement of species including Atlantic salmon, chub, grayling and gudgeon.<br /> Morphological monitoring shows active sediment transport, evolving riffles, pools and meanders; trail cameras and public reporting demonstrate increased wildlife use and strong community interest. The scheme gained national/international attention (Dam Removal Europe finalist; Natural History Museum case study).<br /> |Lessons learn=- Work with natural processes rather than over‑engineering: re-meandering and floodplain reconnection produced rapid geomorphic recovery and self‑sustaining habitat complexity.<br /> - Robust evidence and modelling matter, especially under extreme weather: detailed hydraulic modelling supported design decisions and proved accurate during Storm Babet, informing emergency responses and building public confidence.<br /> - Partnerships and blended funding accelerate delivery and broaden ownership; engaging landowners and tenant farmers early secured permissions and stewardship.<br /> - Community engagement and transparent communication (GIS storyboards, QR codes, videos, field visits) are essential for social licence and long‑term stewardship.<br /> <br /> Overall, the Ecclesbourne project demonstrates that targeted, evidence‑led barrier removal and channel reconnection can rapidly restore connectivity and biodiversity while delivering multiple social and climate‑resilience benefits.<br /> |Project title=River Ecclesbourne Restoration Project<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Salmon_to_Sheffield&diff=51807 2026-02-25T14:22:43Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=53.43045, -1.35885<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matthew<br /> |Main contact surname=Duffy<br /> |Main contact id=DCRT<br /> |Contact organisation=Don Catchment Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=dcrt.org.uk/<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project summary=The River Don suffered severe industrial pollution throughout the 19th and 20th centuries and was considered ecologically dead until the late 1980s. Improvements in water quality, combined with fish reintroductions and restocking, led to the recovery of resident fish populations and the return of Atlantic salmon to the lower catchment in the mid-1990s. Despite this recovery, migratory species remained unable to access their historic spawning grounds in the upper Don due to a succession of man-made barriers.<br /> Restoring longitudinal connectivity has therefore been a long-term ambition for partners working across the catchment. The first major barrier to migration, Crimpsall Sluice at Doncaster, was addressed through construction of a rock ramp, enabling salmon and other migratory fish to bypass the structure. Over the following 20 years, and working predominantly from downstream to upstream, a further 16 barriers were progressively eased. These interventions were primarily delivered through the installation of Larinier fish passes, a proven and effective solution for the steep, low-head weirs characteristic of the River Don.<br /> <br /> Delivery of this catchment-scale programme relied on a combination of legislative drivers linked to riparian and hydropower developments, charitable grant funding secured by the Don Catchment Rivers Trust (DCRT), and contributions from organisations such as Yorkshire Water in support of their sustainability objectives. This partnership approach enabled long-standing barriers to be addressed and ensured steady progress towards restoring full river connectivity.<br /> <br /> The success of this work became clear in 2019 with the recording of a hen Atlantic salmon downstream of Sheffield city centre at Salmon Pastures. Subsequent sightings and carcass records led to targeted surveys to assess spawning success. In 2025, these efforts culminated in the discovery of a salmon parr by a DCRT survey team—the first confirmed evidence of successful salmon reproduction in the River Don for over 200 years.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Monitoring and evaluation support the project through targeted electrofishing surveys and wider ecological monitoring. As the programme moves from delivery to optimisation, the installation of fish counters represents a key next step, providing robust, quantitative evidence of fish passage effectiveness and demonstrating restored connectivity at a catchment scale. This enhanced monitoring will help secure the long-term legacy of the project and inform best practice for migratory fish restoration elsewhere.<br /> |Project title=Salmon to Sheffield<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background}}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Southern_Water_Lukely_Brook&diff=51806 2026-02-25T14:21:18Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=50.69087, -1.31091<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Dempster<br /> |Main contact id=Southern Water Catchment Team<br /> |Partner organisations=AtkinsRéalis, FiveRivers<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Lukely Brook.png<br /> |Picture description=Lukely Brook upstream of Clatterford<br /> |Project summary=The Lukely Brook is a Chalk winterbourne stream located on the Isle of Wight, flowing from the rural central downs north through Carisbrooke and into the Medina Estuary in Newport.<br /> <br /> Southern Water operates two groundwater abstractions near to the Lukely Brook, which supply a large proportion of the Isle of Wight with clean drinking water. Southern Water has had a number of environmental regulatory undertakings as part of its AMP6 NEP (National Environment Programme) and AMP7 WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme), which aim to ensure that groundwater abstractions are environmentally sustainable in the long-term, and seeks to mitigate any quantified impacts resulting from water company abstraction on watercourses and the valuable ecological habitats they support. <br /> <br /> <br /> Under the AMP6 NEP and AMP7 WINEP, Southern Water have undertaken a programme of ecological and hydro-geomorphological improvement works on the Lukely Brook between 2020 and 2024 to improve the ecological resilience of this chalk winterbourne stream and adjacent ecologically designated floodplain meadows. The environmental enhancement works include the removal of a weir, installation of three fish passes, two ‘Stage Zero’ floodplain reconnection schemes, realignment and reprofiling of a historically modified section of channel, and removal of a weir along with reprofiling of banks in a town centre public amenity space. The final element completed in 2024 was restoration of the river channel though a disused highways ford next to Southern Waters water supply works in Carisbrooke. Successful delivery of the scheme has been achieved through partnership working with the Island Rivers/Newport Rivers Group and continued positive engagement and consultation with landowners and other local stakeholders.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results='''Horse Paddock and Plaish Meadows Stage Zero schemes:'''<br /> *Hydrometric monitoring at 5 surface water locations (stilling wells) and 5 shallow groundwater monitoring locations in the floodplain was undertaken to monitor impacts of the Phase 1 Schemes on water levels:<br /> #June 2017-March 2019: 3 surface water monitoring locations, 2 groundwater monitoring locations and 1 barometer were installed in June 2017). The automatic water level monitoring devices conducted regular stage board and manual water level readings were downloaded and processed the data until March 2019. <br /> #November 2017-May 2022: Loggers and recorded stage board were downloaded and manual dip readings recorded as part of baseline monitoring. <br /> #May 2022-October 2024: 2 further surface water, 3 further groundwater and 1 barometric monitoring locations were added. Regular stage board and manual groundwater level readings were reinstated as part of this project.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 to Autumn 2024 using a DJI Mini drone, as well as time lapse and fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to Autumn 2024 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of the Stage Zero schemes in the channel and floodplain. <br /> *Water quality data collected at 6 locations quarterly from March 2023 to Autumn 2024 track any changes in water quality over time.<br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation as a result of the Phase 1 Schemes.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly following the construction of the schemes from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> The following open-source datasets from local monitoring stations were also used to supplement the site data:<br /> *Daily rainfall data from Carisbrooke rainfall gauge (Station ID: 333195) <br /> *Hourly barometric pressure from Met Office weather station at Saint Catherine’s Point.<br /> '''For the other schemes at Sheep Dip Field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond:'''<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to Autumn 2024 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of all Phase 2 Schemes. <br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation in Sheep Dip Field only.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone (Sheep Dip Field only), as well as fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly prior to the construction of the Sheep Dip Field from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> <br /> <br /> '''Water level monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> The highly different antecedent conditions between May 2022 and October 2024 make it difficult to separate the impacts of the scheme from the overall hydrological signal, especially for sites with limited baseline data. Floodplain inundation in Horse Paddock occurred during a lower magnitude rainfall event and water was stored on the floodplain for longer duration post-scheme, than was seen in the baseline monitoring period. Extended periods of floodplain inundation have occurred since the scheme construction. Whilst the Plaish Meadow scheme may locally be extending the duration of elevated shallow groundwater levels in the floodplain into the summer months, this may simply be a reflection of the wetter conditions after the scheme has been implemented. Extended wetter conditions since the construction of the woody features suggests an increasingly wetter floodplain in both above and below ground water levels, but it is difficult to separate the effects of the scheme from the extraordinarily high rainfall between October 2023 and March 2024.<br /> <br /> '''Visual imagery:'''<br /> <br /> Drone imagery and fixed-point photography have provided visual evidence of changes at each site. This was particularly pronounced at Horse Paddock where the floodplain vegetation has changed to become more aquatic and creating a diversity of flow types on the floodplain. The drone imagery was particularly effective here with shorter vegetation on the floodplain than Plaish Meadows. Floodplain inundation in Plaish Meadows was more responsive to high rainfall events, reconnecting temporarily in the local area surrounding the ford and Lukely Brook woody feature. The drone imagery also showed the woody features on the drains effectively working to slow and store flow, with macrophyte vegetation establishing in the channel. Drone imagery was less effective at this site as the tall vegetation made it difficult to see the extent of floodplain inundation. At Froglands Stream, the drone imagery has shown the recovery of bank and in-channel vegetation in response to the restoration showing clearly how the vegetation has narrowed flow, creating faster flowing riffle features. Fixed-point photos of Spring Lane and Towngate Pond have shown how the schemes have recovered following the disturbance of construction with vegetation establishment coming quickly following the implementation of both schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Aquatic ecology – macroinvertebrate monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Drought conditions were experienced before the implementation of schemes followed by wetter conditions afterwards. Thus, some initial changes in the macroinvertebrates are likely to show a gradual recovery over time with increased flows and sedimentation. There were notable differences in the macroinvertebrate community found at Horse Paddock compared to the other Lukely Brook sites, with Horse Paddock communities more associated with slower flows and a greater abundance of fine sediment. The majority of species were common, but the samples yielded a total of five nationally scarce species (the caddisfly Limnephilus hirsutus, long-horned soldierfly Vanoyia tenuicornis, pygmy soldier fly Oxycera pygmaea, white-barred soldier fly O. morrisii and the riffle beetle Riolus subviolaceus). At three sampling sites nationally scarce species (soldierfly, Oxycera pygmaea; white-barred soldierfly, Oxycera morrisii; the caddisfly: Limnephilus hirsutus and the long-horned soldierfly: Vanovia tenuicornis) were recorded at the sites for the first time following scheme construction and are associated with wetlands and marshes. Following an initial drop in taxon richness, macroinvertebrate indices from the re-meandered Froglands Stream increased post restoration showing a gradual recovery to pre-restoration levels and an improvement in habitat quality. Interesting changes were observed rapidly at Spring Lane following the tree removal and coppicing. Implementation of this scheme was later and hence the further monitoring will show how the scheme has responded to the additional narrowing. Following the removal of the weir at Towngate Pond, samples show an increase in diversity of mayflies, caddisfly taxa and riffle beetles, particularly in April 2024, perhaps due to favourable flow conditions. The increase in post-restoration LIFE scores indicates an increase in flow velocity likely resulting from the weir removal.<br /> <br /> '''Water quality:'''<br /> <br /> In general, concentrations of both phosphorus and nitrogen species were highest at the upstream end of Lukely Brook (at Horse Paddock and Plaish Farm monitoring sites), lowest at Plaish Meadows, and increased at Clatterford Shute, at the downstream end of the reach. The Fishpond Stream (which comes in on Plaish Meadows was noted as having good quality and potentially improving water quality downstream. The largest improvements in water quality were noted downstream of Plaish Meadows but is difficult to disentangle whether this was due to the schemes or whether this was primarily due to the improved water quality of the Fishpond Stream.<br /> <br /> '''Vegetation monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Little evidence of any significant changes to National Vegetation Classification communities although it was noted that communities could take time for a visible change to occur following the implementation of the various schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Bird counts:'''<br /> <br /> The wetter floodplains have attracted birds that have been previously absent such as Jack Snipe, Common Snipe, Little Egret, Shelduck and Moorhen. <br /> The monitoring is continuing for all schemes delivered in the second WINEP namely Horse Paddock, Plaish Meadow, Sheep Dip field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond. Monitoring is scheduled to continue until 2030 but at reduced frequency. Currently, the monitoring report is being updated with the 2025 monitoring results.<br /> |Lessons learn=To add<br /> }}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> <br /> {{Project background<br /> |Total cost category=500 - 1000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Southern Water WINEP<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Lukely Brook<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Abstraction, Barriers to fish migration, Drinking water storage and supply<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Invertebrates, Macrophytes<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Lukely Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB107101006250<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Southern_Water_Lukely_Brook&diff=51805 2026-02-25T14:21:01Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Dempster<br /> |Main contact id=Southern Water Catchment Team<br /> |Partner organisations=AtkinsRéalis, FiveRivers<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Lukely Brook.png<br /> |Picture description=Lukely Brook upstream of Clatterford<br /> |Project summary=The Lukely Brook is a Chalk winterbourne stream located on the Isle of Wight, flowing from the rural central downs north through Carisbrooke and into the Medina Estuary in Newport.<br /> <br /> Southern Water operates two groundwater abstractions near to the Lukely Brook, which supply a large proportion of the Isle of Wight with clean drinking water. Southern Water has had a number of environmental regulatory undertakings as part of its AMP6 NEP (National Environment Programme) and AMP7 WINEP (Water Industry National Environment Programme), which aim to ensure that groundwater abstractions are environmentally sustainable in the long-term, and seeks to mitigate any quantified impacts resulting from water company abstraction on watercourses and the valuable ecological habitats they support. <br /> <br /> <br /> Under the AMP6 NEP and AMP7 WINEP, Southern Water have undertaken a programme of ecological and hydro-geomorphological improvement works on the Lukely Brook between 2020 and 2024 to improve the ecological resilience of this chalk winterbourne stream and adjacent ecologically designated floodplain meadows. The environmental enhancement works include the removal of a weir, installation of three fish passes, two ‘Stage Zero’ floodplain reconnection schemes, realignment and reprofiling of a historically modified section of channel, and removal of a weir along with reprofiling of banks in a town centre public amenity space. The final element completed in 2024 was restoration of the river channel though a disused highways ford next to Southern Waters water supply works in Carisbrooke. Successful delivery of the scheme has been achieved through partnership working with the Island Rivers/Newport Rivers Group and continued positive engagement and consultation with landowners and other local stakeholders.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results='''Horse Paddock and Plaish Meadows Stage Zero schemes:'''<br /> *Hydrometric monitoring at 5 surface water locations (stilling wells) and 5 shallow groundwater monitoring locations in the floodplain was undertaken to monitor impacts of the Phase 1 Schemes on water levels:<br /> #June 2017-March 2019: 3 surface water monitoring locations, 2 groundwater monitoring locations and 1 barometer were installed in June 2017). The automatic water level monitoring devices conducted regular stage board and manual water level readings were downloaded and processed the data until March 2019. <br /> #November 2017-May 2022: Loggers and recorded stage board were downloaded and manual dip readings recorded as part of baseline monitoring. <br /> #May 2022-October 2024: 2 further surface water, 3 further groundwater and 1 barometric monitoring locations were added. Regular stage board and manual groundwater level readings were reinstated as part of this project.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 to Autumn 2024 using a DJI Mini drone, as well as time lapse and fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to Autumn 2024 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of the Stage Zero schemes in the channel and floodplain. <br /> *Water quality data collected at 6 locations quarterly from March 2023 to Autumn 2024 track any changes in water quality over time.<br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation as a result of the Phase 1 Schemes.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly following the construction of the schemes from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> The following open-source datasets from local monitoring stations were also used to supplement the site data:<br /> *Daily rainfall data from Carisbrooke rainfall gauge (Station ID: 333195) <br /> *Hourly barometric pressure from Met Office weather station at Saint Catherine’s Point.<br /> '''For the other schemes at Sheep Dip Field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond:'''<br /> *Aquatic ecology surveys conducted in spring and autumn from April 2022 to Autumn 2024 to track any changes in macroinvertebrates as a result of all Phase 2 Schemes. <br /> *National Vegetation Classification (NVC) surveys in 2018, 2022 and 2023 to track changes in floodplain vegetation in Sheep Dip Field only.<br /> *Visual imagery collected by repeat aerial imagery surveys every 6 weeks from May 2022 using a DJI Mini drone (Sheep Dip Field only), as well as fixed-point photography to monitor the evolution of the sites over time.<br /> *Bird monitoring has also been undertaken monthly prior to the construction of the Sheep Dip Field from November 2022 to April 2023.<br /> <br /> <br /> '''Water level monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> The highly different antecedent conditions between May 2022 and October 2024 make it difficult to separate the impacts of the scheme from the overall hydrological signal, especially for sites with limited baseline data. Floodplain inundation in Horse Paddock occurred during a lower magnitude rainfall event and water was stored on the floodplain for longer duration post-scheme, than was seen in the baseline monitoring period. Extended periods of floodplain inundation have occurred since the scheme construction. Whilst the Plaish Meadow scheme may locally be extending the duration of elevated shallow groundwater levels in the floodplain into the summer months, this may simply be a reflection of the wetter conditions after the scheme has been implemented. Extended wetter conditions since the construction of the woody features suggests an increasingly wetter floodplain in both above and below ground water levels, but it is difficult to separate the effects of the scheme from the extraordinarily high rainfall between October 2023 and March 2024.<br /> <br /> '''Visual imagery:'''<br /> <br /> Drone imagery and fixed-point photography have provided visual evidence of changes at each site. This was particularly pronounced at Horse Paddock where the floodplain vegetation has changed to become more aquatic and creating a diversity of flow types on the floodplain. The drone imagery was particularly effective here with shorter vegetation on the floodplain than Plaish Meadows. Floodplain inundation in Plaish Meadows was more responsive to high rainfall events, reconnecting temporarily in the local area surrounding the ford and Lukely Brook woody feature. The drone imagery also showed the woody features on the drains effectively working to slow and store flow, with macrophyte vegetation establishing in the channel. Drone imagery was less effective at this site as the tall vegetation made it difficult to see the extent of floodplain inundation. At Froglands Stream, the drone imagery has shown the recovery of bank and in-channel vegetation in response to the restoration showing clearly how the vegetation has narrowed flow, creating faster flowing riffle features. Fixed-point photos of Spring Lane and Towngate Pond have shown how the schemes have recovered following the disturbance of construction with vegetation establishment coming quickly following the implementation of both schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Aquatic ecology – macroinvertebrate monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Drought conditions were experienced before the implementation of schemes followed by wetter conditions afterwards. Thus, some initial changes in the macroinvertebrates are likely to show a gradual recovery over time with increased flows and sedimentation. There were notable differences in the macroinvertebrate community found at Horse Paddock compared to the other Lukely Brook sites, with Horse Paddock communities more associated with slower flows and a greater abundance of fine sediment. The majority of species were common, but the samples yielded a total of five nationally scarce species (the caddisfly Limnephilus hirsutus, long-horned soldierfly Vanoyia tenuicornis, pygmy soldier fly Oxycera pygmaea, white-barred soldier fly O. morrisii and the riffle beetle Riolus subviolaceus). At three sampling sites nationally scarce species (soldierfly, Oxycera pygmaea; white-barred soldierfly, Oxycera morrisii; the caddisfly: Limnephilus hirsutus and the long-horned soldierfly: Vanovia tenuicornis) were recorded at the sites for the first time following scheme construction and are associated with wetlands and marshes. Following an initial drop in taxon richness, macroinvertebrate indices from the re-meandered Froglands Stream increased post restoration showing a gradual recovery to pre-restoration levels and an improvement in habitat quality. Interesting changes were observed rapidly at Spring Lane following the tree removal and coppicing. Implementation of this scheme was later and hence the further monitoring will show how the scheme has responded to the additional narrowing. Following the removal of the weir at Towngate Pond, samples show an increase in diversity of mayflies, caddisfly taxa and riffle beetles, particularly in April 2024, perhaps due to favourable flow conditions. The increase in post-restoration LIFE scores indicates an increase in flow velocity likely resulting from the weir removal.<br /> <br /> '''Water quality:'''<br /> <br /> In general, concentrations of both phosphorus and nitrogen species were highest at the upstream end of Lukely Brook (at Horse Paddock and Plaish Farm monitoring sites), lowest at Plaish Meadows, and increased at Clatterford Shute, at the downstream end of the reach. The Fishpond Stream (which comes in on Plaish Meadows was noted as having good quality and potentially improving water quality downstream. The largest improvements in water quality were noted downstream of Plaish Meadows but is difficult to disentangle whether this was due to the schemes or whether this was primarily due to the improved water quality of the Fishpond Stream.<br /> <br /> '''Vegetation monitoring:'''<br /> <br /> Little evidence of any significant changes to National Vegetation Classification communities although it was noted that communities could take time for a visible change to occur following the implementation of the various schemes.<br /> <br /> '''Bird counts:'''<br /> <br /> The wetter floodplains have attracted birds that have been previously absent such as Jack Snipe, Common Snipe, Little Egret, Shelduck and Moorhen. <br /> The monitoring is continuing for all schemes delivered in the second WINEP namely Horse Paddock, Plaish Meadow, Sheep Dip field, Spring Lane and Towngate Pond. Monitoring is scheduled to continue until 2030 but at reduced frequency. Currently, the monitoring report is being updated with the 2025 monitoring results.<br /> |Lessons learn=To add<br /> }}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=50.69087, -1.31091<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> <br /> {{Project background<br /> |Total cost category=500 - 1000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Southern Water WINEP<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Lukely Brook<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Abstraction, Barriers to fish migration, Drinking water storage and supply<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Invertebrates, Macrophytes<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Lukely Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB107101006250<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Restoring_the_River_Mease_Catchment&diff=51804 2026-02-25T14:17:07Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=52.70332, -1.52548<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gilwiskaw Brook from Source to River Mease<br /> }}<br /> |Project title=Restoring the River Mease Catchment<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Project web site url=rivermease.co.uk<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Urban, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Ruth<br /> |Main contact surname=Needham<br /> |Main contact id=Ruth_Needham<br /> |Contact organisation=Trent Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.trentriverstrust.org/<br /> |Partner organisations=Catchment Sensitive Farming, Derbyshire County Council, Environment Agency, Leicestershire County Council, Lichfield District Council, Natural England, North West Leciestershire District Council, South Derbyshire District Council, Staffordshire County Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Mease Meadows<br /> |Picture description=Restored reach of River Mease, showing re-profiled riverbank, vegetated buffer and in-channel vegetation.<br /> |Project summary=The Mease catchment project demonstrates how coordinated, collaborative action can improve river health, support nature recovery, and sustain food production.<br /> <br /> The catchment is dominated by high quality agricultural land and supports an active, productive farming community. Ashby and Measham are the main urban centres. In 1998, the river was designated as an SSSI for its small but nationally important, populations of Spined Loach Cobitis taenia and Bullhead Cottus gobio.<br /> <br /> Like many lowland UK rivers, the Mease had long suffered from habitat loss, flooding, and pollution, particularly phosphate, at a time when food production was the priority. Few people, including the farmers, were aware of the Mease, its fish, or the pressures on its wildlife.<br /> <br /> The SSSI/SAC designation in 2005 opened up funding that supported land use change and management practices that value nature. From the early 2000s, work began to bring farmers and stakeholders together. The early years were challenging; the protected status was unpopular with many farmers. The partnership strengthened significantly after TRT, and the EA came on board in 2013. <br /> <br /> Since then, landowners have been closely engaged to identify solutions that balance food production with habitat creation and water retention on farmland.<br /> <br /> The partnership has delivered substantial capital works and extensive engagement. Together we are working towards a genuinely restored catchment where food production is balanced with space for nature. We have demonstrated that rivers can be restored and connected to their floodplain within a productive farmed landscape.<br /> <br /> Objectives of the Partnership<br /> 1. Restore the catchment by balancing land use for food production, nature recovery and making space for water.<br /> 2. Deliver nature based capital works across the River Mease and its tributaries.<br /> 3. Promote good practice and interventions that trap and store pollution and slow flood flows.<br /> 4. Restore the River Mease SSSI to good ecological health.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Monitoring and evaluation is fundamental to all the activities, to help evaluate impact as well as inform future work. The evidence collected includes fixed point photography, invertebrate and species surveys, water quality monitoring, recording of landowner engagement and volunteer activity.<br /> <br /> A programme of fixed point photography has been carried out across key restoration sites, capturing seasonal changes and fluctuations in water levels. These images clearly show how restored river habitats establish and evolve over time, and they provide valuable material to share with farmers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> Surveys for freshwater aquatic invertebrates at key sites have been able to show how the river is starting to recover, once river restoration has been completed. <br /> <br /> Phosphate monitoring at interventions sites and on all the major tributaries has helped to evaluate schemes, as well as inform the future targeting of work, including the nutrient neutrality framework. <br /> <br /> Engagement has been a key focus. We maintain an engagement tracker which helps to strengthen our understanding of landowner and communities’ interests in the methods used. <br /> <br /> Specific species surveys have been undertaken including White clawed-crayfish, fish and INNS. <br /> <br /> The evidence is assessed on a regular basis to report the impact, influence future work and raise awareness of achievements.<br /> |Lessons learn=Engagement and collaboration is key. We are restoring and rivers, and finding places to protect nature within a farmed landscape. The concept is unfamiliar to many landowners and stakeholders. Naturally functioning rivers that are connected to their floodplain create habitats, store water and trap pollution. Yet they take up space, especially when in flood. Farmers and landowners in the Mease historically would farm right up to the bank top, and are reluctant to lose productive land. It can take several years for a farmer to agree to a scheme. It need to blend into their wider farmer management, utilising buffers, margins and field corners. It might include areas that lie wet. Schemes are best secured with a grant such as a Countryside Stewardship Scheme or Sustainable Farm Incentive. <br /> <br /> Allow time to talk to the farmer / landowner. <br /> Look at the site from the landowners eyes, understand where they are able to amend their management, and what grant revenue might off set any production losses. <br /> Survey for ecology, archaeology and services, they all can have a big influence on how a scheme can take shape. <br /> Present plans to the farmer at an early stage. <br /> Look for wider benefits in addition to river restoration, such as trapping pollution or flood storage. <br /> Engage with the regulatory bodies early, such as the Lead Local Flood Authority or the Environment Agency. It can take time to get the permissions in place. <br /> The best time for capital works is June to September, outside of bird breeding season, the fish spawning season and when river levels and flood risk is low. <br /> Talk to a contractor early, get in indication of price. Make sure your funder is aware of the constraints and time line. Allow some extra budget for contingency. Usually something doesn't go quite to plan!<br /> |Project title=Restoring the River Mease Catchment<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background}}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Restoring_the_River_Mease_Catchment&diff=51803 2026-02-25T14:13:43Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=52.70332, -1.52548<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gilwiskaw Brook from Source to River Mease<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Project web site url=rivermease.co.uk<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Urban, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Ruth<br /> |Main contact surname=Needham<br /> |Main contact id=Ruth_Needham<br /> |Contact organisation=Trent Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.trentriverstrust.org/<br /> |Partner organisations=Catchment Sensitive Farming, Derbyshire County Council, Environment Agency, Leicestershire County Council, Lichfield District Council, Natural England, North West Leciestershire District Council, South Derbyshire District Council, Staffordshire County Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Mease Meadows<br /> |Picture description=Restored reach of River Mease, showing re-profiled riverbank, vegetated buffer and in-channel vegetation.<br /> |Project summary=The Mease catchment project demonstrates how coordinated, collaborative action can improve river health, support nature recovery, and sustain food production.<br /> <br /> The catchment is dominated by high quality agricultural land and supports an active, productive farming community. Ashby and Measham are the main urban centres. In 1998, the river was designated as an SSSI for its small but nationally important, populations of Spined Loach Cobitis taenia and Bullhead Cottus gobio.<br /> <br /> Like many lowland UK rivers, the Mease had long suffered from habitat loss, flooding, and pollution, particularly phosphate, at a time when food production was the priority. Few people, including the farmers, were aware of the Mease, its fish, or the pressures on its wildlife.<br /> <br /> The SSSI/SAC designation in 2005 opened up funding that supported land use change and management practices that value nature. From the early 2000s, work began to bring farmers and stakeholders together. The early years were challenging; the protected status was unpopular with many farmers. The partnership strengthened significantly after TRT, and the EA came on board in 2013. <br /> <br /> Since then, landowners have been closely engaged to identify solutions that balance food production with habitat creation and water retention on farmland.<br /> <br /> The partnership has delivered substantial capital works and extensive engagement. Together we are working towards a genuinely restored catchment where food production is balanced with space for nature. We have demonstrated that rivers can be restored and connected to their floodplain within a productive farmed landscape.<br /> <br /> Objectives of the Partnership<br /> 1. Restore the catchment by balancing land use for food production, nature recovery and making space for water.<br /> 2. Deliver nature based capital works across the River Mease and its tributaries.<br /> 3. Promote good practice and interventions that trap and store pollution and slow flood flows.<br /> 4. Restore the River Mease SSSI to good ecological health.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Monitoring and evaluation is fundamental to all the activities, to help evaluate impact as well as inform future work. The evidence collected includes fixed point photography, invertebrate and species surveys, water quality monitoring, recording of landowner engagement and volunteer activity.<br /> <br /> A programme of fixed point photography has been carried out across key restoration sites, capturing seasonal changes and fluctuations in water levels. These images clearly show how restored river habitats establish and evolve over time, and they provide valuable material to share with farmers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> Surveys for freshwater aquatic invertebrates at key sites have been able to show how the river is starting to recover, once river restoration has been completed. <br /> <br /> Phosphate monitoring at interventions sites and on all the major tributaries has helped to evaluate schemes, as well as inform the future targeting of work, including the nutrient neutrality framework. <br /> <br /> Engagement has been a key focus. We maintain an engagement tracker which helps to strengthen our understanding of landowner and communities’ interests in the methods used. <br /> <br /> Specific species surveys have been undertaken including White clawed-crayfish, fish and INNS. <br /> <br /> The evidence is assessed on a regular basis to report the impact, influence future work and raise awareness of achievements.<br /> |Lessons learn=Engagement and collaboration is key. We are restoring and rivers, and finding places to protect nature within a farmed landscape. The concept is unfamiliar to many landowners and stakeholders. Naturally functioning rivers that are connected to their floodplain create habitats, store water and trap pollution. Yet they take up space, especially when in flood. Farmers and landowners in the Mease historically would farm right up to the bank top, and are reluctant to lose productive land. It can take several years for a farmer to agree to a scheme. It need to blend into their wider farmer management, utilising buffers, margins and field corners. It might include areas that lie wet. Schemes are best secured with a grant such as a Countryside Stewardship Scheme or Sustainable Farm Incentive. <br /> <br /> Allow time to talk to the farmer / landowner. <br /> Look at the site from the landowners eyes, understand where they are able to amend their management, and what grant revenue might off set any production losses. <br /> Survey for ecology, archaeology and services, they all can have a big influence on how a scheme can take shape. <br /> Present plans to the farmer at an early stage. <br /> Look for wider benefits in addition to river restoration, such as trapping pollution or flood storage. <br /> Engage with the regulatory bodies early, such as the Lead Local Flood Authority or the Environment Agency. It can take time to get the permissions in place. <br /> The best time for capital works is June to September, outside of bird breeding season, the fish spawning season and when river levels and flood risk is low. <br /> Talk to a contractor early, get in indication of price. Make sure your funder is aware of the constraints and time line. Allow some extra budget for contingency. Usually something doesn't go quite to plan!<br /> |Project title=Restoring the River Mease Catchment<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background}}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51717 2026-01-28T09:03:00Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://www.colnecan.org.uk/index.php/the-action-plans/rivers-gade-and-bulbourne/rivers-gade-and-bulbourne-projects/302-channel-restoration-gadebridge-park<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Photo 1.JPG<br /> |Picture description=Drone footage of new channel and central footbridge.<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project realigned 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. This re-routing of the river reconnected it to the natural floodplain and chalk aquifer. The newly excavated channel features gently sloping river banks, creating a wide and shallow river in keeping with natural chalk stream form. Gravels were added to restore the lost river bed, and shaped to restore in-channel features such as riffles and side bars. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> With the inclusion of spring water flow, which was previously piped beneath the park and discharged at Kings Langley 5 Kilometres downstream, 6.5 kilometres of river has been improved. 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Baseline surveys undertaken for the project site pre-works: <br /> <br /> *Macrophytes- dominated by marginal reeds and herbs, which choked much of the channel and the number of scoring taxa is very low. First record of water crowfoot at this site in 2024, but at cover value of 2 (1%). First record of lesser water-parsnip present at this site in 2024, but at cover value 1 (0.1%). INNS (Orange balsam) was recorded here in past surveys (2016 - 2023) at low cover, but not recorded in 2024. Suspected issues at this site could be turbidity, siltation/slow flow and poaching as the site is located in the park and popular for building temporary dams and children splashing in a summer. There were a limited number of Macrophytes species and a very homogenous community in the mill channel. <br /> <br /> *Hyporheic zone- There were no specialist groundwater/hyporheic fauna recorded in any of the samples. <br /> <br /> *Water quality- the water quality was both stable and at a high level across the two sites. There was little evidence of any pollution inputs impacting this stretch of the Gade and the low turbidity levels also show that there was minimal siltation / sedimentation issues.<br /> <br /> *River fly- Improvements are possible with restoration, aiming to increase abundances of caseless caddisflies, mayflies, and stoneflies.<br /> <br /> *Invertebrates- Scored as Good status in 2017 and High status in 2018, 19, 21, 22 &amp; 23. <br /> <br /> *Fish- in the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously.<br /> <br /> We have completed two water vole surveys a year since 2021 as they have been recorded both upstream and downstream of the park. We utilised camera traps and rafts from November 2023 and through 2024 and removed scrub/saplings to prevent the area from becoming overgrown and limiting water vole foraging opportunities. There had been no sightings of water vole for two years prior to construction. <br /> <br /> Post construction surveys: <br /> <br /> Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> <br /> Surveys are ongoing, including water vole, riverfly, hyporheic, flow, temperature, macrophytes, invertebrates and fish.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Gadebridge Park<br /> |WFD water body code=GB106039029900<br /> |WFD (national) typology=freshwater, Chalk stream<br /> |WFD water body name=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Impounded, Over deepened, Over-widened, Single channel, Straightened<br /> |Reference morphology=2-stage channel, Pool-riffle, Sinuous, chalk stream<br /> |Desired post project morphology=2-stage channel, Groundwater dominated, Pool-riffle, Sinuous<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Orange Balsam, American signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), Water Vole<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater<br /> |Dominant substrate=Silt<br /> |River corridor land use=Urban, parkland, farmland<br /> |Mean discharge category=0.1 - 1.0 m³/s<br /> |Mn discharge=0.16<br /> |Average channel gradient category=more than 0.1<br /> |Avrg channel gradient=0.33<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Substrate conditions, Width &amp; depth variation, modified channel, straight channel, perched channel, disconnected floodplain, over- deep channel, siltation, impounded channel<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Fish: Abundance, Fish: Species composition, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Oxygen balance, Temperature<br /> |Other motivation=Climate change resilience, access to nature, education on chalk streams, reduced maintenance<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=1:3 and 1:6 banks, Introduction of spawning gravels, Creation of pools and riffles, creation of buffer zones, Creation of low flow channel, gravel river access point, preservation of historic mill leat<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of multi stage channel, Improving fish migration, Lowland meadow, Maintenance of riparian vegetation, Introduction of spring flow, New ultrasonic gauging station<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Improvement of channel morphology, Improving fish migration, restoring more sinuous planform<br /> |Other technical measure=Introduction of 2 foot bridges<br /> |Social measures=Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, 2 events in the park, Junior river wardens programme, school visits, tours and presentations for local interest groups, social media video, Information boards, mailing list, project website, project mailbox, community satisfaction survey<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Ecological survey, Monitoring via Fixed Point Photography, Climate change adaptation, Definition of environmental objectives and indicators and monitoring program., Removal of Stevenson Stones for display<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=415<br /> |Project started=2015-10-07<br /> |Works started=2024-09-04<br /> |Works completed=2025-07-01<br /> |Project completed=2026-07-22<br /> |Total cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, AffinityWater, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=JBA Consulting<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Oliver<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Francis<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=BAM Nuttall Limited<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=David<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Bugden<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Robert<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Cassidy<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Total project cost: £4.148 million. EA FCERM £2.268 million, EA Water Resources £1.510 million. Affinity Water £250k. Dacorum Borough Council £120k.<br /> Five Rivers were subcontracted by BAM to undertake the ecological elements of the works- placement of gravels, planting etc.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Connection to groundwaters<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Freshwater flow regime<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Fish<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Invertebrates<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Macrophytes<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=Oxygen balance<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=PH<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=Temperature<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=River Habitat Survey<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Water vole survey<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Public opinion<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=river bank vegetation<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://youtu.be/i_3Bk_3GLRM?si=QpmLhoKKYtJQAd5B<br /> |Description=Introductory video<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51716 2026-01-28T09:02:36Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://www.colnecan.org.uk/index.php/the-action-plans/rivers-gade-and-bulbourne/rivers-gade-and-bulbourne-projects/302-channel-restoration-gadebridge-park<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Photo 1.JPG<br /> |Picture description=Drone footage of new channel and central footbridge.<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project realigned 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. This re-routing of the river reconnected it to the natural floodplain and chalk aquifer. The newly excavated channel features gently sloping river banks, creating a wide and shallow river in keeping with natural chalk stream form. Gravels were added to restore the lost river bed, and shaped to restore in-channel features such as riffles and side bars. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> With the inclusion of spring water flow, which was previously piped beneath the park and discharged at Kings Langley 5 Kilometres downstream, 6.5 kilometres of river has been improved. 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Baseline surveys undertaken for the project site pre-works: <br /> <br /> *Macrophytes- dominated by marginal reeds and herbs, which choked much of the channel and the number of scoring taxa is very low. First record of water crowfoot at this site in 2024, but at cover value of 2 (1%). First record of lesser water-parsnip present at this site in 2024, but at cover value 1 (0.1%). INNS (Orange balsam) was recorded here in past surveys (2016 - 2023) at low cover, but not recorded in 2024. Suspected issues at this site could be turbidity, siltation/slow flow and poaching as the site is located in the park and popular for building temporary dams and children splashing in a summer. There were a limited number of Macrophytes species and a very homogenous community in the mill channel. <br /> <br /> *Hyporheic zone- There were no specialist groundwater/hyporheic fauna recorded in any of the samples. <br /> <br /> *Water quality- the water quality was both stable and at a high level across the two sites. There was little evidence of any pollution inputs impacting this stretch of the Gade and the low turbidity levels also show that there was minimal siltation / sedimentation issues.<br /> <br /> *River fly- Improvements are possible with restoration, aiming to increase abundances of caseless caddisflies, mayflies, and stoneflies.<br /> <br /> *Invertebrates- Scored as Good status in 2017 and High status in 2018, 19, 21, 22 &amp; 23. <br /> <br /> *Fish- in the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously.<br /> <br /> We have completed two water vole surveys a year since 2021 as they have been recorded both upstream and downstream of the park. We utilised camera traps and rafts from November 2023 and through 2024 and removed scrub/saplings to prevent the area from becoming overgrown and limiting water vole foraging opportunities. There had been no sightings of water vole for two years prior to construction. <br /> <br /> Post construction surveys: <br /> <br /> Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> <br /> Surveys are ongoing, including water vole, riverfly, hyporheic, flow, temperature, macrophytes, invertebrates and fish.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Gadebridge Park<br /> |WFD water body code=GB106039029900<br /> |WFD (national) typology=freshwater, Chalk stream<br /> |WFD water body name=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Impounded, Over deepened, Over-widened, Single channel, Straightened<br /> |Reference morphology=2-stage channel, Pool-riffle, Sinuous, chalk stream<br /> |Desired post project morphology=2-stage channel, Groundwater dominated, Pool-riffle, Sinuous<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Orange Balsam, American signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), Water Vole<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater<br /> |Dominant substrate=Silt<br /> |River corridor land use=Urban, parkland, farmland<br /> |Mean discharge category=0.1 - 1.0 m³/s<br /> |Mn discharge=0.16<br /> |Average channel gradient category=more than 0.1<br /> |Avrg channel gradient=0.33<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Connection to groundwaters, Flow velocities, Freshwater flow regime, Substrate conditions, Width &amp; depth variation, modified channel, straight channel, perched channel, disconnected floodplain, over- deep channel, siltation, impounded channel<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Fish: Abundance, Fish: Species composition, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Oxygen balance, Temperature<br /> |Other motivation=Climate change resilience, access to nature, education on chalk streams, reduced maintenance<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=1:3 and 1:6 banks, Introduction of spawning gravels, Creation of pools and riffles, creation of buffer zones, Creation of low flow channel, gravel river access point, preservation of historic mill leat<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of multi stage channel, Improving fish migration, Lowland meadow, Maintenance of riparian vegetation, Introduction of spring flow, New ultrasonic gauging station<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Improvement of channel morphology, Improving fish migration, restoring more sinuous planform<br /> |Other technical measure=Introduction of 2 foot bridges<br /> |Social measures=Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, 2 events in the park, Junior river wardens programme, school visits, tours and presentations for local interest groups, social media video, Information boards, mailing list, project website, project mailbox, community satisfaction survey<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Ecological survey, Monitoring via Fixed Point Photography, Climate change adaptation, Definition of environmental objectives and indicators and monitoring program., Removal of Stevenson Stones for display<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=415<br /> |Project started=2015-10-07<br /> |Works started=2024-09-04<br /> |Works completed=2025-07-01<br /> |Project completed=2026-07-22<br /> |Total cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, AffinityWater, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=JBA Consulting<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Oliver<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Francis<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=BAM Nuttall Limited<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=David<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Bugden<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Robert<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Cassidy<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Total project cost: £4.148 million. EA FCERM £2.268 million, EA Water Resources £1.510 million. Affinity Water £250k. Dacorum Borough Council £120k.<br /> Five Rivers were subcontracted by BAM to undertake the ecological elements of the works- placement of gravels, planting etc.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Connection to groundwaters<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Freshwater flow regime<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Fish<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Invertebrates<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Macrophytes<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=Oxygen balance<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=PH<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=Temperature<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=River Habitat Survey<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Water vole survey<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Public opinion<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=river bank vegetation<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://youtu.be/i_3Bk_3GLRM?si=QpmLhoKKYtJQAd5B<br /> |Description=Introductory video<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:The_Taw_River_Improvement_Project_(TRIP)&diff=51690 2026-01-19T16:57:10Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.07721, -4.16656<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Laurence<br /> |Main contact surname=Couldrick<br /> |Contact organisation=North Devon Biosphere Reserve, Westcountry Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.wrt.org.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=Devon Wildlife Trust, Farming and Wildlife Group South West, Silvanus<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=River_pic.png<br /> |Project summary=TRIP is a partnership project that will use CRF funds to manage restoration work to deliver habitat improvements in the Taw catchment. The partnership, led by the Westcountry Rivers Trust, has been carrying out river restoration and addressing the causes of Water Framework Directive issues together for many years.<br /> <br /> The outcomes of the project are the following:<br /> *Water quality management – More consistent supply of better water quality; <br /> *Improved biodiversity - increased habitat biodiversity and renaturalisation; <br /> *Social - Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation; <br /> *Economic - Improved fisheries and spawning for commercial stocks; <br /> *Flood attenuation and management - Increased wetted and wooded areas; <br /> *Counteract climate change - Carbon sequestration through wetland sinks.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Taw river catchment<br /> |WFD water body code=GB540805015500<br /> |WFD water body name=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2012/07/01<br /> |Project completed=2015/03/31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=2332<br /> |Funding sources=Catchment Restoration Funds<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration, Flood risk management<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Continuity for organisms, Structure &amp; condition of riparian zones<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Other motivation=Economic, Social, Climate change mitigation <br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Marginal planting, Gravel augmentation<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of a flood expansion area<br /> |Social measures=Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Participation in works<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Case study monitoring documents<br /> |Monitoring document=SW001+SW010 monitoring framework table.docx<br /> |Description=RRC Monitoring table - Taw River<br /> }}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=CRF040 Project Briefing Note - Taw River (TRIP).pdf<br /> |Description=project brief<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=51689 2026-01-19T16:49:16Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>__NOEDITSECTION__ {{DISPLAYTITLE:Home|noerror}}<br /> <br /> Welcome to the '''river''', '''estuary''', and '''coastal restoration''' case studies '''RESTORE Wiki'''. This site is funded by the '''Environment Agency''' (England) and supported by '''the RRC''' (UK). <br /> This is an interactive source of information on river restoration, estuary restoration, coastal restoration and '''nature-based solution''' schemes from around Europe.<br /> <br /> Up to now, the database holds '''{{#ask:[[Category:Case study]]|format=count}}''' restoration case studies from '''31''' countries<br /> <br /> ==Map of case studies==<br /> {{Home page map}}<br /> <br /> &lt;div style=&quot;float:right;clear:both;width:200%&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;float:right;&quot;&gt;Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;<br /> <br /> == Contents ==<br /> <br /> &lt;div style=&quot;float:left;padding-right:15px; margin-top:6px;&quot;&gt;<br /> __TOC__<br /> &lt;/div&gt;<br /> &lt;div&gt;<br /> {{Latest Updated Casestudies}}<br /> &lt;/div&gt;<br /> &lt;div style=&quot;clear:both&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;<br /> <br /> This tool is for sharing best practices and lessons learnt for policy makers, practitioners and researchers of river, estuary, and coastal restoration. The tool has information on water from source to sea. <br /> <br /> =='''What you can do:'''==<br /> - You can '''search''' the database to find case studies by using the different categories: country; monitoring or implementation costs and many more: [[Special:RunQuery/Case study query simple| click here to search for a case studies]]<br /> <br /> - You can also '''search''' the database to find case studies by topic e.g. natural flood risk management: [https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3ARunQuery/Case_study_query_simple_with_map&amp;wpRunQuery=true&amp;Case_study_query_simple%5BThemes%5D=Flood%20risk%20management&amp;Case_study_query_simple%5BUnit%5D=km&amp;Case_study_query_simple%5BResult%20type%5D=Map Click here to search for all the natural flood risk management case studies]]<br /> <br /> - Please also '''add''' your own river restoration scheme to the database: {{Create case study link|Text=click here to create a new case study}}.<br /> <br /> - Provide us with your '''feedback''': please add to the discussion pages.<br /> <br /> '''HAVE YOUR SAY''', we are happy to receive any suggestions for improvements to the site [[RESTORE Contacts|please contact us]]. <br /> <br /> ''The RiverWiki has been developed by the RESTORE partnership for sharing knowledge and promoting best practice on river restoration. The RESTORE partnership is made possible with the contribution of the LIFE+ financial instrument of the European Community. <br /> [http://www.restorerivers.eu/About/RESTOREProject/tabid/2607/Default.aspx Read more on the RESTORE partnership.]''<br /> <br /> == Countries ==<br /> The following countries are members of the RESTORE partnership. Click any of the links below to view information about that country.<br /> <br /> {{#ask:[[Category:RESTORE country]]|limit=100}}<br /> <br /> The following European countries are not members of the RESTORE partnership, but can also be clicked to view information about the country.<br /> <br /> {{#ask:[[Category:European country]] [[Not a RESTORE country::Yes]]|limit=100}}<br /> <br /> == Search ==<br /> * [[Special:RunQuery/Case study query simple| Search for case studies using a basic search form]]<br /> * [[Special:RunQuery/Case study query comprehensive| Search for case studies using an advanced search form]]<br /> <br /> == Create a case study ==<br /> {{Create case study link}}<br /> <br /> == Contacts ==<br /> '''Do you have ideas of things that could be improved?''' [[RESTORE Contacts|please contact us]].<br /> <br /> Please add your thoughts to the [[Talk:Main Page|discussion page]] or if you have any questions about the RESTORE case studies wiki or feedback, you can find a list of contacts on the [[RESTORE Contacts|contacts page]].<br /> <br /> == Other resources ==<br /> * The REFORM wiki [http://wiki.reformrivers.eu/index.php/Main_Page a wiki site] disseminates scientific knowledge about river restoration.<br /> * [http://wateractionhub.org/ The Water Action Hub] is an online platform designed to assist stakeholders to efficiently identify potential collaborators and engage with them in water-related collective action to improve water management in regions of critical strategic interest.<br /> * The '''European River Restoration Website''' [https://www.ecrr.org/] <br /> <br /> The RESTORE RiverWiki was developed by the '''RESTORE EU LIFE+ partnership''', which was made possible with the contribution of the LIFE+ financial instrument of the European Community. <br /> [[File:Life.png|frameless|right|top|upright]]</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51688 2026-01-19T16:08:54Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=1:3 and 1:6 banks, Introduction of spawning gravels, Creation of pools and riffles, creation of buffer zones, Creation of low flow channel, gravel river access point, preservation of historic mill leat<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of multi stage channel, Improving fish migration, Lowland meadow, Maintenance of riparian vegetation, Introduction of spring flow, New ultrasonic gauging station<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of meanders, Improvement of channel morphology, Improving fish migration<br /> |Other technical measure=Introduction of 2 foot bridges<br /> |Social measures=Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, 2 events in the park, Junior river wardens programme, school visits, tours and presentations for local interest groups, social media video, Information boards, mailing list, project website, project mailbox, community satisfaction survey<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Ecological survey, Monitoring via Fixed Point Photography, Climate change adaptation, Definition of environmental objectives and indicators and monitoring program., Removal of Stevenson Stones for display<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Freshwater flow regime, Width &amp; depth variation, Substrate conditions, Flow velocities, Connection to groundwaters<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Fish: Abundance, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance, Fish: Species composition<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Oxygen balance, Temperature<br /> |Other motivation=Moving the river to valley bottom and connecting it with its flood plain will make it more resilient to high and low flows and the park more usable for more of the time.<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Gadebridge Park<br /> |WFD water body code=GB106039029900<br /> |WFD (national) typology=freshwater, Chalk stream<br /> |WFD water body name=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Impounded, Over deepened, Over-widened, Single channel, Straightened<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Actively meandering, Pool-riffle<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Orange Balsam, American signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), Water Vole<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater<br /> |Dominant substrate=Silt<br /> |River corridor land use=Urban, parkland, farmland<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=415<br /> |Project started=2015-10-07<br /> |Works started=2024-09-04<br /> |Works completed=2025-07-01<br /> |Project completed=2026-07-22<br /> |Total cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, AffinityWater, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=JBA Consulting<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Oliver<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Francis<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=BAM Nuttall Limited<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=David<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Bugden<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Robert<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Cassidy<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Total project cost: £4.148 million. EA FCERM £2.268 million, EA Water Resources £1.510 million. Affinity Water £250k. Dacorum Borough Council £120k.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51687 2026-01-19T16:08:16Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=1:3 and 1:6 banks, Introduction of spawning gravels, Creation of pools and riffles, creation of buffer zones, Creation of low flow channel, gravel river access point, preservation of historic mill leat<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of multi stage channel, Improving fish migration, Lowland meadow, Maintenance of riparian vegetation, Introduction of spring flow, New ultrasonic gauging station<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of meanders, Improvement of channel morphology, Improving fish migration<br /> |Other technical measure=Introduction of 2 foot bridges<br /> |Social measures=Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, 2 events in the park, Junior river wardens programme, school visits, tours and presentations for local interest groups, social media video, Information boards, mailing list, project website, project mailbox, community satisfaction survey<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Ecological survey, Monitoring via Fixed Point Photography, Climate change adaptation, Definition of environmental objectives and indicators and monitoring program., Removal of Stevenson Stones for display<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Freshwater flow regime, Width &amp; depth variation, Substrate conditions, Flow velocities, Connection to groundwaters<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Fish: Abundance, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance, Fish: Species composition<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Oxygen balance, Temperature<br /> |Other motivation=Moving the river to valley bottom and connecting it with its flood plain will make it more resilient to high and low flows and the park more usable for more of the time.<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Gadebridge Park<br /> |WFD water body code=GB106039029900<br /> |WFD (national) typology=freshwater, Chalk stream<br /> |WFD water body name=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Impounded, Over deepened, Over-widened, Single channel, Straightened<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Actively meandering, Pool-riffle<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Orange Balsam, American signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), Water Vole<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater<br /> |Dominant substrate=Silt<br /> |River corridor land use=Urban, parkland, farmland<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=415<br /> |Project started=2015-10-07<br /> |Works started=2024-09-04<br /> |Works completed=2025-07-01<br /> |Project completed=2026-07-22<br /> |Total cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, AffinityWater, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=JBA Consulting<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Oliver<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Francis<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=BAM Nuttall Limited<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=David<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Bugden<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Robert<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Cassidy<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Total project cost: £4.148 million. EA FCERM £2.268 million, EA Water Resources £1.510 million. Affinity Water £250k. Dacorum Borough Council £120k.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51686 2026-01-19T16:07:40Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=1:3 and 1:6 banks, Introduction of spawning gravels, Creation of pools and riffles, creation of buffer zones, Creation of low flow channel, gravel river access point, preservation of historic mill leat<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of multi stage channel, Improving fish migration, Lowland meadow, Maintenance of riparian vegetation, Introduction of spring flow, New ultrasonic gauging station<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of meanders, Improvement of channel morphology, Improving fish migration<br /> |Other technical measure=Introduction of 2 foot bridges<br /> |Social measures=Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, 2 events in the park, Junior river wardens programme, school visits, tours and presentations for local interest groups, social media video, Information boards, mailing list, project website, project mailbox, community satisfaction survey<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Ecological survey, Monitoring via Fixed Point Photography, Climate change adaptation, Definition of environmental objectives and indicators and monitoring program., Removal of Stevenson Stones for display<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Freshwater flow regime, Width &amp; depth variation, Substrate conditions, Flow velocities, Connection to groundwaters<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Fish: Abundance, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance, Fish: Species composition<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Oxygen balance, Temperature<br /> |Other motivation=Moving the river to valley bottom and connecting it with its flood plain will make it more resilient to high and low flows and the park more usable for more of the time.<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Gadebridge Park<br /> |WFD water body code=GB106039029900<br /> |WFD (national) typology=freshwater, Chalk stream<br /> |WFD water body name=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Impounded, Over deepened, Over-widened, Single channel, Straightened<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Actively meandering, Pool-riffle<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Orange Balsam, American signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus), Water Vole<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater<br /> |Dominant substrate=Silt<br /> |River corridor land use=Urban, parkland, farmland<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=415<br /> |Project started=2015-10-07<br /> |Works started=2024-09-04<br /> |Works completed=2025-07-01<br /> |Project completed=2026-07-22<br /> |Total cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, AffinityWater, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=JBA Consulting<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Oliver<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Francis<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=BAM Nuttall Limited<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=David<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Bugden<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Robert<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Cassidy<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Total project cost: £4.148 million. EA FCERM £2.268 million, EA Water Resources £1.510 million. Affinity Water £250k. Dacorum Borough Council £120k.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:New_user_message&diff=51670 2026-01-07T12:40:25Z

<p>Ascarr: Created page with &quot;Hi Ecopatrimonio could you add a picture to your new case study please and then we can approve it. thanks Toni&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>Hi Ecopatrimonio could you add a picture to your new case study please and then we can approve it. thanks Toni</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:RIVER_RESTORATION_PROJECT_OF_THE_OLD_SEGURA_RIVER_BED_IN_THE_VIVILLO_MEANDER_(MURCIA)&diff=51669 2026-01-07T12:37:08Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=37.98043, -1.17378<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Land use management - forestry, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Urban, Water quality<br /> |Country=Spain<br /> |Main contact forename=Ecopatrimonio<br /> |Main contact surname=Ecopatrimonio<br /> |Main contact id=Ecopatrimonio<br /> |Contact organisation=Concejalía de Planificación Urbanística, Huertas y Medio Rural, Ayuntamiento de Murcia<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://medioambiente.murcia.es/<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project summary=The project is part of a joint strategy developed since 2017 by the City Council of Murcia and the Universities of Murcia and Cartagena (UPCT) aimed at the environmental restoration of the Segura River and its former meanders in the western area of the municipality. This global strategy, completed in 2019, defines 26 types of environmental and territorial actions applied to 27 specific river sections, focusing on riverbed restoration, riparian revegetation, agroecological recovery of the huerta, flood risk management, improvement of paths and connectivity, enhancement of hydraulic heritage, and environmental education.<br /> <br /> The areas of intervention are classified according to their morphology (large meanders, medium meanders, small bends, fluvial terraces, and connecting areas). Four of these were prioritized due to their social, environmental, and administrative relevance, including the Meandro Chico del Vivillo. These areas allow improvements in the river’s longitudinal, lateral, and vertical connectivity, the recovery of biodiversity, the reduction of flood risk, and the creation of new green spaces close to densely populated urban areas.<br /> <br /> The Vivillo Meander project was developed as a preliminary design and received European funding through the Biodiversity Foundation within the framework of the Recovery, Transformation and Resilience Plan. Its objective is to reverse the negative impacts of river channelization carried out since the 1970s, which straightened the river, eliminated meanders, and disconnected it from its floodplain, leading to a loss of fluvial dynamics and biodiversity.<br /> <br /> The proposal is based on contemporary river restoration principles that promote the recovery of natural river geomorphology, reconnection with the floodplain, enhancement of riparian forests, and the creation of diverse habitats, demonstrating that nature-based solutions are more effective and sustainable than traditional channelization approaches for flood management.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=1. Strategic and Planning Results<br /> <br /> A global environmental restoration strategy was defined for the Segura River in the western area of the municipality of Murcia, structured into:<br /> * 26 types of actions (9 general actions applicable to the entire proposal and 17 specific actions for defined areas).<br /> * 27 specific intervention areas between La Contraparada and the city of Murcia.<br /> *Four priority preliminary design projects were developed: Rambla de la Ventosa, Meandro Chico del Vivillo, Meandro del Molino de la Rosquilla, and Meandro del Molino de Funes.<br /> <br /> 2. Administrative and Funding Results<br /> <br /> The Fluvial Restoration Project of the former Segura River channel at the Vivillo Meander was:<br /> * Submitted to the Fundación Biodiversidad grant call (NextGenerationEU).<br /> * Awarded funding of €1,670,158.9 in September 2022.<br /> * The preliminary design was reviewed by the Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura (CHS), which issued technical considerations in June 2023.<br /> * The drafting of the project was commissioned to Urbanizadora Municipal S.A. (URBAMUSA), with technical assistance provided by the Polytechnic University of Cartagena.<br /> <br /> 3. Environmental Diagnostic Results<br /> <br /> The channelization works carried out between the 1970s and 1990s:<br /> * Caused a loss of the river’s natural alignment, riverbed, and riparian zones.<br /> * Led to a disconnection between the active channel and the floodplain.<br /> * Resulted in 20 abandoned meanders within the Region of Murcia.<br /> * The current river reach is characterized by:<br /> * A homogeneous and rectilinear morphology.<br /> * Widespread invasion by Arundo donax (giant reed).<br /> * The absence of a functional riparian forest.<br /> <br /> 4. Fluvial Connectivity Results<br /> <br /> A significant deterioration of fluvial connectivity was identified:<br /> * Longitudinal connectivity: lack of continuous riparian vegetation.<br /> * Lateral connectivity: disconnection between the river channel and the floodplain.<br /> * Vertical connectivity: alteration of subsurface and groundwater flows.<br /> * The recovery of abandoned meanders would:<br /> * Increase habitat diversity.<br /> * Enhance the ecological resilience of the fluvial system.<br /> <br /> 5. Hydraulic Analysis and Flood Risk Results<br /> <br /> According to the Flood Hazard and Risk Maps (MPRI):<br /> * No significant flood risk exists for return periods of 10 and 50 years.<br /> * The entire intervention area is flood-prone for return periods of 100 and 500 years.<br /> * The project area is included within a Preferential Flow Zone (PFZ).<br /> * A hydraulic study using HEC-RAS was conducted, comparing scenarios:<br /> * Without implementation of the meander restoration.<br /> * With implementation of the meander restoration.<br /> * The results confirm that the proposed intervention:<br /> * Does not increase flood risk upstream or downstream.<br /> * Improves flood attenuation capacity during extreme events.<br /> <br /> 6. Urban Planning and Legal Compliance Results<br /> <br /> * The intervention area is fully compatible with the Plan General de Organización Urbanística (PGOU):<br /> * Classified as a Hydraulic General System and Green/Open Space System.<br /> <br /> The project:<br /> * Is entirely located within the Public Hydraulic Domain.<br /> * Complies with the Spanish Water Law and the Regulations of the Public Hydraulic Domain.<br /> * Meets fluvial restoration and ecological continuity criteria.<br /> <br /> 7. Overall Project Outcome<br /> The proposal:<br /> * Restores a more natural fluvial morphology.<br /> * Enhances ecological connectivity.<br /> * Reduces flood risk through nature-based solutions.<br /> * Demonstrates technical, environmental, urban planning, and legal feasibility.<br /> |Lessons learn=1. The historical channelization of the Segura River, mainly carried out between the 1970s and 1990s, reduced immediate flood risk but resulted in a significant loss of natural fluvial dynamics, ecological connectivity, and floodplain functionality.<br /> 2. The disconnection between the current river channel and the abandoned meanders has led to marked environmental degradation, characterized by morphological homogenization, the disappearance of riparian forests, and the spread of invasive species such as Arundo donax.<br /> 3. The Meandro Chico del Vivillo area shows a high potential for fluvial restoration, as it is a former river bend located within the Public Hydraulic Domain, with minimal impact on private land and full urban planning compatibility.<br /> 4. The recovery of the former meander through channel widening and riparian revegetation will significantly improve longitudinal, lateral, and vertical connectivity of the fluvial system, increasing habitat diversity and enhancing the ecological resilience of the Segura River.<br /> 5. The hydraulic studies conducted demonstrate that the proposed intervention does not increase flood risk for the analyzed return periods and contributes to improved flood attenuation during extreme flood events.<br /> 6. The intervention complies with current water, land-use planning, and flood risk management regulations, and is aligned with fluvial restoration principles and nature-based solutions.<br /> 7. The project represents a strategic and replicable action for the environmental recovery of the Segura River fluvial corridor, providing environmental, social, and landscape benefits, and strengthening institutional cooperation between public administrations and universities.<br /> |Project title=RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT OF THE OLD SEGURA RIVER BED IN THE VIVILLO MEANDER (MURCIA)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2025-05-09<br /> |Works started=2025-10-25<br /> |Total cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=1426.461552<br /> |Funding sources=Recovery Transformation and Resilience Plan, Fundación Biodiversidad<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Meandro Chico del Vivillo<br /> |WFD water body code=ES070MSPF<br /> |WFD (national) typology=ES070MSPF002080115<br /> |WFD water body name=Segura River<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Artificial channel, Low gradient passively meandering<br /> |Reference morphology=Low gradient passively meandering<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Low gradient passively meandering, Reinforced banks<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Site designation=Spain - Parque Periurbano<br /> |Local site designation=Metropolitan Green Belt, Habitats of Community Interest<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Arundo donax, Populus alba, Phoenix dactilyfera<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Artificially regulated<br /> |Dominant substrate=Pebble, Silt<br /> |River corridor land use=Orchard, Urban<br /> |Average bankfull channel width category=5 - 10 m<br /> |Avrg bankfull channel width=12.10<br /> |Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m<br /> |Avrg1 bankfull channel depth=1<br /> |Mean discharge category=0.1 - 1.0 m³/s<br /> |Mn discharge=0.3<br /> |Average channel gradient category=Less than 0.001<br /> |Avrg channel gradient=0.0007<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Invasive species, Riparian development<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Flow velocities, Fluvial conectivity, Flood attenuation capacity<br /> |Biological quality elements=Angiosperms, Macrophytes, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance, Riparian habitat<br /> |Other motivation=Historical channels, Hydraulic heritage of the river reach<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Right bank maintains the existing levee, Left bank turns with the old meander, Current levee elevation is mantained<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Habitat restoration, Planting of autochthonous vegetation<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Modification of existing defenses, restoration of the old meander<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Freshwater flow regime<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Width &amp; depth variation<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Continuity of sediment transport<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Macrophytes<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Invertebrates: Abundance<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Angiosperms<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Reed<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Flood risk management<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Erosion<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Riparian tree establishment<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Birds<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Mammel survey<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=European otter<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=dragonflies<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:RIVER_RESTORATION_PROJECT_OF_THE_OLD_SEGURA_RIVER_BED_IN_THE_VIVILLO_MEANDER_(MURCIA)&diff=51668 2026-01-07T12:36:47Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Land use management - forestry, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Urban, Water quality<br /> |Country=Spain<br /> |Main contact forename=Ecopatrimonio<br /> |Main contact surname=Ecopatrimonio<br /> |Main contact id=Ecopatrimonio<br /> |Contact organisation=Concejalía de Planificación Urbanística, Huertas y Medio Rural, Ayuntamiento de Murcia<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://medioambiente.murcia.es/<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project summary=The project is part of a joint strategy developed since 2017 by the City Council of Murcia and the Universities of Murcia and Cartagena (UPCT) aimed at the environmental restoration of the Segura River and its former meanders in the western area of the municipality. This global strategy, completed in 2019, defines 26 types of environmental and territorial actions applied to 27 specific river sections, focusing on riverbed restoration, riparian revegetation, agroecological recovery of the huerta, flood risk management, improvement of paths and connectivity, enhancement of hydraulic heritage, and environmental education.<br /> <br /> The areas of intervention are classified according to their morphology (large meanders, medium meanders, small bends, fluvial terraces, and connecting areas). Four of these were prioritized due to their social, environmental, and administrative relevance, including the Meandro Chico del Vivillo. These areas allow improvements in the river’s longitudinal, lateral, and vertical connectivity, the recovery of biodiversity, the reduction of flood risk, and the creation of new green spaces close to densely populated urban areas.<br /> <br /> The Vivillo Meander project was developed as a preliminary design and received European funding through the Biodiversity Foundation within the framework of the Recovery, Transformation and Resilience Plan. Its objective is to reverse the negative impacts of river channelization carried out since the 1970s, which straightened the river, eliminated meanders, and disconnected it from its floodplain, leading to a loss of fluvial dynamics and biodiversity.<br /> <br /> The proposal is based on contemporary river restoration principles that promote the recovery of natural river geomorphology, reconnection with the floodplain, enhancement of riparian forests, and the creation of diverse habitats, demonstrating that nature-based solutions are more effective and sustainable than traditional channelization approaches for flood management.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=1. Strategic and Planning Results<br /> <br /> A global environmental restoration strategy was defined for the Segura River in the western area of the municipality of Murcia, structured into:<br /> * 26 types of actions (9 general actions applicable to the entire proposal and 17 specific actions for defined areas).<br /> * 27 specific intervention areas between La Contraparada and the city of Murcia.<br /> *Four priority preliminary design projects were developed: Rambla de la Ventosa, Meandro Chico del Vivillo, Meandro del Molino de la Rosquilla, and Meandro del Molino de Funes.<br /> <br /> 2. Administrative and Funding Results<br /> <br /> The Fluvial Restoration Project of the former Segura River channel at the Vivillo Meander was:<br /> * Submitted to the Fundación Biodiversidad grant call (NextGenerationEU).<br /> * Awarded funding of €1,670,158.9 in September 2022.<br /> * The preliminary design was reviewed by the Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura (CHS), which issued technical considerations in June 2023.<br /> * The drafting of the project was commissioned to Urbanizadora Municipal S.A. (URBAMUSA), with technical assistance provided by the Polytechnic University of Cartagena.<br /> <br /> 3. Environmental Diagnostic Results<br /> <br /> The channelization works carried out between the 1970s and 1990s:<br /> * Caused a loss of the river’s natural alignment, riverbed, and riparian zones.<br /> * Led to a disconnection between the active channel and the floodplain.<br /> * Resulted in 20 abandoned meanders within the Region of Murcia.<br /> * The current river reach is characterized by:<br /> * A homogeneous and rectilinear morphology.<br /> * Widespread invasion by Arundo donax (giant reed).<br /> * The absence of a functional riparian forest.<br /> <br /> 4. Fluvial Connectivity Results<br /> <br /> A significant deterioration of fluvial connectivity was identified:<br /> * Longitudinal connectivity: lack of continuous riparian vegetation.<br /> * Lateral connectivity: disconnection between the river channel and the floodplain.<br /> * Vertical connectivity: alteration of subsurface and groundwater flows.<br /> * The recovery of abandoned meanders would:<br /> * Increase habitat diversity.<br /> * Enhance the ecological resilience of the fluvial system.<br /> <br /> 5. Hydraulic Analysis and Flood Risk Results<br /> <br /> According to the Flood Hazard and Risk Maps (MPRI):<br /> * No significant flood risk exists for return periods of 10 and 50 years.<br /> * The entire intervention area is flood-prone for return periods of 100 and 500 years.<br /> * The project area is included within a Preferential Flow Zone (PFZ).<br /> * A hydraulic study using HEC-RAS was conducted, comparing scenarios:<br /> * Without implementation of the meander restoration.<br /> * With implementation of the meander restoration.<br /> * The results confirm that the proposed intervention:<br /> * Does not increase flood risk upstream or downstream.<br /> * Improves flood attenuation capacity during extreme events.<br /> <br /> 6. Urban Planning and Legal Compliance Results<br /> <br /> * The intervention area is fully compatible with the Plan General de Organización Urbanística (PGOU):<br /> * Classified as a Hydraulic General System and Green/Open Space System.<br /> <br /> The project:<br /> * Is entirely located within the Public Hydraulic Domain.<br /> * Complies with the Spanish Water Law and the Regulations of the Public Hydraulic Domain.<br /> * Meets fluvial restoration and ecological continuity criteria.<br /> <br /> 7. Overall Project Outcome<br /> The proposal:<br /> * Restores a more natural fluvial morphology.<br /> * Enhances ecological connectivity.<br /> * Reduces flood risk through nature-based solutions.<br /> * Demonstrates technical, environmental, urban planning, and legal feasibility.<br /> |Lessons learn=1. The historical channelization of the Segura River, mainly carried out between the 1970s and 1990s, reduced immediate flood risk but resulted in a significant loss of natural fluvial dynamics, ecological connectivity, and floodplain functionality.<br /> 2. The disconnection between the current river channel and the abandoned meanders has led to marked environmental degradation, characterized by morphological homogenization, the disappearance of riparian forests, and the spread of invasive species such as Arundo donax.<br /> 3. The Meandro Chico del Vivillo area shows a high potential for fluvial restoration, as it is a former river bend located within the Public Hydraulic Domain, with minimal impact on private land and full urban planning compatibility.<br /> 4. The recovery of the former meander through channel widening and riparian revegetation will significantly improve longitudinal, lateral, and vertical connectivity of the fluvial system, increasing habitat diversity and enhancing the ecological resilience of the Segura River.<br /> 5. The hydraulic studies conducted demonstrate that the proposed intervention does not increase flood risk for the analyzed return periods and contributes to improved flood attenuation during extreme flood events.<br /> 6. The intervention complies with current water, land-use planning, and flood risk management regulations, and is aligned with fluvial restoration principles and nature-based solutions.<br /> 7. The project represents a strategic and replicable action for the environmental recovery of the Segura River fluvial corridor, providing environmental, social, and landscape benefits, and strengthening institutional cooperation between public administrations and universities.<br /> |Project title=RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT OF THE OLD SEGURA RIVER BED IN THE VIVILLO MEANDER (MURCIA)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2025-05-09<br /> |Works started=2025-10-25<br /> |Total cost category=more than 10000 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=1426.461552<br /> |Funding sources=Recovery Transformation and Resilience Plan, Fundación Biodiversidad<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=37.98043, -1.17378<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Meandro Chico del Vivillo<br /> |WFD water body code=ES070MSPF<br /> |WFD (national) typology=ES070MSPF002080115<br /> |WFD water body name=Segura River<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Artificial channel, Low gradient passively meandering<br /> |Reference morphology=Low gradient passively meandering<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Low gradient passively meandering, Reinforced banks<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Site designation=Spain - Parque Periurbano<br /> |Local site designation=Metropolitan Green Belt, Habitats of Community Interest<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Arundo donax, Populus alba, Phoenix dactilyfera<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Artificially regulated<br /> |Dominant substrate=Pebble, Silt<br /> |River corridor land use=Orchard, Urban<br /> |Average bankfull channel width category=5 - 10 m<br /> |Avrg bankfull channel width=12.10<br /> |Average bankfull channel depth category=0.5 - 2 m<br /> |Avrg1 bankfull channel depth=1<br /> |Mean discharge category=0.1 - 1.0 m³/s<br /> |Mn discharge=0.3<br /> |Average channel gradient category=Less than 0.001<br /> |Avrg channel gradient=0.0007<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Invasive species, Riparian development<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Flow velocities, Fluvial conectivity, Flood attenuation capacity<br /> |Biological quality elements=Angiosperms, Macrophytes, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance, Riparian habitat<br /> |Other motivation=Historical channels, Hydraulic heritage of the river reach<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Right bank maintains the existing levee, Left bank turns with the old meander, Current levee elevation is mantained<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Habitat restoration, Planting of autochthonous vegetation<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Modification of existing defenses, restoration of the old meander<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Freshwater flow regime<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Quantity &amp; dynamics of flow<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Width &amp; depth variation<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Continuity of sediment transport<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Macrophytes<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Invertebrates: Abundance<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Angiosperms<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Reed<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Flood risk management<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Erosion<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Riparian tree establishment<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Birds<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=Mammel survey<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=European otter<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Other response table row<br /> |Element=dragonflies<br /> |Monitored before=Yes<br /> |Monitored after=No<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51582 2025-12-02T10:51:53Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51581 2025-12-02T10:51:37Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51580 2025-12-02T10:51:22Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51579 2025-12-02T10:51:01Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Gade (Upper stretch Great Gaddesden to confluence with Bulbourne / GUC)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51578 2025-12-02T10:50:23Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.dacorum.gov.uk/home/all-news/2025/08/06/river-gade-restoration-in-gadebridge-park-nears-final-phase<br /> |Description=Dacorum borough council<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/supporting_documents/gadebridge-park-faqs-aug-2025pdf<br /> |Description=Environment Agency FAQ<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.gov.uk/government/news/river-gade-returns-to-its-natural-course-through-gadebridge-park<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mg3mn98kdo<br /> |Description=news article<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=https://www.affinitywater.co.uk/sustainability/restoration/river-gade<br /> |Description=affinity water<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51577 2025-12-02T10:47:33Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.gov.uk/government/news/vital-new-wetland-habitat-protected-with-announcement-of-a-new-kings-national-nature-reserve#:~:text=Nature%20Minister%20Rebecca%20Pow%20said,how%20we%20can%20do%20that.<br /> |Description=Vital new wetland habitat protected with announcement of a new King’s National Nature Reserve<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.endsreport.com/article/1861785/devon-nature-reserve-significantly-extended-part-climate-adaptation-project<br /> |Description=Devon nature reserve significantly extended as part of climate adaptation project<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51576 2025-12-02T10:46:59Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(1).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(4).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Image_(2).png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=River Otter<br /> }}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.gov.uk/government/news/vital-new-wetland-habitat-protected-with-announcement-of-a-new-kings-national-nature-reserve#:~:text=Nature%20Minister%20Rebecca%20Pow%20said,how%20we%20can%20do%20that.<br /> |Description=Vital new wetland habitat protected with announcement of a new King’s National Nature Reserve<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.endsreport.com/article/1861785/devon-nature-reserve-significantly-extended-part-climate-adaptation-project<br /> |Description=Devon nature reserve significantly extended as part of climate adaptation project<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Image_(2).png&diff=51575 2025-12-02T10:46:53Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Image_(4).png&diff=51574 2025-12-02T10:46:34Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Image_(1).png&diff=51573 2025-12-02T10:45:51Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51572 2025-12-02T10:45:22Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project background<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter project.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter launch.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=River Otter<br /> }}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.gov.uk/government/news/vital-new-wetland-habitat-protected-with-announcement-of-a-new-kings-national-nature-reserve#:~:text=Nature%20Minister%20Rebecca%20Pow%20said,how%20we%20can%20do%20that.<br /> |Description=Vital new wetland habitat protected with announcement of a new King’s National Nature Reserve<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.endsreport.com/article/1861785/devon-nature-reserve-significantly-extended-part-climate-adaptation-project<br /> |Description=Devon nature reserve significantly extended as part of climate adaptation project<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51571 2025-12-02T10:44:44Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=18000<br /> |Project started=2021-01-04<br /> |Works completed=2023-10-01<br /> |Total1 cost=3000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, European Regional Development Fund<br /> |Supplementary funding information=a managed realignment scheme delivered by the EA with a budget input of approx. £30 million<br /> £8.5 million of co-financing from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) through the Interreg V A France (Channel) England programme (2021 to 2023)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter project.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter launch.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=River Otter<br /> }}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.gov.uk/government/news/vital-new-wetland-habitat-protected-with-announcement-of-a-new-kings-national-nature-reserve#:~:text=Nature%20Minister%20Rebecca%20Pow%20said,how%20we%20can%20do%20that.<br /> |Description=Vital new wetland habitat protected with announcement of a new King’s National Nature Reserve<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.endsreport.com/article/1861785/devon-nature-reserve-significantly-extended-part-climate-adaptation-project<br /> |Description=Devon nature reserve significantly extended as part of climate adaptation project<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51570 2025-12-02T10:42:17Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.77879, -0.49069<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51569 2025-12-02T10:41:32Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=50.6308, -3.30815<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51568 2025-12-02T10:38:12Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Gadebridge.jpeg<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> BNG has increased by 10% from 26.8 units to 29.53 units<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Gadebridge.jpeg&diff=51567 2025-12-02T10:37:32Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Image_(3).png&diff=51566 2025-12-02T10:34:46Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Greenwich_Peninsula&diff=51565 2025-12-02T10:27:46Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.50323, 0.00303<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=www.estuaryedges.co.uk/<br /> |Themes=Estuary, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Toni<br /> |Main contact surname=Scarr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.environment-agency.gov.uk<br /> |Partner organisations=Greenwich Peninsula Regeneration Ltd<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Greenwich.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Tidal terraces<br /> |Project summary=Prior to 2000 1.7km of flood defences were replaced and refurbished on the eastern side of the Greenwich Peninsula. A further 700m is proposed on the western frontage.<br /> <br /> * Greenwich Peninsula is a 190 acre development site and is therefore London’s largest regeneration scheme.<br /> * The mixed use development consists of 10,000 new homes, 3.5 million square feet of office space – a brand new business district for London, with over 150 shops and restaurants.<br /> * The site is being developed in phases/plots in line with the overall masterplan produced by Terry Farrell and Partners.<br /> * Many of the features incorporated at this site are being used as good practice with other developers across London.<br /> * A large amount of green roofs and other SUDS were agreed as part of the outline planning permission. These are part of the landscape, ecology and surface water management plans.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=* The intertidal terraces provide valuable habitat for fish and other animals and birds, as well as creating a new landscape feature for people to enjoy.<br /> * Flood defences designed to protect from tidal flooding with an allowance made for the future effects of climate change.<br /> * Surface water flood risk reduction on each plot will be provided in line with the London Plan policies.<br /> |Lessons learn=cost neutral<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Greenwich 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=during construction<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Greenwich 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=planned development<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=THAMES MIDDLE<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Greenwich Peninsula<br /> |WFD water body code=GB530603911402,<br /> |WFD (national) typology=intertidal,<br /> |WFD water body name=THAMES MIDDLE<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Estuary,<br /> |Dominant substrate=Estuarine mud,<br /> |River corridor land use=Urban,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=2400<br /> |Project started=1997/01/01<br /> |Works started=1997/01/01<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Flood risk management, Navigation,<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Structure &amp; condition of intertidal zone,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Macrophytes,<br /> |Other motivation=millenium project, housing development<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank improvement, creation of intertidal terraces<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Fish<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=thamescasestudies.pdf<br /> |Description=Case study no 4<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Estuary Edges structurally engineered designs.pdf<br /> |Description=Design Guidance includign Greenwich as an example<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.ecrr.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=toZTNTJ5zXA%3d&amp;tabid=2624<br /> |Description=Estuary Edges design guidance link<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information<br /> |Information='''The site'''<br /> <br /> • Tidal range 7m.<br /> <br /> • Over 1300m of sheet piling was in poor condition and needed to be replaced.<br /> <br /> • Peninsula being redeveloped for high-density, high-value housing and facilities.<br /> <br /> <br /> '''What the developers did'''<br /> <br /> • In all locations, the existing sheet pile wall was cut down to near beach level and capped.<br /> <br /> • Approximately 7–15m inland, either sheet pile or an L-shaped concrete wall were installed.<br /> <br /> • Site 1: infill material was installed over wide area at stable angle of repose and allowed to colonise naturally.<br /> <br /> • Sites 2 and 3: terraces were created between the new wall and the foreshore using gabions and wooden piles, maximising the area between Mean High Water Neap and Mean High Water Spring tide levels wherever possible at slopes of 1:7 or less. Growing medium initially protected under coir matting.<br /> <br /> • Sites 2 and 3 were planted with a variety of saltmarsh plants through coir matting. Substrate particle size distribution was a close match to foreshore for both stability in local area and habitat value. Eastern wall, Greenwich Peninsula, London: Site 2 during construction<br /> <br /> <br /> '''The result'''<br /> <br /> • Wave action led to lifting of the matting and extraction of many young plants, necessitating some replanting, though there was also considerable natural colonisation.<br /> <br /> • Re-planting of Sites 2 and 3 directly into substrate without erosion matting was most successful with Common Reed, Grey Club-rush Sea Club-rush and Sea Aster, several species surviving well below or above the main ‘saltmarsh zone’.<br /> <br /> • Failure to install rhizome breaks has led to excessive dominance by Common Reed, which may need to be corrected.<br /> <br /> • Freshwater outfall locations became areas bare of much vegetation, and reinforced geotextile mat used at these locations eventually looked unsightly.<br /> <br /> • Extensive monitoring has shown intense use of the terraces by Sea Bass and other species.<br /> <br /> • Flounder and adult Common Goby did not appear to ascend submerged terrace steps. One solution to this is shown in the design for the terracing at Site 3, where a series of terraces sloping in three dimensions was created in the form of an ‘ecological sculpture’. (In future schemes, cutting down of the old sheet pile to beach level should be considered to avoid the creation of barriers to certain fish species).<br /> <br /> • Limited scope for human access, which might be addressed in future schemes by a variety of slipways or floating pontoons (where ecological and safety constraints permit).<br /> <br /> • Overall considered to be a highly successful, benchmark design, though a few gabions appear to be breaking down after ten years (probably due to use of welded gabions) and repairs/renewals may be necessary to retain certain terraces (woven and plastic-coated gabions are always the preferred option if gabions are to be used).<br /> }}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Greenwich_Peninsula&diff=51564 2025-12-02T10:27:31Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=www.estuaryedges.co.uk/<br /> |Themes=Estuary, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Social benefits, Spatial planning, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Toni<br /> |Main contact surname=Scarr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.environment-agency.gov.uk<br /> |Partner organisations=Greenwich Peninsula Regeneration Ltd<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Greenwich.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Tidal terraces<br /> |Project summary=Prior to 2000 1.7km of flood defences were replaced and refurbished on the eastern side of the Greenwich Peninsula. A further 700m is proposed on the western frontage.<br /> <br /> * Greenwich Peninsula is a 190 acre development site and is therefore London’s largest regeneration scheme.<br /> * The mixed use development consists of 10,000 new homes, 3.5 million square feet of office space – a brand new business district for London, with over 150 shops and restaurants.<br /> * The site is being developed in phases/plots in line with the overall masterplan produced by Terry Farrell and Partners.<br /> * Many of the features incorporated at this site are being used as good practice with other developers across London.<br /> * A large amount of green roofs and other SUDS were agreed as part of the outline planning permission. These are part of the landscape, ecology and surface water management plans.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=* The intertidal terraces provide valuable habitat for fish and other animals and birds, as well as creating a new landscape feature for people to enjoy.<br /> * Flood defences designed to protect from tidal flooding with an allowance made for the future effects of climate change.<br /> * Surface water flood risk reduction on each plot will be provided in line with the London Plan policies.<br /> |Lessons learn=cost neutral<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.50323332188222, 0.003032844427480086<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Greenwich 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=during construction<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Greenwich 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=planned development<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=THAMES MIDDLE<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Greenwich Peninsula<br /> |WFD water body code=GB530603911402,<br /> |WFD (national) typology=intertidal,<br /> |WFD water body name=THAMES MIDDLE<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Estuary,<br /> |Dominant substrate=Estuarine mud,<br /> |River corridor land use=Urban,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=2400<br /> |Project started=1997/01/01<br /> |Works started=1997/01/01<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Flood risk management, Navigation,<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Structure &amp; condition of intertidal zone,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish, Macrophytes,<br /> |Other motivation=millenium project, housing development<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank improvement, creation of intertidal terraces<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Fish<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=No<br /> |Control site used=No<br /> |Result=Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=thamescasestudies.pdf<br /> |Description=Case study no 4<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Estuary Edges structurally engineered designs.pdf<br /> |Description=Design Guidance includign Greenwich as an example<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.ecrr.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=toZTNTJ5zXA%3d&amp;tabid=2624<br /> |Description=Estuary Edges design guidance link<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information<br /> |Information='''The site'''<br /> <br /> • Tidal range 7m.<br /> <br /> • Over 1300m of sheet piling was in poor condition and needed to be replaced.<br /> <br /> • Peninsula being redeveloped for high-density, high-value housing and facilities.<br /> <br /> <br /> '''What the developers did'''<br /> <br /> • In all locations, the existing sheet pile wall was cut down to near beach level and capped.<br /> <br /> • Approximately 7–15m inland, either sheet pile or an L-shaped concrete wall were installed.<br /> <br /> • Site 1: infill material was installed over wide area at stable angle of repose and allowed to colonise naturally.<br /> <br /> • Sites 2 and 3: terraces were created between the new wall and the foreshore using gabions and wooden piles, maximising the area between Mean High Water Neap and Mean High Water Spring tide levels wherever possible at slopes of 1:7 or less. Growing medium initially protected under coir matting.<br /> <br /> • Sites 2 and 3 were planted with a variety of saltmarsh plants through coir matting. Substrate particle size distribution was a close match to foreshore for both stability in local area and habitat value. Eastern wall, Greenwich Peninsula, London: Site 2 during construction<br /> <br /> <br /> '''The result'''<br /> <br /> • Wave action led to lifting of the matting and extraction of many young plants, necessitating some replanting, though there was also considerable natural colonisation.<br /> <br /> • Re-planting of Sites 2 and 3 directly into substrate without erosion matting was most successful with Common Reed, Grey Club-rush Sea Club-rush and Sea Aster, several species surviving well below or above the main ‘saltmarsh zone’.<br /> <br /> • Failure to install rhizome breaks has led to excessive dominance by Common Reed, which may need to be corrected.<br /> <br /> • Freshwater outfall locations became areas bare of much vegetation, and reinforced geotextile mat used at these locations eventually looked unsightly.<br /> <br /> • Extensive monitoring has shown intense use of the terraces by Sea Bass and other species.<br /> <br /> • Flounder and adult Common Goby did not appear to ascend submerged terrace steps. One solution to this is shown in the design for the terracing at Site 3, where a series of terraces sloping in three dimensions was created in the form of an ‘ecological sculpture’. (In future schemes, cutting down of the old sheet pile to beach level should be considered to avoid the creation of barriers to certain fish species).<br /> <br /> • Limited scope for human access, which might be addressed in future schemes by a variety of slipways or floating pontoons (where ecological and safety constraints permit).<br /> <br /> • Overall considered to be a highly successful, benchmark design, though a few gabions appear to be breaking down after ten years (probably due to use of welded gabions) and repairs/renewals may be necessary to retain certain terraces (woven and plastic-coated gabions are always the preferred option if gabions are to be used).<br /> }}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Project:About&diff=51563 2025-12-01T14:45:42Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>==RESTORE partnership==<br /> RESTORE was a [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2607&amp;tabid=2602 partnership] for sharing knowledge and promoting best practice on river restoration in Europe. It was supported by LIFE+ funding from the European Commission and works closely together with the European Centre for River Restoration ([http://www.ecrr.org/ ECRR]). The project finished in 2013 and is now supported through the European Centre for River Restoration. [https://www.ecrr.org/]<br /> <br /> The RESTORE [http://www.ecrr.org/ website] (http://www.ecrr.org/) is managed on behalf of the European Centre for River Restoration by Wetlands International. The RESTORE River Wiki (https://restorerivers.eu/) is managed on behalf of the RESTORE partnership by the RRC and funding is provided by the Environment Agency. <br /> <br /> ==Mission==<br /> RESTORE encourages the restoration of European rivers, lakes, estuaries and coastal waters towards a more natural state. This delivers increased ecological quality, flood risk reduction, climate resilience and social and economic benefits.<br /> <br /> ==Partnership organisations==<br /> RESTORE was a partnership between the [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency Environment Agency] (EA – England), [http://www.ecrr.org/About/RESTOREProject/WesternEurope/tabid/2670/Default.aspx River Restoration Centre] (RRC - UK), [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2676&amp;tabid=2607 Wetlands International] (WI - International), [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2672&amp;tabid=2607 Government Service for Land and Water Management] (DLG - Netherlands), [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2669&amp;tabid=2607 Finnish Environment Institute] (SYKE - Finland) and [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2671&amp;tabid=2607 Italian Centre for River Restoration] (CIRF - Italy).</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Project:About&diff=51562 2025-12-01T14:44:01Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>==RESTORE partnership==<br /> RESTORE was a [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2607&amp;tabid=2602 partnership] for sharing knowledge and promoting best practice on river restoration in Europe. It was supported by LIFE+ funding from the European Commission and works closely together with the European Centre for River Restoration ([http://www.ecrr.org/ ECRR]). The project finished in 2013 and is now supported through the European Centre for River Restoration. [https://www.ecrr.org/]<br /> <br /> The RESTORE [http://www.ecrr.org/ website] (http://www.ecrr.org/) is managed on behalf of the European Centre for River Restoration by Wetlands International. The RESTORE River Wiki (https://restorerivers.eu/) is managed on behalf of the RESTORE partnership by the RRC and funding is provided by the Environment Agency. <br /> <br /> ==Mission==<br /> RESTORE encourages the restoration of European rivers towards a more natural state. This delivers increased ecological quality, flood risk reduction, and social and economic benefits.<br /> <br /> ==Partnership organisations==<br /> RESTORE is a partnership between the [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency Environment Agency] (EA – England), [http://www.ecrr.org/About/RESTOREProject/WesternEurope/tabid/2670/Default.aspx River Restoration Centre] (RRC - UK), [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2676&amp;tabid=2607 Wetlands International] (WI - International), [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2672&amp;tabid=2607 Government Service for Land and Water Management] (DLG - Netherlands), [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2669&amp;tabid=2607 Finnish Environment Institute] (SYKE - Finland) and [http://www.restorerivers.eu/LinkClick.aspx?link=2671&amp;tabid=2607 Italian Centre for River Restoration] (CIRF - Italy).</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Lower_Otter_Restoration_Project&diff=51554 2025-11-19T13:47:50Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=50.6308, -3.30815<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=www.lowerotterrestorationproject.co.uk<br /> |Themes=Estuary, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Lydia<br /> |Main contact surname=Burgess Gamble<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=clintondevon.com<br /> |Partner organisations=Clinton Devon Estates, European Regional Development Fund<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Otter overview.png<br /> |Picture description=overview<br /> |Project summary=The Lower Otter Restoration Project (LORP) in Budleigh Salterton, East Devon, is a flagship intertidal habitat restoration, climate adaptation, and infrastructure improvement project delivered by the Environment Agency in partnership with the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths Conservation Trust and Clinton Devon Estates. <br /> <br /> LORP has been majority funded by the UK government, with £8.5 million of co-financing from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) through the Interreg V A France (Channel) England programme (2021 to 2023). It is the English arm of a cross-border initiative called ‘Promoting Adaptation to Changing Coasts’ (PACCo) and is delivering pre-emptive climate change adaptation in the Otter Valley by working with nature to provide benefits for people and the environment. <br /> <br /> As part of the initiative, work is also going ahead on a similar project (Basse Saâne 2050) in the Saâne Valley in Normandy, France. Left unchanged, both valleys’ landscapes would not be sustainable in the face of climate change after centuries of human modification.<br /> <br /> The aim of LORP is to demonstrate that it is possible to collaborate with stakeholders in estuarine regions and work with nature, rather than against it, to improve the resilience of coastal communities and their environments. <br /> <br /> It is achieving this by increasing flood resilience through greatly improved infrastructure, reversing biodiversity loss (record-breaking levels of wading birds have already been seen regularly in the area since wetland development began), undoing the negative impacts of man-made modifications and restoring significant habitat loss, increasing carbon capture, and building awareness of climate adaptation and nature-based solutions through a range of educational resources and visits. LORP’s unique approach and methodology has also been shared through the publication of the PACCo Guide – a comprehensive framework for nature-based adaptation and management.<br /> <br /> The project began in spring 2021 and was completed in early autumn 2023. The works include a 70-meter breach in embankments to reconnect the Otter Estuary to its historic floodplain; restoring 55ha of wetland habitat; the construction of a 30-meter span flood-resilient, raised road and road bridge, as well as a new footbridge over the location of the future breach to ensure continuity of the South West Coast Path; the relocation of Budleigh Salterton Cricket Club away from the floodplain; raising and improving public footpaths, and creating wildlife viewing areas. <br /> <br /> To find out more about the Lower Otter Restoration Project, visit: www.lowerotterrestorationproject.co.uk<br /> <br /> For more information on the PACCo initiative, visit: www.pacco-interreg.com<br /> <br /> The essential work elements of the Scheme at a glance:<br /> * Habitat creation<br /> * 28ha of mudflats and 27ha of transitional marsh and saltmarsh<br /> * Facilitating works<br /> * Relocate Budleigh Salterton Cricket Club<br /> * Create a 70m wide breach through the estuary flood embankment near Lime Kiln car park. <br /> * Construct a new 70m span footbridge over the breach to ensure continuity of public access along the embankment;<br /> * Create a new main creek channel 2km in length and associated outer creek channels <br /> * Divert the existing hard-engineered SWW combined sewage outlet behind the shingle bar underground under the estuary mouth;<br /> * Raise South Farm Road to protect the highway from regular flooding. This includes a new 30m span highway bridge over the new creek channel; <br /> * Remove a small section of the existing landfill site to allow construction of the new South Farm Road highway bridge. The remaining areas of the landfill site will receive additional fill to provide furthering protection of the existing material within with the outer edges receiving improved erosion protection; <br /> * Demolish and remove the existing Budleigh Brook concrete aqueduct and create a realigned more natural meandering channel connected to the floodplain through Little Marsh;<br /> * Create a 200m wide breach in Little Bank and a 170m breach in Big Bank to improve water flow across the floodplain;<br /> * Install seven new viewing areas at various locations across the scheme to enrich visitor experience of the enhanced wildlife reserve resulting from the Scheme; <br /> * Create a new car park area at the south-western end of the new South Farm Road, removing informal parking in the existing SSSI which is damaging to the site;<br /> * Raise the existing footpath section between South Farm Road and Big Bank, on the western side of the floodplain, and improve the surfacing. <br /> * Divert the existing overhead power lines, which run west to east across the landfill site, underground;<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=The Lower Otter Restoration Project is returning the Lower Otter Valley and Otter Estuary to a more natural state and function by harnessing nature-based solutions. Without pre-emptive adaptation, the valley would not be sustainable in the face of climate change, the effects of which are already being felt. These impacts are further exacerbated by man-made modifications for commercial and agricultural purposes that have been implemented over the last 200 years. <br /> <br /> The main components of LORP are the reconnection of the River Otter and the reintroduction of wetland habitat. This habitat acts as a natural filter for pollutants, traps carbon, and increases biodiversity by providing important feeding and breeding grounds for a variety of species of wading birds, fish and invertebrates. <br /> By strategically breaching embankments, including a final 70-meter breach, and creating a new network of natural channels, the tide will flow back into its historic floodplain, providing a multitude of benefits, including the above.<br /> <br /> * Restoration has led to a new National Nature Reserve in the ‘King’s Series’: an extension of the Pebblebed Heaths NNR to include the Lower Otter Restoration Project area – a managed realignment scheme delivered by the EA with a budget input of approx. £30 million. <br /> * The new NNR will be further extended by the new Round 2 Landscape Recovery ‘Heaths to Sea’ project under ELMS. It will connect the Pebblebed Heaths with the Otter estuary over 4000ha, and restore 175ha of wetland, 18km of river and create 96ha of riparian woodland.<br /> |Lessons learn=This makes LORP a shining example of how natural processes can be harnessed to provide multiple benefits to wildlife, the environment, and people. By working with nature, the project is helping to create a more resilient, sustainable, and brighter future for the Otter Valley, its estuary, and surrounding communities.<br /> <br /> Through these natural solutions, LORP demonstrates that it is possible to adapt to the challenges of climate change, reverse significant habitat and biodiversity loss, and improve degraded systems by working alongside nature, rather than against it.<br /> <br /> The project is not only improving the ecological health of the Otter Valley and Estuary, but also providing important socio-economic benefits for local communities, such as improved flood resilience and infrastructure, and enhanced wellbeing, health, and recreational activities.<br /> |Project title=Lower Otter Restoration Project<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=18000<br /> |Project started=2021-01-04<br /> |Works completed=2023-10-01<br /> |Total1 cost=3000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, European Regional Development Fund<br /> |Supplementary funding information=a managed realignment scheme delivered by the EA with a budget input of approx. £30 million<br /> £8.5 million of co-financing from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) through the Interreg V A France (Channel) England programme (2021 to 2023)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter project.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter launch.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=River Otter<br /> }}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.gov.uk/government/news/vital-new-wetland-habitat-protected-with-announcement-of-a-new-kings-national-nature-reserve#:~:text=Nature%20Minister%20Rebecca%20Pow%20said,how%20we%20can%20do%20that.<br /> |Description=Vital new wetland habitat protected with announcement of a new King’s National Nature Reserve<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.endsreport.com/article/1861785/devon-nature-reserve-significantly-extended-part-climate-adaptation-project<br /> |Description=Devon nature reserve significantly extended as part of climate adaptation project<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Lower_Otter_Restoration_Project&diff=51553 2025-11-19T13:47:22Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=www.lowerotterrestorationproject.co.uk<br /> |Themes=Estuary, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Lydia<br /> |Main contact surname=Burgess Gamble<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=clintondevon.com<br /> |Partner organisations=Clinton Devon Estates, European Regional Development Fund<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Otter overview.png<br /> |Picture description=overview<br /> |Project summary=The Lower Otter Restoration Project (LORP) in Budleigh Salterton, East Devon, is a flagship intertidal habitat restoration, climate adaptation, and infrastructure improvement project delivered by the Environment Agency in partnership with the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths Conservation Trust and Clinton Devon Estates. <br /> <br /> LORP has been majority funded by the UK government, with £8.5 million of co-financing from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) through the Interreg V A France (Channel) England programme (2021 to 2023). It is the English arm of a cross-border initiative called ‘Promoting Adaptation to Changing Coasts’ (PACCo) and is delivering pre-emptive climate change adaptation in the Otter Valley by working with nature to provide benefits for people and the environment. <br /> <br /> As part of the initiative, work is also going ahead on a similar project (Basse Saâne 2050) in the Saâne Valley in Normandy, France. Left unchanged, both valleys’ landscapes would not be sustainable in the face of climate change after centuries of human modification.<br /> <br /> The aim of LORP is to demonstrate that it is possible to collaborate with stakeholders in estuarine regions and work with nature, rather than against it, to improve the resilience of coastal communities and their environments. <br /> <br /> It is achieving this by increasing flood resilience through greatly improved infrastructure, reversing biodiversity loss (record-breaking levels of wading birds have already been seen regularly in the area since wetland development began), undoing the negative impacts of man-made modifications and restoring significant habitat loss, increasing carbon capture, and building awareness of climate adaptation and nature-based solutions through a range of educational resources and visits. LORP’s unique approach and methodology has also been shared through the publication of the PACCo Guide – a comprehensive framework for nature-based adaptation and management.<br /> <br /> The project began in spring 2021 and was completed in early autumn 2023. The works include a 70-meter breach in embankments to reconnect the Otter Estuary to its historic floodplain; restoring 55ha of wetland habitat; the construction of a 30-meter span flood-resilient, raised road and road bridge, as well as a new footbridge over the location of the future breach to ensure continuity of the South West Coast Path; the relocation of Budleigh Salterton Cricket Club away from the floodplain; raising and improving public footpaths, and creating wildlife viewing areas. <br /> <br /> To find out more about the Lower Otter Restoration Project, visit: www.lowerotterrestorationproject.co.uk<br /> <br /> For more information on the PACCo initiative, visit: www.pacco-interreg.com<br /> <br /> The essential work elements of the Scheme at a glance:<br /> * Habitat creation<br /> * 28ha of mudflats and 27ha of transitional marsh and saltmarsh<br /> * Facilitating works<br /> * Relocate Budleigh Salterton Cricket Club<br /> * Create a 70m wide breach through the estuary flood embankment near Lime Kiln car park. <br /> * Construct a new 70m span footbridge over the breach to ensure continuity of public access along the embankment;<br /> * Create a new main creek channel 2km in length and associated outer creek channels <br /> * Divert the existing hard-engineered SWW combined sewage outlet behind the shingle bar underground under the estuary mouth;<br /> * Raise South Farm Road to protect the highway from regular flooding. This includes a new 30m span highway bridge over the new creek channel; <br /> * Remove a small section of the existing landfill site to allow construction of the new South Farm Road highway bridge. The remaining areas of the landfill site will receive additional fill to provide furthering protection of the existing material within with the outer edges receiving improved erosion protection; <br /> * Demolish and remove the existing Budleigh Brook concrete aqueduct and create a realigned more natural meandering channel connected to the floodplain through Little Marsh;<br /> * Create a 200m wide breach in Little Bank and a 170m breach in Big Bank to improve water flow across the floodplain;<br /> * Install seven new viewing areas at various locations across the scheme to enrich visitor experience of the enhanced wildlife reserve resulting from the Scheme; <br /> * Create a new car park area at the south-western end of the new South Farm Road, removing informal parking in the existing SSSI which is damaging to the site;<br /> * Raise the existing footpath section between South Farm Road and Big Bank, on the western side of the floodplain, and improve the surfacing. <br /> * Divert the existing overhead power lines, which run west to east across the landfill site, underground;<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=The Lower Otter Restoration Project is returning the Lower Otter Valley and Otter Estuary to a more natural state and function by harnessing nature-based solutions. Without pre-emptive adaptation, the valley would not be sustainable in the face of climate change, the effects of which are already being felt. These impacts are further exacerbated by man-made modifications for commercial and agricultural purposes that have been implemented over the last 200 years. <br /> <br /> The main components of LORP are the reconnection of the River Otter and the reintroduction of wetland habitat. This habitat acts as a natural filter for pollutants, traps carbon, and increases biodiversity by providing important feeding and breeding grounds for a variety of species of wading birds, fish and invertebrates. <br /> By strategically breaching embankments, including a final 70-meter breach, and creating a new network of natural channels, the tide will flow back into its historic floodplain, providing a multitude of benefits, including the above.<br /> <br /> * Restoration has led to a new National Nature Reserve in the ‘King’s Series’: an extension of the Pebblebed Heaths NNR to include the Lower Otter Restoration Project area – a managed realignment scheme delivered by the EA with a budget input of approx. £30 million. <br /> * The new NNR will be further extended by the new Round 2 Landscape Recovery ‘Heaths to Sea’ project under ELMS. It will connect the Pebblebed Heaths with the Otter estuary over 4000ha, and restore 175ha of wetland, 18km of river and create 96ha of riparian woodland.<br /> |Lessons learn=This makes LORP a shining example of how natural processes can be harnessed to provide multiple benefits to wildlife, the environment, and people. By working with nature, the project is helping to create a more resilient, sustainable, and brighter future for the Otter Valley, its estuary, and surrounding communities.<br /> <br /> Through these natural solutions, LORP demonstrates that it is possible to adapt to the challenges of climate change, reverse significant habitat and biodiversity loss, and improve degraded systems by working alongside nature, rather than against it.<br /> <br /> The project is not only improving the ecological health of the Otter Valley and Estuary, but also providing important socio-economic benefits for local communities, such as improved flood resilience and infrastructure, and enhanced wellbeing, health, and recreational activities.<br /> |Project title=Lower Otter Restoration Project<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=50.6308, -3.30815<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=18000<br /> |Project started=2021-01-04<br /> |Works completed=2023-10-01<br /> |Total1 cost=3000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency, European Regional Development Fund<br /> |Supplementary funding information=a managed realignment scheme delivered by the EA with a budget input of approx. £30 million<br /> £8.5 million of co-financing from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) through the Interreg V A France (Channel) England programme (2021 to 2023)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter project.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Otter launch.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=River Otter<br /> }}<br /> {{Site}}<br /> <br /> {{Motivations}}<br /> {{Measures}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.gov.uk/government/news/vital-new-wetland-habitat-protected-with-announcement-of-a-new-kings-national-nature-reserve#:~:text=Nature%20Minister%20Rebecca%20Pow%20said,how%20we%20can%20do%20that.<br /> |Description=Vital new wetland habitat protected with announcement of a new King’s National Nature Reserve<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.endsreport.com/article/1861785/devon-nature-reserve-significantly-extended-part-climate-adaptation-project<br /> |Description=Devon nature reserve significantly extended as part of climate adaptation project<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Gadebridge_park_river_restoration&diff=51490 2025-10-21T09:41:39Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/engagement/gadebridge-park-information-page/<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Monitoring, Social benefits, Urban<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Kelly<br /> |Main contact surname=Standbrook<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Affinity Water, Dacorum Borough Council<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project summary=The River Gade, a globally rare chalk stream with poor ecological status within Gadebridge park, used to flow down a ‘perched’ channel created to supply water to Bury Mill. It was disconnected from its floodplain and over widened, leading to sluggish flows and a build-up of silt and vegetation. The EA Gauging Station Bury Mill and other in-channel structures acted as barriers to fish movement. Being disconnected from groundwater and spring flow had a significant impact on low flow resilience and to wildlife. Partnered with Dacorum Borough Council and Affinity Water Limited, this Environment Agency lead project diverted 415 metres of river channel to the valley bottom through the park. The Bury Mill gauging station was replaced with an ultrasonic one to allow fish passage. Work progressed from 2018 with construction complete in June 2025. <br /> <br /> 0.85 hectares of habitat was created, 3.9 hectares habitat enhanced, 6.5 km of river restored, 0.9 hectares buffer strip created and 1.1km water body opened to fish passage. The river corridor now provides better resilience to low and high flows and the impacts of climate change. Two new bridges and a large gravel access point to the channel were provided for the local community. <br /> <br /> The project was designed by JBA Consulting Limited and delivered by BAM Nuttall Limited.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Macrophyte survey- August 2025:<br /> New species:<br /> *Persicaria maculosa (Redshank) <br /> *Callitriche obtusangula (Blunt fruited water starwort)<br /> *Sparganium erectum (Branched bur-reed)<br /> *Lemna minor (Duckweed)<br /> *The total number of species has increased from 18 to 24 new ones<br /> <br /> Increase in cover:<br /> *Ranunculus penicillatus subsp. Pseudofluitans (Brook watercrowfoot) <br /> *Veronica anagallis-aquatica (Water speedwell)<br /> <br /> Fisheries:<br /> In a fisheries survey in September 2025, we recorded high numbers of minnow, and similar counts for stickleback and bullhead. Most significantly we recorded 14 trout in the ~100m section, with a few different age classes represented. We also undertook a detailed habitat survey to help assess how the habitat will change in the coming years. <br /> <br /> Summary of improvement- In the 2021 survey we were suffering low flows. The highly modified old channel had no resilience in such conditions and offered very little habitat for fish during those flows. We confirmed this, as we recorded trout on a survey in 2022 further upstream, where restoration work had been carried out previously. Our work within the park restored a more varied range of habitats that could be used across more flows.<br /> <br /> Our 2025 post works survey showed a significant increase in numbers of &quot;minor&quot; species, all of which are prey items for trout. Their increased abundance is a great sign of river health and will support trout numbers in the park. Habitat requirements change as trout are in different life stages. The trout we recorded were from a few different age classes, from juveniles to adults. This shows that even in a 100m section there is enough variety in habitat to support a population of trout.<br /> <br /> A Kingfisher and 3 Grey Wagtail have also been spotted on site since the restoration was completed.<br /> |Lessons learn=*Factor in a good contingency for the project, thinking about the contractors available on the framework, increases in material costs, inflation, FTE charges, compensation events. Have a good understanding of any changes to the design, working with the designer to estimate cost increases.<br /> *The project group should contain members of the required level of authority. Set accountabilities early to avoid delays and misunderstanding plus each team's minimum requirements. Technical team leads should have ownership of their elements of the project to ensure all discussion items are logged and addressed.<br /> *Make sure all staff have the training and capabilities to conduct their role within the project team and they have available resource. <br /> *Develop a robust benefits realisation strategy early on to enable a better understanding of the benefits to all parties and a greater financial contribution.<br /> *Walk the line of works with the Topography Plan and Tree Survey before commencing works at site, to check for mapping discrepancies.<br /> *Ensure a close working relationship with the designer and the technical teams to avoid delays. <br /> *Engage with the local community in a variety of ways eg. project web page, mailing list updates, project mailbox, Facebook, Twitter, council newsletters, onsite signage, community events.<br /> }}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:The_Taw_River_Improvement_Project_(TRIP)&diff=51471 2025-10-08T17:01:18Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.07721, -4.16656<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Laurence<br /> |Main contact surname=Couldrick<br /> |Contact organisation=North Devon Biosphere Reserve, Westcountry Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.wrt.org.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=Devon Wildlife Trust, Farming and Wildlife Group South West, Silvanus<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=River_pic.png<br /> |Project summary=TRIP is a partnership project that will use CRF funds to manage restoration work to deliver habitat improvements in the Taw catchment. The partnership, led by the Westcountry Rivers Trust, has been carrying out river restoration and addressing the causes of Water Framework Directive issues together for many years.<br /> <br /> The outcomes of the project are the following:<br /> *Water quality management – More consistent supply of better water quality; <br /> *Improved biodiversity - increased habitat biodiversity and renaturalisation; <br /> *Social - Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation; <br /> *Economic - Improved fisheries and spawning for commercial stocks; <br /> *Flood attenuation and management - Increased wetted and wooded areas; <br /> *Counteract climate change - Carbon sequestration through wetland sinks.<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Taw river catchment<br /> |WFD water body code=GB540805015500<br /> |WFD water body name=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2012/07/01<br /> |Project completed=2015/03/31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=2332<br /> |Funding sources=Catchment Restoration Funds<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration, Flood risk management<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Continuity for organisms, Structure &amp; condition of riparian zones<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Other motivation=Economic, Social, Climate change mitigation <br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Marginal planting, Gravel augmentation<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of a flood expansion area<br /> |Social measures=Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Participation in works<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Case study monitoring documents<br /> |Monitoring document=SW001+SW010 monitoring framework table.docx<br /> |Description=RRC Monitoring table - Taw River<br /> }}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=CRF040 Project Briefing Note - Taw River (TRIP).pdf<br /> |Description=project brief<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:The_Taw_River_Improvement_Project_(TRIP)&diff=51470 2025-10-08T17:01:08Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Laurence<br /> |Main contact surname=Couldrick<br /> |Contact organisation=North Devon Biosphere Reserve, Westcountry Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.wrt.org.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=Devon Wildlife Trust, Farming and Wildlife Group South West, Silvanus<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=River_pic.png<br /> |Project summary=TRIP is a partnership project that will use CRF funds to manage restoration work to deliver habitat improvements in the Taw catchment. The partnership, led by the Westcountry Rivers Trust, has been carrying out river restoration and addressing the causes of Water Framework Directive issues together for many years.<br /> <br /> The outcomes of the project are the following:<br /> *Water quality management – More consistent supply of better water quality; <br /> *Improved biodiversity - increased habitat biodiversity and renaturalisation; <br /> *Social - Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation; <br /> *Economic - Improved fisheries and spawning for commercial stocks; <br /> *Flood attenuation and management - Increased wetted and wooded areas; <br /> *Counteract climate change - Carbon sequestration through wetland sinks.<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.07721, -4.16656<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Taw river catchment<br /> |WFD water body code=GB540805015500<br /> |WFD water body name=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2012/07/01<br /> |Project completed=2015/03/31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=2332<br /> |Funding sources=Catchment Restoration Funds<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration, Flood risk management<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Continuity for organisms, Structure &amp; condition of riparian zones<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Other motivation=Economic, Social, Climate change mitigation <br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Marginal planting, Gravel augmentation<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of a flood expansion area<br /> |Social measures=Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Participation in works<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Case study monitoring documents<br /> |Monitoring document=SW001+SW010 monitoring framework table.docx<br /> |Description=RRC Monitoring table - Taw River<br /> }}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=CRF040 Project Briefing Note - Taw River (TRIP).pdf<br /> |Description=project brief<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:The_Taw_River_Improvement_Project_(TRIP)&diff=51469 2025-10-08T16:59:56Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Location<br /> |Location=51.07721, -4.16656<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Laurence<br /> |Main contact surname=Couldrick<br /> |Contact organisation=North Devon Biosphere Reserve, Westcountry Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.wrt.org.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=Devon Wildlife Trust, Farming and Wildlife Group South West, Silvanus<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=River_pic.png<br /> |Project summary=TRIP is a partnership project that will use CRF funds to manage restoration work to deliver habitat improvements in the Taw catchment. The partnership, led by the Westcountry Rivers Trust, has been carrying out river restoration and addressing the causes of Water Framework Directive issues together for many years.<br /> <br /> The outcomes of the project are the following:<br /> *Water quality management – More con-sistent supply of better water quality; <br /> *Improved biodiversity - increased hab-itat biodiversity and renaturalisation; <br /> *Social - Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation; <br /> *Economic - Improved fisheries and spawning for commercial stocks; <br /> *Flood attenuation and management - Increased wetted and wooded areas; Counteract climate change - Carbon sequestration through wetland sinks.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> <br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Taw river catchment<br /> |WFD water body code=GB540805015500<br /> |WFD water body name=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2012/07/01<br /> |Project completed=2015/03/31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=2332<br /> |Funding sources=Catchment Restoration Funds<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration, Flood risk management<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Continuity for organisms, Structure &amp; condition of riparian zones<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Other motivation=Economic, Social, Climate change mitigation <br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Marginal planting, Gravel augmentation<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of a flood expansion area<br /> |Social measures=Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Participation in works<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Case study monitoring documents<br /> |Monitoring document=SW001+SW010 monitoring framework table.docx<br /> |Description=RRC Monitoring table - Taw River<br /> }}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=CRF040 Project Briefing Note - Taw River (TRIP).pdf<br /> |Description=project brief<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:The_Taw_River_Improvement_Project_(TRIP)&diff=51468 2025-10-08T16:59:41Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Laurence<br /> |Main contact surname=Couldrick<br /> |Contact organisation=North Devon Biosphere Reserve, Westcountry Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.wrt.org.uk/<br /> |Partner organisations=Devon Wildlife Trust, Farming and Wildlife Group South West, Silvanus<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=River_pic.png<br /> |Project summary=TRIP is a partnership project that will use CRF funds to manage restoration work to deliver habitat improvements in the Taw catchment. The partnership, led by the Westcountry Rivers Trust, has been carrying out river restoration and addressing the causes of Water Framework Directive issues together for many years.<br /> <br /> The outcomes of the project are the following:<br /> *Water quality management – More con-sistent supply of better water quality; <br /> *Improved biodiversity - increased hab-itat biodiversity and renaturalisation; <br /> *Social - Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation; <br /> *Economic - Improved fisheries and spawning for commercial stocks; <br /> *Flood attenuation and management - Increased wetted and wooded areas; Counteract climate change - Carbon sequestration through wetland sinks.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=51.07721399504302, -4.16656494140625<br /> }}<br /> <br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> <br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Taw river catchment<br /> |WFD water body code=GB540805015500<br /> |WFD water body name=TAW / TORRIDGE<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |River corridor land use=Intensive agriculture (arable)<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=2012/07/01<br /> |Project completed=2015/03/31<br /> |Total cost category=1000 - 5000 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=2332<br /> |Funding sources=Catchment Restoration Funds<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Barriers to fish migration, Flood risk management<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Continuity for organisms, Structure &amp; condition of riparian zones<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Other motivation=Economic, Social, Climate change mitigation <br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Marginal planting, Gravel augmentation<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Creation of a flood expansion area<br /> |Social measures=Improved leisure environment for angling and recreation<br /> |Wider stakeholder / citizen engagement=Participation in works<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Other responses header}}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Monitoring documents}}<br /> {{Case study monitoring documents<br /> |Monitoring document=SW001+SW010 monitoring framework table.docx<br /> |Description=RRC Monitoring table - Taw River<br /> }}<br /> {{Monitoring documents end}}<br /> {{Additional Documents}}<br /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=CRF040 Project Briefing Note - Taw River (TRIP).pdf<br /> |Description=project brief<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Ascarr https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:River_pic.png&diff=51467 2025-10-08T16:58:27Z

<p>Ascarr: </p> <hr /> <div></div>

Ascarr