https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=Dhutchinson 2026-04-23T19:50:04Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.39.7 https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49813 2024-05-24T09:31:10Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.92952349785008, -0.6281864911059154<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Various in-channel measures e.g brushwood berms, tree hinging,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Bed raising, floodplain lowering and floodplain roughening.<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass and removal<br /> |Management interventions=Changes to floodplain management practice<br /> |Social measures=Community engagement and education e,g River School.<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.youtube.com/watch?v=biWRCJ0zYW0<br /> |Description=Upper Witham River Prize Film 2024<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49783 2024-05-13T14:27:26Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.92952349785008, -0.6281864911059154<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Various in-channel measures e.g brushwood berms, tree hinging,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Bed raising, floodplain lowering and floodplain roughening.<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass and removal<br /> |Management interventions=Changes to floodplain management practice<br /> |Social measures=Community engagement and education e,g River School.<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://youtu.be/biWRCJ0zYW0<br /> |Description=Upper Witham River Prize Film 2024<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49563 2024-03-01T15:50:35Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.92952349785008, -0.6281864911059154<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Various in-channel measures e.g brushwood berms, tree hinging,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Bed raising, floodplain lowering and floodplain roughening.<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass and removal<br /> |Management interventions=Changes to floodplain management practice<br /> |Social measures=Community engagement and education e,g River School.<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=youtu.be/PtZikLDHlP0<br /> |Description=Manthorpe Video<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49562 2024-03-01T15:47:52Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.92952349785008, -0.6281864911059154<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Various in-channel measures e.g brushwood berms, tree hinging,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Bed raising, floodplain lowering and floodplain roughening.<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass and removal<br /> |Management interventions=Changes to floodplain management practice<br /> |Social measures=Community engagement and education e,g River School.<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Manthorpe_Floodplain_Reconnection&diff=49560 2024-02-29T16:39:40Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.92912864241979, -0.6289553096715861<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Wild Trout Trust, Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust.<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=EMRA0714.JPG<br /> |Picture description=Project after completion.<br /> |Project summary=This project was jointly undertaken by the Wild Trout Trust and Environment Agency.<br /> <br /> There were five components to the scheme:<br /> <br /> *Removal of redundant flood bank, and lowering of the floodplain to create a terraced floodplain with a lower more frequently connected floodplain and a higher terrace of un-lowered floodplain. This gives maximum<br /> benefit to the river and natural processes whilst providing some variation in flood event storage and habitat evolution and variety.<br /> *Addition of riffles and gravel supply in the form of point bars and islands and splitting of channel into multiple threads creating a more natural form and allowing the river space to adjust to changes in flow but also allow natural processes like silt deposition, channel evolution, less intensive management, woody material to be retained in channel and on flood plain. The gravel raises the bed helping to connect the river into the floodplain reducing the amount of spoil generated to lower floodplain as well as providing rich habitats for riverine wildlife.<br /> *Creation of floodplain ponds and terrestrial habitat features like habitat piles, stone piles for hibernacular, and woody material on the floodplain to encourage further hydraulic roughness in high flow events<br /> *Spreading of spoil over the top of the valley sides outside of the floodplain, this was then reseeded with appropriate wildflower grassland mix and provides pollinator benefits.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Brown trout have already been observed spawning on the new limestone gravels. Crayfish monitoring was carried out pre works and showed a very low baseline population with only 6 individuals caught, repeat monitoring of this will be carried out along with repeat bird surveys of the site.<br /> |Lessons learn=4200m3 of earth was removed from the floodplain during the lowering and removal of embankments. Reconnecting the floodplain has created 19,500m3 of space for water which now reconnects to the lower floodplain frequently after intense rainfall events at a 1 in 2 event magnitude.<br /> |Project title=Manthorpe Floodplain Reconnection<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Manthorpe evolving channel.jpg<br /> |Caption=New channel evolving.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wet floodplain in winter.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Manthorpe Floodplain Reconnection<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=325<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=229<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=Environement Agency<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Matt<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Parr<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=Wild Trout Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Rob<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Mungovan<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Channel modification, Gravel added, Tree Hinging,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Redundant Flood Bank Removed, Floodplain Lowered, Floodplain Roughened, Ponds added.<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Multiple channels added<br /> |Other technical measure=Wild Flower Meadow area created.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Case Study Manthorpe Restoration.pdf<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtZikLDHlP0<br /> |Description=Manthorpe Video<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Westborough&diff=49555 2024-02-27T13:39:33Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.99212077259784, -0.7242975556686315<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Westborough 1.png<br /> |Picture description=Reveted bank at Westborough post works<br /> |Project summary=To take advantage of regular maintenance activities and utilise existing woody materials to reduce bank side erosion, whilst creating a better riverine habitat.<br /> <br /> Objectives:<br /> *Increase riverine diversity<br /> *Stabilise eroding banks<br /> *Reduce sediment input in to the river<br /> *Provide fish refuge areas<br /> *To explore environmental options whilst undertaking regular maintenance activities<br /> *Bring multiple benefits through a joined up approach.<br /> *Reduce ongoing maintenance cost<br /> *Utilise existing materials<br /> *Meet Water Framework Directive objectives<br /> <br /> Phase 1 of the project delivered works along a section of bank 300 metres long, initially 40 meters have been reveted and a number of trees pinned. <br /> Phase 2 increased the length of works by a further 1.5km and included bank protection and tree pinning.<br /> |Lessons learn=That by looking at our existing maintenance works; we can promote best practice by delivering cost saving initiatives that have a wider benefit on river ecology with minimal cost implications.<br /> |Project title=Westborough<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Westborough 2.png<br /> |Caption=Works being undertaken.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Westborough 3.png<br /> |Caption=Completed works in low and high flow events.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Westborough<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1870<br /> |Project started=2024/09/01<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=17500<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree hinging work over long section of Witham.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Westborough case study final.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49554 2024-02-27T13:34:08Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Various in-channel measures e.g brushwood berms, tree hinging,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Bed raising, floodplain lowering and floodplain roughening.<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass and removal<br /> |Management interventions=Changes to floodplain management practice<br /> |Social measures=Community engagement and education e,g River School.<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49553 2024-02-27T13:30:59Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Various in-channel measures e.g brushwood berms, tree hinging,<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49552 2024-02-27T13:29:04Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49551 2024-02-27T13:26:48Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=80000<br /> |Project started=01/01/2013<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 footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49550 2024-02-27T13:23:26Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=Yes<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49549 2024-02-27T13:22:54Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780, GB105030051570, GB105030051560<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham - Headwaters to Confluence Cringle Brook, Upper Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant and Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=In general - Disconnected from floodplain, lack of wood, lack of gravel and gravel supply.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Desired post project morphology=In general and unconstrained areas - More connected floodplains, gravel and wood<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Brown Trout, Otters, Water voles and Native Crayfish<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water System<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay,<br /> |River corridor land use=Livestock and arable.<br /> }}<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49548 2024-02-27T13:14:19Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2 -Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Caption=Colsterworth just after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 3 -Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Caption=Wyndham Park Project 2019<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Mar 23 Photo.jpg<br /> |Caption=Cringle Brook after restoration.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4 -Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Mar_23_Photo.jpg&diff=49547 2024-02-27T13:13:30Z

<p>Dhutchinson: Cringle Brook after restoration.</p> <hr /> <div>Cringle Brook after restoration.</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Pic_4_-Grange_Farm_Stage_Zero_Winter_2023.jpg&diff=49546 2024-02-27T13:11:53Z

<p>Dhutchinson: Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.</p> <hr /> <div>Grange Farm Stage Zero Winter 2023.</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Pic_3_-Wyndham_Park_Project_Grantham_2019.jpg&diff=49545 2024-02-27T13:10:28Z

<p>Dhutchinson: Wyndham Park Project 2019</p> <hr /> <div>Wyndham Park Project 2019</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Pic_2_-Colsterworth_October_2023.JPG&diff=49544 2024-02-27T13:08:51Z

<p>Dhutchinson: Colsterworth just after restoration.</p> <hr /> <div>Colsterworth just after restoration.</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49543 2024-02-27T13:03:35Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wetted floodplain at Manthorpe following restoration<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Westborough 1.png<br /> |Caption=Westborough<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart established.jpg<br /> |Caption=Dysart Park, Grantham Habitat Improvement Project after establishment and naturalisation.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Caption=Little Ponton brushwood mattresses<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=EMRA0714.JPG<br /> |Caption=Manthorpe Floodplain Reconnection after completion<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Manthorpe_wetted_floodplain_in_winter_23.jpg&diff=49542 2024-02-27T13:02:50Z

<p>Dhutchinson: Dhutchinson uploaded a new version of File:Manthorpe wetted floodplain in winter 23.jpg</p> <hr /> <div>Wet floodplain in winter.</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Witham_Restoration&diff=49541 2024-02-27T12:57:10Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.34571570593564, 0.809030630159393<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=In progress<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=East Mercia Rivers Trust, formerly Lincolnshire Rivers Trust, Wild Trout Trust, National Trust, Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section, South Kesteven District Council, University of Lincoln.<br /> |Multi-site=Yes<br /> |Project picture=Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Wyndham Park Project Grantham 2019<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham has been subject to significant changes which have modified the river and its hydrological functioning. These legacy interventions have been damaging to habitat and with serious pollution incidents, climate change implications and invasive species threats, native species such as White Clawed Cray-fish and Brown Trout are at risk of local extinction. A ground water fed system has now also become far more reactive in response to an increase in storm intensity across the area. <br /> <br /> Habitat improvement, rejuvenating a self-regulating functional active river system has been an aspiration for stakeholders working in the catchment for some time. Initial attempts at improving in-channel habitat from 2013 (EA, WTT and GAAFFs) used hinged trees and berms to narrow the river and scour pools. In the lower reaches, downstream of Grantham, this provided habitat in a system where it had previously been removed and was a good addition. Reviews of work did however indicate that this approach was not always having the desired effect; linked to very resistant clay bed and banks, poor gravel supply, and a lack of floodplain connectivity. <br /> <br /> Lessons were learned and subsequent landowner and flood risk engagement took place. These were applied in the EA and NT’s Belton project which began in 2016 with imported gravels added at the time. This worked well and provided a blueprint for works in the nearby urban setting of Wyndham Park, Grantham (EA and SKDC in 2017). More urban projects in the town followed from the Rivers Trusts (Dysart Park 2020) and most notably the Blue Green corridor project led by SKDC with more gravels added, trees hinged, berms created, and wildflower and wetlands introduced widely along the river. Belton was revisited in 2023 where floodplain connectivity was increased through strategic floodplain lowering and reconnection using live and dead woody material as the driver for change.<br /> <br /> The scale and ambition of individual projects increased with a more recent focus on larger scale projects connecting rivers with their floodplains more frequently. Manthorpe flood bank removal in 2020 (WTT and EA), Upper Cringle Brook ‘stage 8’ 2022 (EMRT), Grange Farm Stage 0 restoration (EA 2021) and Colsterworth (EMRT 2023) system reactivation, as well as innovative techniques such as smaller size gravel augmentation downstream of weirs (2023, WTT and GAAFFS at Papermill weir). Three large scale weir easement projects have also taken place at Aubourn (2016), Great Ponton (2015) and Easton (2014).<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=We have learnt a great deal about lowland restoration and have applied this learning as the projects have progressed. Valuable feedback has come from revisiting project sites and undertaking objective reviews e.g 2018 Wild Trout Trust report . This is how we identified the importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity. We have long term ecological data for sites in the river that indicate that habitat works play a part in the continued improvement and prevention of determination of the ecology e.g Foston Ford fish surveys. Other sites like Easton Park show the limitations of some of the early in-channel techniques particular for fish populations although other factors like pollution incidents and low flow may be playing a role. Trout Redd surveys also provide good supporting data. Other monitoring techniques we have used include geomorphological surveys and drone topographical surveys. As the larger projects continue to evolve, our understanding of the impact they are having continues to develop, but it is clear following the storm events of winter 23/24 that we are undertaking projects that are both sustainable and are returning dynamic river processes to a lowland system.<br /> |Lessons learn=To get maximum benefit from projects, in areas with less constraints, we needed to look wider than interventions focused just within the channel and consider the floodplain as well. Further learning for individual projects can be found in the project specific case studies.<br /> |Project title=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Westborough 1.png<br /> |Caption=Westborough<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023.jpg<br /> |Caption=Belton floodplain inundating Winter 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart established.jpg<br /> |Caption=Dysart Park, Grantham Habitat Improvement Project after establishment and naturalisation.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Caption=Little Ponton brushwood mattresses<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=EMRA0714.JPG<br /> |Caption=Manthorpe Floodplain Reconnection after completion<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Grantham_Blue_Green_-_Urban_Reach&diff=49540 2024-02-27T12:20:45Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.91371588803417, -0.6381707235536571<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Alice<br /> |Main contact surname=Atkins<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Environment Agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Pic 3.jpg<br /> |Project summary=This project was undertaken to improve river habitat in a section of the Upper Witham through Urban Grantham. It followed on from an urban opportunities study and similar work at Dysart Park (Rivers Trust) and Wyndham Park Phase 1 (EA). There is a near continuous, accessible, river corridor along the river through the town which takes in 2 large, popular parks. The river here has been heavily modified which has had a significant impact on the habitat and its appearance. <br /> <br /> The works aimed to improve the habitat, look of the river and to try and reinstate some natural river processes within the constraints of an urban environment e.g flood risk. River works were complemented by the planting of wildflower meadows and urban wetlands along the river corridor.<br /> <br /> The river work involved daylighting, tree hinging, berm creation and the addition of gravel to the channel at 4 sperate project sites. Local volunteers, including the River Care group in particular assisted contractors in undertaking the works.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Baseline monitoring has been undertaken by EA for fish and invertebrates. Sample site Stonebridge Close, Sedgewick Meadows and Queen Elizabeth Park. Impact will be assessed over time.<br /> |Lessons learn=Delivery of a large programme of works to deadline through COVID has been challenging but works came in within budget. Working in an urban environment is difficult and successful project delivery relies on engagement with the many stakeholders from the outset, particularly the local community. If new project officers are picking up the delivery of works and were not involved in the initial project development, then it is important that a through handover of work takes place.<br /> |Project title=Grantham Blue Green - Urban Reach<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Gravel being added to channel.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly installed brushwood berm in foreground (Queen Elizabeth Park)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly dug wetland feature in Queen Elizabeth Park prior to volunteer planting.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Grantham Urban Reach<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1300<br /> |Project started=01/07/2021<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=313<br /> |Funding sources=Leader+ European Structural Fund, EA, SKDC<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree Hinging adding gravel, berm creation, daylighting.<br /> |Other technical measure=Urban wetlands and wildflower meadows<br /> |Social measures=Big engagement programme with local community.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Case study Grantham Blue Green - Urban Reach.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Dysart_Park,_Grantham_Habitat_Improvement&diff=49539 2024-02-27T12:13:58Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.9029014214775, -0.6289751145472255<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Dysart established.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Project after establishment and naturalisation.<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham is the ground water fed headwaters of the Witham supporting important species including Native Crayfish and Brown Trout. Historic changes to the river for milling and land drainage have however degraded habitat especially in urban areas such as Grantham. <br /> <br /> The project aimed to restore habitat in an over widened, shaded section of river running alongside a public park in the town. This was done by hinging trees to form berms which helped to narrow the channel and provide lighter. As well as benefiting the habitat, this made the river more visible to near-by residents and park users.<br /> <br /> This work reduced the need for EA maintenance of the trees in this section of river.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Visual inspections and photographs of changes. It is clear that even with a resistant clay bed some of the narrowing structures have created scour pool formation.<br /> |Lessons learn=Plan ahead where native Crayfish could be impacted by a project. Ensure you have the necessary permissions to survey for them and where necessary relocate from the project site.<br /> <br /> This project also planned to install a rock ramp on a weir downstream, but this could not be taken forward due to site access during Covid.<br /> |Project title=Dysart Park, Grantham Habitat Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Site before works, Summer 2020. Very shaded and with a silt dominated, over widened<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Berm creation using hinged trees, Autumn 2020.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 3.jpg<br /> |Caption=Deep Scour pool between narrowing berms Winter 2022.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=Clean gravels and aquatic vegetation forming next to berm. Winter 2022.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Dysart Park, Grantham Habitat Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=100<br /> |Project started=01/09/2020<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=16380<br /> |Funding sources=EA, Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF),<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> |Other motivation=Improving Local Park<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Day lighting and addition of woody material to form narrowing berms<br /> |Social measures=Volunteer work parties using the local community.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Dysart Park Grantham Restoration Case Study.pdf<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Papermill_Weir_Section_in-channel_restoration&diff=49538 2024-02-27T12:09:56Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.898698113878325, -0.6267162657191405<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=SKDC, Wild Trout Trust and Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section,<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=PaperM2.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Hinged Trees following works<br /> |Project summary=This project was undertaken to improve river habitat in a section of the Upper Witham downstream of a large weir. Despite flowing through an area of woodland with good riparian wetland habitat and some sinuosity, the bed material was almost exclusively large cobbles. Very little gravel was available for trout spawning, as a result of the interruption of natural sediment transport processes by the weir. In addition, there was little woody material habitat in the river. The project to address this occurred in two phases. In 2022, the Blue Green Corridor project led by SKDC worked in conjunction with Grantham Angling Association (Fly Fishing Section) to hinge existing trees into the river to create berm features and also secured trunks that fully spanned the river. The latter aiming to create scour pools underneath. In 2023, the Wild Trout Trust completed the works by adding gravel onto the sill of the weir at the upstream extent of the reach. In subsequent high flow events, including Storm Babet, the gravel could then naturally start to move into position downstream.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=This is a routine EA fisheries survey site so we will be able to monitor the long term impact of the changes over the next few years. The movement of gravel features is being monitored and post high flow events winter 23/24 we are seeing near bar and riffle features forming in the wooded section.<br /> |Lessons learn=It has worked well to do this project in two phases, firstly with the addition of the wood and secondly with the gravel. Particularly where living willow has been used, it will allow the woody material to establish before trapping the gravel as it moves downstream over time.<br /> <br /> The use of natural wood found on site and the placement of gravel at a single point with good access have proved very cost effective compared to a constructed riffle approach.<br /> <br /> If safe to do so, gravel is best added in high flows to avoid the requirement for people in the channel to rake it flat. The high flows will naturally and quickly sort the gravel into position. The gravel used was 5 – 20mm size range; in future a 20 – 40mm component should also be included to match the naturally-occurring size range in the Upper Witham.<br /> |Project title=Papermill Weir Section in-channel restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=PaperM1.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=New Riffle.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Papermill weir section<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=350<br /> |Project started=01/11/2023<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=23400<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage and Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree hinging and adding gravel.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Papermill Weir In-channel Restoration (Tree Hinging and gravel) Case Study.pdf<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Papermill_Weir_Section_in-channel_restoration&diff=49537 2024-02-27T12:08:49Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.898698113878325, -0.6267162657191405<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=SKDC, Wild Trout Trust and Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section,<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=PaperM2.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Hinged Trees following works<br /> |Project summary=This project was undertaken to improve river habitat in a section of the Upper Witham downstream of a large weir. Despite flowing through an area of woodland with good riparian wetland habitat and some sinuosity, the bed material was almost exclusively large cobbles. Very little gravel was available for trout spawning, as a result of the interruption of natural sediment transport processes by the weir. In addition, there was little woody material habitat in the river. The project to address this occurred in two phases. In 2022, the Blue Green Corridor project led by SKDC worked in conjunction with Grantham Angling Association (Fly Fishing Section) to hinge existing trees into the river to create berm features and also secured trunks that fully spanned the river. The latter aiming to create scour pools underneath. In 2023, the Wild Trout Trust completed the works by adding gravel onto the sill of the weir at the upstream extent of the reach. In subsequent high flow events, including Storm Babet, the gravel could then naturally start to move into position downstream.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=This is a routine EA fisheries survey site so we will be able to monitor the long term impact of the changes over the next few years. The movement of gravel features is being monitored and post high flow events winter 23/24 we are seeing near bar and riffle features forming in the wooded section.<br /> |Lessons learn=It has worked well to do this project in two phases, firstly with the addition of the wood and secondly with the gravel. Particularly where living willow has been used, it will allow the woody material to establish before trapping the gravel as it moves downstream over time.<br /> <br /> The use of natural wood found on site and the placement of gravel at a single point with good access have proved very cost effective compared to a constructed riffle approach.<br /> <br /> If safe to do so, gravel is best added in high flows to avoid the requirement for people in the channel to rake it flat. The high flows will naturally and quickly sort the gravel into position. The gravel used was 5 – 20mm size range; in future a 20 – 40mm component should also be included to match the naturally-occurring size range in the Upper Witham.<br /> |Project title=Papermill Weir Section in-channel restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=PaperM1.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=New Riffle.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Papermill weir section<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=350<br /> |Project started=01/11/2023<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=23400<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage and Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree hinging and adding gravel.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Papermill Weir In-channel Restoration (Tree Hinging and gravel) Case Study.pdf<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Little_Ponton&diff=49536 2024-02-27T12:07:26Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.872697880892936, -0.622609752818255<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Picture description=Brushwood mattress in restoration section<br /> |Project summary=Project Objectives <br /> <br /> * To reduce fine sediment inputs caused by bank erosion. <br /> * Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river. <br /> * To improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk. <br /> * To improve in-stream habitats and the bed structure to benefit fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish. <br /> <br /> The Enhancement Scheme <br /> The enhancement scheme was completed in two phases. A short section downstream of Great Ponton Mill was completed in February 2013 and the second, the continuation downstream to Whalebone Lane, Little Ponton, was completed in mid-August 2014. Prior to the enhancement work the in-river habitat was in generally good condition, however opportunities were identified to provide additional cover and food supply for a range of aquatic organisms together with measures to modify the flow to improve the structure of the riverbed and reduce the deposition of fine sediment. <br /> <br /> The works consisted of brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes, improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A fixed point photographic record has been set up and this, together with visual inspections, will be used to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream structures. A programme of fine sediment sampling and Wolman Pebble Counts to monitor the coarser riverbed material has also been established. In combination they will determine and record changes to river morphology as the result of the works. The established crayfish monitoring site at the bottom of the reach is already surveyed every 2 years and this will give an indication of the impact of the scheme on crayfish numbers. Finally additional ongoing invertebrate sampling will identify any ecological and water quality changes that occur.<br /> |Lessons learn=Learning lessons from the earlier GAAFFS work, willow logs were was not used in the subsequent phase of enhancement work. Instead logs, branches and brushwood generated by the management of other riverside tree<br /> and shrub species were used to create a variety of structures to protect vulnerable banks from erosion, narrow the channel and trap suspended fine sediment.<br /> |Project title=Little Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 1.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 2.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 3.png<br /> |Caption=Post Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Little Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1620<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=27000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes.<br /> |Management interventions=Improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Little Ponton Case Study (final) v2 010316.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:River_Witham_Great_Ponton&diff=49535 2024-02-27T12:05:36Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.85899655241563, -0.6179527123062312<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Wild Trout Trust and Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Ponton 1.png<br /> |Picture description=By-pass channel under construction.<br /> |Project summary=Channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using a variety of techniques: log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps); increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by excavating of bays/berms; and the reduction of sediment inputs by ford refurbishment and riverside fencing. The final phase involved major works to restore a section of the river to a more natural planform.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The initial downstream phases were primarily designed to<br />  Stabilise eroding river banks to reduce sediment inputs caused by fluvial processes and livestock.<br />  Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river.<br />  Improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk.<br />  Improve in-stream habitats for fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish.<br /> The final phase, at Grange Farm, set out to restore a degraded section of the river to its original course, such that the naturalised section of river would function in an ecologically and geomorphologically improved form.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=For all phases, visual inspections and regular fixed-point photographs are being undertaken to monitor the integrity and performance of the enhancement works and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Specific to Phase 2, modifications to the channel profile as a result of the woody material introduction upstream of Dunkirk Cottage can be determined by comparison with a baseline cross-section in this location and the effects on turbidity and invertebrate populations will also be monitored here. For phase 3, in addition to an annual redd (trout spawning “nest”) survey of the new riffles, the established annual fish monitoring downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge will be used to detect any changes as a result of the works.<br /> |Lessons learn=The importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity to drive significant change. Need for wood in by-pass channel. Where the constraints have been addressed by realigning and re-naturalising the channel at Grange Farm, habitat improvement has been more successful, although further intervention is required. Introduced gravel has been displaced in high flows and needs to be replaced with larger calibre material which will remain stable and restore the designed pool-riffle sequence. The abrupt change in valley floor gradient at this site constrained the design of the new channel and caused this situation; this is unusual and should not be a deterrent to similar river restoration schemes elsewhere.<br /> |Project title=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 5.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 6.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=2.7<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total1 cost=141<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphates<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree Hinging, Faggot Mattresses, Flow Deflectors<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing, cattle access points<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass, new meandering channel planform<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:River_Witham_Great_Ponton&diff=49534 2024-02-27T12:04:23Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.85899655241563, -0.6179527123062312<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Wild Trout Trust and Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Ponton 1.png<br /> |Picture description=By-pass channel under construction.<br /> |Project summary=Channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using a variety of techniques: log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps); increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by excavating of bays/berms; and the reduction of sediment inputs by ford refurbishment and riverside fencing. The final phase involved major works to restore a section of the river to a more natural planform.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The initial downstream phases were primarily designed to<br />  Stabilise eroding river banks to reduce sediment inputs caused by fluvial processes and livestock.<br />  Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river.<br />  Improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk.<br />  Improve in-stream habitats for fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish.<br /> The final phase, at Grange Farm, set out to restore a degraded section of the river to its original course, such that the naturalised section of river would function in an ecologically and geomorphologically improved form.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=For all phases, visual inspections and regular fixed-point photographs are being undertaken to monitor the integrity and performance of the enhancement works and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Specific to Phase 2, modifications to the channel profile as a result of the woody material introduction upstream of Dunkirk Cottage can be determined by comparison with a baseline cross-section in this location and the effects on turbidity and invertebrate populations will also be monitored here. For phase 3, in addition to an annual redd (trout spawning “nest”) survey of the new riffles, the established annual fish monitoring downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge will be used to detect any changes as a result of the works.<br /> |Lessons learn=The importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity to drive significant change. Need for wood in by-pass channel. Where the constraints have been addressed by realigning and re-naturalising the channel at Grange Farm, habitat improvement has been more successful, although further intervention is required. Introduced gravel has been displaced in high flows and needs to be replaced with larger calibre material which will remain stable and restore the designed pool-riffle sequence. The abrupt change in valley floor gradient at this site constrained the design of the new channel and caused this situation; this is unusual and should not be a deterrent to similar river restoration schemes elsewhere.<br /> |Project title=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 5.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 6.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=2.7<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total1 cost=141<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphates<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree Hinging, Faggot Mattresses, Flow Deflectors<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing, cattle access points<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass, new meandering channel planform<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:River_Witham_Great_Ponton&diff=49533 2024-02-27T12:04:14Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.85899655241563, -0.6179527123062312<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Wild Trout Trust and Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Ponton 1.png<br /> |Picture description=By-pass channel under construction.<br /> |Project summary=Channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using a variety of techniques: log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps); increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by excavating of bays/berms; and the reduction of sediment inputs by ford refurbishment and riverside fencing. The final phase involved major works to restore a section of the river to a more natural planform.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The initial downstream phases were primarily designed to<br />  Stabilise eroding river banks to reduce sediment inputs caused by fluvial processes and livestock.<br />  Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river.<br />  Improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk.<br />  Improve in-stream habitats for fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish.<br /> The final phase, at Grange Farm, set out to restore a degraded section of the river to its original course, such that the naturalised section of river would function in an ecologically and geomorphologically improved form.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=For all phases, visual inspections and regular fixed-point photographs are being undertaken to monitor the integrity and performance of the enhancement works and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Specific to Phase 2, modifications to the channel profile as a result of the woody material introduction upstream of Dunkirk Cottage can be determined by comparison with a baseline cross-section in this location and the effects on turbidity and invertebrate populations will also be monitored here. For phase 3, in addition to an annual redd (trout spawning “nest”) survey of the new riffles, the established annual fish monitoring downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge will be used to detect any changes as a result of the works.<br /> |Lessons learn=The importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity to drive significant change. Need for wood in by-pass channel. Where the constraints have been addressed by realigning and re-naturalising the channel at Grange Farm, habitat improvement has been more successful, although further intervention is required. Introduced gravel has been displaced in high flows and needs to be replaced with larger calibre material which will remain stable and restore the designed pool-riffle sequence. The abrupt change in valley floor gradient at this site constrained the design of the new channel and caused this situation; this is unusual and should not be a deterrent to similar river restoration schemes elsewhere.<br /> |Project title=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 5.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 6.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=upper witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=2.7<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total1 cost=141<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphates<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree Hinging, Faggot Mattresses, Flow Deflectors<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing, cattle access points<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass, new meandering channel planform<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Cringle_Floodplain_Restoration_Project&diff=49532 2024-02-27T12:02:09Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.824834336618046, -0.6487210410023536<br /> |Kml file=Upper Cringle Project Map SK9077625837toSK9160026376.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=lincsrivers.org.uk/upper-cringle-brook-gets-a-makeover/?msclkid=6925b300d11011ecbd85ed27680329e8<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Talton<br /> |Main contact id=LincsRivers<br /> |Contact organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=lincsrivers.org.uk<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Before and After Collage.png<br /> |Picture description=Upper Cringle Brook Before and After Collagee<br /> |Project summary=The Limestone Becks are located over a 3,000km2 limestone ridge in the west of Lincolnshire and are supplied by consistent flows of high-quality groundwater. They are isolated and unique, and if in good condition, have potential to support a rich aquatic flora and fauna, rarely found in Eastern England. <br /> Cringle Brook is a 12km limestone beck exemplifying both good and poor river habitat. The lower sections of the Brook remain relatively natural whilst the Upper Cringle Brook, historically straightened and deepened, faces a range of pressures including deterioration in habitat quality through changing management practices and diffuse pollution from the wider catchment, damaging it to such an extent it is substantially poorer ecologically. <br /> <br /> The current overall WFD status is moderate with invertebrates and macrophytes at moderate (2019 classification).<br /> <br /> Cringle Brook is also a catchment for supply of public drinking water, currently closed due to elevated pesticide concentrations. The site is also downstream of Skillington village waste-water treatment plant where phosphate treatment options are limited. A separate project is being undertaken in the wider catchment to address diffuse pollution however, it is anticipated that the new wetland areas created by this project will help provide some degree of natural attenuation.<br /> <br /> The project location at the top of the Witham catchment was deemed ideal as natural processes could be used to make space for water and help trap sediment. This project included 1km of the Upper Cringle Brook, which was un-farmed, dry floodplain, with the deepened and straightened channel running along the Southern edge. The channel and floodplain were completely disconnected, and the channel habitat was very poor.<br /> <br /> Previous experience in the Upper Witham Catchment has shown that the only effective option for restoration is to provide the river with a floodplain. In-channel measures alone would not make a worthwhile improvement. This is why other options were not considered. <br /> <br /> 1 ha (the maximum area agreed by the landowner) of inset floodplain was excavated along the 1km stretch with secondary channels, back channels and ponds added and some trees from the site were pulled across the new floodplain, enabling natural processes to be restarted, creating diversity and sinuosity in the channel. Without this action, the habitat will not be improved and a WFD reason for failure will not be addressed. Spoil generated from the excavations was used on the same site to create a 1.7 ha wildflower area adjacent to the floodplain.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A Morph River Condition assessment survey was carried out before with a follow up survey later in the summer and a further one in a year. Ecological surveys also carried out prior to project will be compared to surveys to be carried out next year to assess ecological impact. Results are expected to show a significant improvement in habitat and ecology along the restored 1km stretch. Drone video footage was recorded before and afterwards showing the extent of the works and the increased water storage capacity of the newly instated inset floodplains. Fixed point photography of the floodplain over time will be used to study sediment deposition. Phosphate levels will also be measured upstream between water treatment works and project site and compared with downstream of site to monitor ‘polishing’ effect of floodplain reconnection along the stretch. Baseline data from EA gauging stations should provide evidence of the volume of water storage made available by the and the possible reduction of peak flows in Upper Witham system.<br /> |Lessons learn=Head waters should not be discounted as a place to look to restore even when restoration seems unfeasible due to current condition. The benefits can be significant.<br /> <br /> When lowering floodplains, considering how the material can be landscaped on site and used for other benefits e.g., wildflower habitats but understanding that the site to look a bit stark whilst this establishes.<br /> <br /> The value of an experienced site supervisor and a skilled contractor cannot be underestimated.<br /> Confidence in the contractor's experience enabled them free reign to be creative within the constraints of the given inset floodplain parameters, and to observe and work with the river gives a more organic approach (regular site checks ensure all going to plan and landowner completely happy). <br /> <br /> Concise and transparent communication with landowner to build trust is key, enabling a more flexible approach on the broader principles of work as they were set out, facilitating a more natural approach from the contractors on the ground.<br /> |Project title=Upper Cringle Floodplain Restoration Project<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Before restoration pic early Feb 22.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Post restoration pic late Feb 22.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Before Photo.jpeg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=After photo.JPG<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051560<br /> |WFD (national) typology=limestone river<br /> |WFD water body name=Cringle Brook - Upper<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Straightened, Over deepened,<br /> |Reference morphology=Anastomosing,<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Anastomosing,<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater,<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay, Gravel,<br /> |River corridor land use=Grassland,<br /> |Average bankfull channel width category=Less than 2 m<br /> |Average bankfull channel depth category=Less than 0.5 m<br /> |Mean discharge category=Less than 0.1 m³/s<br /> |Average channel gradient category=0.001 - 0.01<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1000<br /> |Project started=03/02/2022<br /> |Works started=2022/02/03<br /> |Works completed=2022/04/30<br /> |Project completed=2022/04/30<br /> |Total cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=98<br /> |Benefit to cost ratio=2.97<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency,<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Invst and design cost=14<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Stakeholder1 engagement cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Wrk and supervision cost=84<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Post-project1 management and maintenance cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Monitoring1 cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Works were paid for by a Water Environment Improvement Fund Grant and land was contributed to the project by the landowner.<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Channel pattern/planform,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Invertebrates, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations, Oxygen balance,<br /> |Other motivation=Landscape enhancement,<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Introducing large woody debris,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Lowering of floodplain, Wildflower meadows,<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Back channel created, Channel naturalisation, Creation of an island, Creation of pond, Creation of backwater, Habitat creation,<br /> |Management interventions=Associated terrestrial habitat improvements,<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Channel pattern/planform<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 /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Invertebrates: Diversity<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<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=Upper Cringle Brook Restoration Case Study 2024 Update.pdf<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=lincsrivers.org.uk/upper-cringle-brook-gets-a-makeover/<br /> |Description=Press Release<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_River_Witham_:_Easton&diff=49531 2024-02-27T11:59:27Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.82943474779571, -0.6255157090478636<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Easton.png<br /> |Picture description=Post Restoration<br /> |Project summary=Weir removal to restore bed gradient; channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps) and earth, turf and silt filled log- or faggot-fronted enclosures; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by reprofiling eroded banks; excavation of pools in the river bed; increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; and fencing to prevent bank erosion by livestock.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The pre-project surveys and assessments led to the identification of the following objectives for the enhancement scheme:<br />  Reduce the impact of sediment inputs as a result of erosion caused by livestock.<br />  Repair eroded banks and protect them from erosion in the future.<br />  Trap sediment already in the system.<br />  Improve flows and natural cleansing of spawning gravels.<br />  Improve light levels in over-shaded sections.<br />  Improve habitat for trout, coarse fish and native white-clawed crayfish.<br />  Ensure that historic features within the Grade II Listed Historic Park and Garden are protected.<br /> Three separate schemes based on these objectives were prepared.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=In addition to the established annual fish monitoring programme downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge, visual inspections of the enhanced reach will be undertaken, and the fixed point photographic record will be updated to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream enhancements and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Post-works redd (trout spawning nest) surveys were undertaken upstream and downstream of Easton Lane. 6 redds were located in the upstream (Easton Park) section, but none were located downstream. These surveys provide a baseline for future monitoring.<br /> |Lessons learn=1. The greatest detrimental impact upon river habitat is the legacy of past channel engineering. Straightening and widening of the channel and lowering of the river bed have disrupted/destroyed the natural pool-riffle sequence and disconnected the floodplain. The process of the river recovering these natural characteristics is very slow (centuries) because of the naturally low energy of the river and limited supply of coarse sediment.<br /> <br /> 2. Habitat improvement measures within the existing channel have generally been unsuccessful. Installed in-stream structures have not had the desired effect of creating scour and producing depth variation. This is because of the resistant nature of the predominantly clay substrate, loss of sediment (gravel) to historic channel engineering and lack of sediment (gravel) supply/retention within the present channel dimensions. Introduced brushwood and large woody material have improved cover and fish-holding habitat, but have not fundamentally changed the channel shape.<br /> <br /> 3. The weir removal at Easton has restored fish passage and better habitat to the formerly impounded reach upstream, although the above constraints (point 1) remain. Trout numbers observed in this reach indicate a recovery from past pollution incidents.<br /> |Project title=Upper River Witham : Easton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper River Witham Easton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=01/10/2013<br /> |Total cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=66<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Weir Removal, Berms, Flow Deflectors, Tree Hinging<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Stainby_Road,_Colsterworth&diff=49530 2024-02-27T11:58:07Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.80026977522567, -0.6256366590738383<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Talton<br /> |Main contact id=N/A<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=eastmercia.org/<br /> |Partner organisations=Environment Agency,<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Case_study:Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Picture description=October 2023 just after construction<br /> |Project summary=This project was delivered by East Mercia Rivers Trust on land owned by Buckminster Estates. Although the Upper Witham which flows through the site had retained a meandering course, the river had become very disconnected from its floodplain with very little gravel in the channel. The aim of the project was to improve the river’s connectivity with the floodplain and in the process, enhance both river and floodplain habitat across the site. This was achieved by the lowering of areas of floodplain across the site and the introduction of limestone gravel riffles and point bars. The selective addition of woody material at certain locations further improved habitat.<br /> <br /> A backwater was created along with floodplain ponds and the enhancement of spring tributaries from the valley sides allowed the creation of ground water fed scrapes. All material removed from the valley bottom was landscaped on the valley sides outside of the floodplain and planted with wildflower seed.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Project is very recent so just establishing. We have baseline data for fish and river habitat survey as well as detailed drone topo. Post monitoring work will commence from 24 on wards.<br /> <br /> River condition assessment pre and post delivery has taken place.<br /> |Lessons learn=Allow plenty of time for the development and delivery of a large project such as this where the ecological window for delivery is very limited. Involve all stakeholders at the earliest possible stage of development. Due to the sensitivity of the site, archaeology was a major factor and where this is the case adequate funding should be accounted for to the help manage this risk. Future management of the site is very important to ensure that high quality floodplain habitats are created. Here, the tenant farmer will continue with low density, conservation cattle grazing. The project was carefully designed to not back up any water onto the field immediately upstream.<br /> |Project title=Stainby Road, Colsterworth<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly installed Lincs Limestone Gravel Feature<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Post construction October 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 3.jpg<br /> |Caption=New channel form post construction<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=New Ground Water Fed Wetland.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Pre project habitat photo.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Stainby Lane Colsterworth<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - Headwaters to confluence of Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Meandering planform but with very poor connectivity and no gravel.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook - Very well connected floodplain. Wood and gravel abundant.<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Floodplain connectivity improved, gravel and wood added.<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water Fed but quite responsive due to modifications.<br /> |Dominant substrate=Pre project - Clay and fine silts.<br /> |River corridor land use=Grazed - Cattle.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1300<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=318<br /> |Funding sources=EA, Anglian Water<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=1 - 10 k€<br /> |Invst and design cost=30<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Talton<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank Lowering, gravel and wood added<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Ground water fed wetlands<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=In-set floodplains created, bend widening, bank reprofiling.<br /> |Management interventions=Conservation grazing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Stainby Road Colsterworth - Restoration Project - Case Study.pdf<br /> |Description=Project case study.<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Grantham_Blue_Green_-_Urban_Reach&diff=49529 2024-02-27T11:51:26Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.91371588803417, -0.6381707235536571<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Alice<br /> |Main contact surname=Atkins<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Environment Agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Pic 3.jpg<br /> |Project summary=This project was undertaken to improve river habitat in a section of the Upper Witham through Urban Grantham. It followed on from an urban opportunities study and similar work at Dysart Park (Rivers Trust) and Wyndham Park Phase 1 (EA). There is a near continuous, accessible, river corridor along the river through the town which takes in 2 large, popular parks. The river here has been heavily modified which has had a significant impact on the habitat and its appearance. <br /> <br /> The works aimed to improve the habitat, look of the river and to try and reinstate some natural river processes within the constraints of an urban environment e.g flood risk. River works were complemented by the planting of wildflower meadows and urban wetlands along the river corridor.<br /> <br /> The river work involved daylighting, tree hinging, berm creation and the addition of gravel to the channel at 4 sperate project sites. Local volunteers, including the River Care group in particular assisted contractors in undertaking the works.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Baseline monitoring has been undertaken by EA for fish and invertebrates. Sample site Stonebridge Close, Sedgewick Meadows and Queen Elizabeth Park. Impact will be assessed over time.<br /> |Lessons learn=Delivery of a large programme of works to deadline through COVID has been challenging but works came in within budget. Working in an urban environment is difficult and successful project delivery relies on engagement with the many stakeholders from the outset, particularly the local community. If new project officers are picking up the delivery of works and were not involved in the initial project development, then it is important that a through handover of work takes place.<br /> |Project title=Grantham Blue Green - Urban Reach<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Gravel being added to channel.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly installed brushwood berm in foreground (Queen Elizabeth Park)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly dug wetland feature in Queen Elizabeth Park prior to volunteer planting.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Grantham Urban Reach<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1300<br /> |Project started=01/07/2021<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=313<br /> |Funding sources=Leader+ European Structural Fund, EA, SKDC<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree Hinging adding gravel, berm creation, daylighting.<br /> |Other technical measure=Urban wetlands and wildflower meadows<br /> |Social measures=Big engagement programme with local community.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Case study Grantham Blue Green - Urban Reach.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Grantham_Blue_Green_-_Urban_Reach&diff=49528 2024-02-27T11:51:00Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.91371588803417, -0.6381707235536571<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Alice<br /> |Main contact surname=Atkins<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Environment Agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Pic 3.jpg<br /> |Project summary=This project was undertaken to improve river habitat in a section of the Upper Witham through Urban Grantham. It followed on from an urban opportunities study and similar work at Dysart Park (Rivers Trust) and Wyndham Park Phase 1 (EA). There is a near continuous, accessible, river corridor along the river through the town which takes in 2 large, popular parks. The river here has been heavily modified which has had a significant impact on the habitat and its appearance. <br /> <br /> The works aimed to improve the habitat, look of the river and to try and reinstate some natural river processes within the constraints of an urban environment e.g flood risk. River works were complemented by the planting of wildflower meadows and urban wetlands along the river corridor.<br /> <br /> The river work involved daylighting, tree hinging, berm creation and the addition of gravel to the channel at 4 sperate project sites. Local volunteers, including the River Care group in particular assisted contractors in undertaking the works.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Baseline monitoring has been undertaken by EA for fish and invertebrates. Sample site Stonebridge Close, Sedgewick Meadows and Queen Elizabeth PArk. Impact will be assessed over time.<br /> |Lessons learn=Delivery of a large programme of works to deadline through COVID has been challenging but works came in within budget. Working in an urban environment is difficult and successful project delivery relies on engagement with the many stakeholders from the outset, particularly the local community. If new project officers are picking up the delivery of works and were not involved in the initial project development, then it is important that a through handover of work takes place.<br /> |Project title=Grantham Blue Green - Urban Reach<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Gravel being added to channel.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly installed brushwood berm in foreground (Queen Elizabeth Park)<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly dug wetland feature in Queen Elizabeth Park prior to volunteer planting.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Grantham Urban Reach<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1300<br /> |Project started=01/07/2021<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=313<br /> |Funding sources=Leader+ European Structural Fund, EA, SKDC<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree Hinging adding gravel, berm creation, daylighting.<br /> |Other technical measure=Urban wetlands and wildflower meadows<br /> |Social measures=Big engagement programme with local community.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Case study Grantham Blue Green - Urban Reach.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Dysart_Park,_Grantham_Habitat_Improvement&diff=49527 2024-02-27T11:48:12Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.9029014214775, -0.6289751145472255<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Dysart established.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Project after establishment and naturalisation.<br /> |Project summary=The Upper Witham is the ground water fed headwaters of the Witham supporting important species including Native Crayfish and Brown Trout. Historic changes to the river for milling and land drainage have however degraded habitat especially in urban areas such as Grantham. <br /> <br /> The project aimed to restore habitat in an over widened, shaded section of river running alongside a public park in the town. This was done by hinging trees to form berms which helped to narrow the channel and provide lighter. As well as benefiting the habitat, this made the river more visible to near-by residents and park users.<br /> <br /> This work reduced the need for EA maintenance of the trees in this section of river.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Visual inspections and photographs of changes. It is clear that even with a resistant clay bed some of the narrowing structures have created scour pool formation.<br /> |Lessons learn=Plan ahead where native Crayfish could be impacted by a project. Ensure you have the necessary permissions to survey for them and where necessary relocate from the project site.<br /> <br /> This project also planned to install a rock ramp on a weir downstream, but this could not be taken forward due to site access during Covid.<br /> |Project title=Dysart Park, Grantham Habitat Improvement<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Site before works, Summer 2020. Very shaded and with a silt dominated, over widened<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Berm creation using hinged trees, Autumn 2020.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 3.jpg<br /> |Caption=Deep Scour pool between narrowing berms Winter 2022.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Dysart 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=Clean gravels and aquatic vegetation forming next to berm. Winter 2022.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Dysart Park, Grantham Habitat Restoration<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=100<br /> |Project started=01/09/2020<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=16380<br /> |Funding sources=EA, Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF),<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> |Other motivation=Improving Local Park<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Day lighting and addition of woody material to form narrowing berms<br /> |Social measures=Volunteer work parties using the local community.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Dysart Park Grantham Restoration Case Study.pdf<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Papermill_Weir_Section_in-channel_restoration&diff=49526 2024-02-27T09:55:33Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.898698113878325, -0.6267162657191405<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=David<br /> |Main contact surname=Hutchinson<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=Environment Agency<br /> |Partner organisations=SKDC, Wild Trout Trust and Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section,<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=PaperM2.jpg<br /> |Picture description=Hinged Trees following works<br /> |Project summary=This project was undertaken to improve river habitat in a section of the Upper Witham downstream of a large weir. Despite flowing through an area of woodland with good riparian wetland habitat and some sinuosity, the bed material was almost exclusively large cobbles. Very little gravel was available for trout spawning, as a result of the interruption of natural sediment transport processes by the weir. In addition, there was little woody material habitat in the river. The project to address this occurred in two phases. In 2022, the Blue Green Corridor project led by SKDC worked in conjunction with Grantham Angling Association (Fly Fishing Section) to hinge existing trees into the river to create berm features and also secured trunks that fully spanned the river. The latter aiming to create scour pools underneath. In 2023, the Wild Trout Trust completed the works by adding gravel onto the sill of the weir at the upstream extent of the reach. In subsequent high flow events, including Storm Babet, the gravel could then naturally start to move into position downstream.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=This is a routine EA fisheries survey site so we will be able to monitor the long term impact of the changes over the next few years. The movement of gravel features is being monitored and post high flow events winter 23/24 we are seeing near bar and riffle features forming in the wooded section.<br /> |Lessons learn=It has worked well to do this project in two phases, firstly with the addition of the wood and secondly with the gravel. Particularly where living willow has been used, it will allow the woody material to establish before trapping the gravel as it moves downstream over time.<br /> <br /> The use of natural wood found on site and the placement of gravel at a single point with good access have proved very cost effective compared to a constructed riffle approach.<br /> <br /> If safe to do so, gravel is best added in high flows to avoid the requirement for people in the channel to rake it flat. The high flows will naturally and quickly sort the gravel into position. The gravel used was 5 – 20mm size range; in future a 20 – 40mm component should also be included to match the naturally-occurring size range in the Upper Witham.<br /> |Project title=Papermill Weir Section in-channel restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=PaperM1.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=New Riffle.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Papermill weir section<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - confluence of Cringle Brook to confluence Brant<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=350<br /> |Project started=01/11/2023<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=23400<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage and Flood Risk<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree hinging and adding gravel.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Papermill Weir In-channel Restoration (Tree Hinging and gravel) Case Study.pdf<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Little_Ponton&diff=49525 2024-02-27T09:52:44Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.872697880892936, -0.622609752818255<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Picture description=Brushwood mattress in restoration section<br /> |Project summary=Project Objectives <br /> <br /> * To reduce fine sediment inputs caused by bank erosion. <br /> * Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river. <br /> * To improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk. <br /> * To improve in-stream habitats and the bed structure to benefit fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish. <br /> <br /> The Enhancement Scheme <br /> The enhancement scheme was completed in two phases. A short section downstream of Great Ponton Mill was completed in February 2013 and the second, the continuation downstream to Whalebone Lane, Little Ponton, was completed in mid-August 2014. Prior to the enhancement work the in-river habitat was in generally good condition, however opportunities were identified to provide additional cover and food supply for a range of aquatic organisms together with measures to modify the flow to improve the structure of the riverbed and reduce the deposition of fine sediment. <br /> <br /> The works consisted of brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes, improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A fixed point photographic record has been set up and this, together with visual inspections, will be used to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream structures. A programme of fine sediment sampling and Wolman Pebble Counts to monitor the coarser riverbed material has also been established. In combination they will determine and record changes to river morphology as the result of the works. The established crayfish monitoring site at the bottom of the reach is already surveyed every 2 years and this will give an indication of the impact of the scheme on crayfish numbers. Finally additional ongoing invertebrate sampling will identify any ecological and water quality changes that occur.<br /> |Lessons learn=Learning lessons from the earlier GAAFFS work, willow logs were was not used in the subsequent phase of enhancement work. Instead logs, branches and brushwood generated by the management of other riverside tree<br /> and shrub species were used to create a variety of structures to protect vulnerable banks from erosion, narrow the channel and trap suspended fine sediment.<br /> |Project title=Little Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 1.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 2.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 3.png<br /> |Caption=Post Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Little Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1620<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=27000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes.<br /> |Management interventions=Improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Little Ponton Case Study (final) v2 010316.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:River_Witham_Great_Ponton&diff=49524 2024-02-27T09:50:47Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.85899655241563, -0.6179527123062312<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Wild Trout Trust and Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Ponton 1.png<br /> |Picture description=By-pass channel under construction.<br /> |Project summary=Channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using a variety of techniques: log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps); increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by excavating of bays/berms; and the reduction of sediment inputs by ford refurbishment and riverside fencing. The final phase involved major works to restore a section of the river to a more natural planform.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The initial downstream phases were primarily designed to<br />  Stabilise eroding river banks to reduce sediment inputs caused by fluvial processes and livestock.<br />  Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river.<br />  Improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk.<br />  Improve in-stream habitats for fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish.<br /> The final phase, at Grange Farm, set out to restore a degraded section of the river to its original course, such that the naturalised section of river would function in an ecologically and geomorphologically improved form.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=For all phases, visual inspections and regular fixed-point photographs are being undertaken to monitor the integrity and performance of the enhancement works and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Specific to Phase 2, modifications to the channel profile as a result of the woody material introduction upstream of Dunkirk Cottage can be determined by comparison with a baseline cross-section in this location and the effects on turbidity and invertebrate populations will also be monitored here. For phase 3, in addition to an annual redd (trout spawning “nest”) survey of the new riffles, the established annual fish monitoring downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge will be used to detect any changes as a result of the works.<br /> |Lessons learn=The importance of gravel and floodplain connectivity to drive significant change. Need for wood in by-pass channel. Where the constraints have been addressed by realigning and re-naturalising the channel at Grange Farm, habitat improvement has been more successful, although further intervention is required. Introduced gravel has been displaced in high flows and needs to be replaced with larger calibre material which will remain stable and restore the designed pool-riffle sequence. The abrupt change in valley floor gradient at this site constrained the design of the new channel and caused this situation; this is unusual and should not be a deterrent to similar river restoration schemes elsewhere.<br /> |Project title=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 5.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Ponton 6.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment}}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=River Witham Great Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=2.7<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total1 cost=141<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land Drainage<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphates<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Tree Hinging, Faggot Mattresses, Flow Deflectors<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing, cattle access points<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Weir Bypass, new meandering channel planform<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_River_Witham_:_Easton&diff=49523 2024-02-27T09:48:42Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.82943474779571, -0.6255157090478636<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Easton.png<br /> |Picture description=Post Restoration<br /> |Project summary=Weir removal to restore bed gradient; channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps) and earth, turf and silt filled log- or faggot-fronted enclosures; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by reprofiling eroded banks; excavation of pools in the river bed; increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; and fencing to prevent bank erosion by livestock.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The pre-project surveys and assessments led to the identification of the following objectives for the enhancement scheme:<br />  Reduce the impact of sediment inputs as a result of erosion caused by livestock.<br />  Repair eroded banks and protect them from erosion in the future.<br />  Trap sediment already in the system.<br />  Improve flows and natural cleansing of spawning gravels.<br />  Improve light levels in over-shaded sections.<br />  Improve habitat for trout, coarse fish and native white-clawed crayfish.<br />  Ensure that historic features within the Grade II Listed Historic Park and Garden are protected.<br /> Three separate schemes based on these objectives were prepared.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=In addition to the established annual fish monitoring programme downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge, visual inspections of the enhanced reach will be undertaken, and the fixed point photographic record will be updated to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream enhancements and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Post-works redd (trout spawning nest) surveys were undertaken upstream and downstream of Easton Lane. 6 redds were located in the upstream (Easton Park) section, but none were located downstream. These surveys provide a baseline for future monitoring.<br /> |Lessons learn=1. The greatest detrimental impact upon river habitat is the legacy of past channel engineering. Straightening and widening of the channel and lowering of the river bed have disrupted/destroyed the natural pool-riffle sequence and disconnected the floodplain. The process of the river recovering these natural characteristics is very slow (centuries) because of the naturally low energy of the river and limited supply of coarse sediment.<br /> <br /> 2. Habitat improvement measures within the existing channel have generally been unsuccessful. Installed in-stream structures have not had the desired effect of creating scour and producing depth variation. This is because of the resistant nature of the predominantly clay substrate, loss of sediment (gravel) to historic channel engineering and lack of sediment (gravel) supply/retention within the present channel dimensions. Introduced brushwood and large woody material have improved cover and fish-holding habitat, but have not fundamentally changed the channel shape.<br /> <br /> 3. The weir removal at Easton has restored fish passage and better habitat to the formerly impounded reach upstream, although the above constraints (point 1) remain. Trout numbers observed in this reach indicate a recovery from past pollution incidents.<br /> |Project title=Upper River Witham : Easton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper River Witham Easton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=01/10/2013<br /> |Total cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=66<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Weir Removal, Berms, Flow Deflectors, Tree Hinging<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_River_Witham_:_Easton&diff=49522 2024-02-27T09:45:37Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.82943474779571, -0.6255157090478636<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Easton.png<br /> |Picture description=Post Restoration<br /> |Project summary=Weir removal to restore bed gradient; channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps) and earth, turf and silt filled log- or faggot-fronted enclosures; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by reprofiling eroded banks; excavation of pools in the river bed; increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; and fencing to prevent bank erosion by livestock.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The pre-project surveys and assessments led to the identification of the following objectives for the enhancement scheme:<br />  Reduce the impact of sediment inputs as a result of erosion caused by livestock.<br />  Repair eroded banks and protect them from erosion in the future.<br />  Trap sediment already in the system.<br />  Improve flows and natural cleansing of spawning gravels.<br />  Improve light levels in over-shaded sections.<br />  Improve habitat for trout, coarse fish and native white-clawed crayfish.<br />  Ensure that historic features within the Grade II Listed Historic Park and Garden are protected.<br /> Three separate schemes based on these objectives were prepared.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=In addition to the established annual fish monitoring programme downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge, visual inspections of the enhanced reach will be undertaken, and the fixed point photographic record will be updated to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream enhancements and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Post-works redd (trout spawning nest) surveys were undertaken upstream and downstream of Easton Lane. 6 redds were located in the upstream (Easton Park) section, but none were located downstream. These surveys provide a baseline for future monitoring.<br /> |Lessons learn=1. The greatest detrimental impact upon river habitat is the legacy of past channel engineering. Straightening and widening of the channel and lowering of the river bed have disrupted/destroyed the natural pool-riffle sequence and disconnected the floodplain. The process of the river recovering these natural characteristics is very slow (centuries) because of the naturally low energy of the river and limited supply of coarse sediment.<br /> <br /> 2. Habitat improvement measures within the existing channel have generally been unsuccessful. Installed in-stream structures have not had the desired effect of creating scour and producing depth variation. This is because of the resistant nature of the predominantly clay substrate, loss of sediment (gravel) to historic channel engineering and lack of sediment (gravel) supply/retention within the present channel dimensions. Introduced brushwood and large woody material have improved cover and fish-holding habitat, but have not fundamentally changed the channel shape.<br /> <br /> 3. The weir removal at Easton has restored fish passage and better habitat to the formerly impounded reach upstream, although the above constraints (point 1) remain. Trout numbers observed in this reach indicate a recovery from past pollution incidents.<br /> <br /> 4. Where the constraints have been addressed by realigning and re-naturalising the channel at Grange Farm, habitat improvement has been more successful, although further intervention is required. Introduced gravel has been displaced in high flows and needs to be replaced with larger calibre material which will remain stable and restore the designed pool-riffle sequence. The abrupt change in valley floor gradient at this site constrained the design of the new channel and caused this situation; this is unusual and should not be a deterrent to similar river restoration schemes elsewhere.<br /> |Project title=Upper River Witham : Easton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper River Witham Easton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=01/10/2013<br /> |Total cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=66<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Weir Removal, Berms, Flow Deflectors, Tree Hinging<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_River_Witham_:_Easton&diff=49521 2024-02-27T09:40:53Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.82943474779571, -0.6255157090478636<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Easton.png<br /> |Picture description=Post Restoration<br /> |Project summary=Weir removal to restore bed gradient; channel narrowing and flow deflection to create flow variation and beneficial bed scour using log flow deflectors (vanes), open and enclosed log/faggot and brushwood mattresses (silt-traps) and earth, turf and silt filled log- or faggot-fronted enclosures; creation of sections of 2-stage channel and enhancing marginal wetland habitat by reprofiling eroded banks; excavation of pools in the river bed; increasing in-stream woody habitat by securing existing deadwood and hinging and pinning (layering) live riverside trees; and fencing to prevent bank erosion by livestock.<br /> <br /> Project Objectives<br /> The pre-project surveys and assessments led to the identification of the following objectives for the enhancement scheme:<br />  Reduce the impact of sediment inputs as a result of erosion caused by livestock.<br />  Repair eroded banks and protect them from erosion in the future.<br />  Trap sediment already in the system.<br />  Improve flows and natural cleansing of spawning gravels.<br />  Improve light levels in over-shaded sections.<br />  Improve habitat for trout, coarse fish and native white-clawed crayfish.<br />  Ensure that historic features within the Grade II Listed Historic Park and Garden are protected.<br /> Three separate schemes based on these objectives were prepared.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=In addition to the established annual fish monitoring programme downstream of Easton Walled Garden and invertebrate sampling at Easton Lane Bridge, visual inspections of the enhanced reach will be undertaken, and the fixed point photographic record will be updated to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream enhancements and record any changes they are making to river morphology. Post-works redd (trout spawning nest) surveys were undertaken upstream and downstream of Easton Lane. 6 redds were located in the upstream (Easton Park) section, but none were located downstream. These surveys provide a baseline for future monitoring.<br /> |Lessons learn=Need for gravel and floodplain connectivity in addition to these techniques to drive real change.<br /> |Project title=Upper River Witham : Easton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 2.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 3.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Easton 4.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper River Witham Easton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Upper Witham Headwater to confluence Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=No<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Project started=01/10/2013<br /> |Total cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=66<br /> |Funding sources=EA<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Weir Removal, Berms, Flow Deflectors, Tree Hinging<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Fencing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Easton Case Study v2 Final 220415 opt.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Cringle_Floodplain_Restoration_Project&diff=49520 2024-02-27T09:37:50Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.824834336618046, -0.6487210410023536<br /> |Kml file=Upper Cringle Project Map SK9077625837toSK9160026376.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=lincsrivers.org.uk/upper-cringle-brook-gets-a-makeover/?msclkid=6925b300d11011ecbd85ed27680329e8<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Talton<br /> |Main contact id=LincsRivers<br /> |Contact organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=lincsrivers.org.uk<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Before and After Collage.png<br /> |Picture description=Upper Cringle Brook Before and After Collagee<br /> |Project summary=The Limestone Becks are located over a 3,000km2 limestone ridge in the west of Lincolnshire and are supplied by consistent flows of high-quality groundwater. They are isolated and unique, and if in good condition, have potential to support a rich aquatic flora and fauna, rarely found in Eastern England. <br /> Cringle Brook is a 12km limestone beck exemplifying both good and poor river habitat. The lower sections of the Brook remain relatively natural whilst the Upper Cringle Brook, historically straightened and deepened, faces a range of pressures including deterioration in habitat quality through changing management practices and diffuse pollution from the wider catchment, damaging it to such an extent it is substantially poorer ecologically. <br /> <br /> The current overall WFD status is moderate with invertebrates and macrophytes at moderate (2019 classification).<br /> <br /> Cringle Brook is also a catchment for supply of public drinking water, currently closed due to elevated pesticide concentrations. The site is also downstream of Skillington village waste-water treatment plant where phosphate treatment options are limited. A separate project is being undertaken in the wider catchment to address diffuse pollution however, it is anticipated that the new wetland areas created by this project will help provide some degree of natural attenuation.<br /> <br /> The project location at the top of the Witham catchment was deemed ideal as natural processes could be used to make space for water and help trap sediment. This project included 1km of the Upper Cringle Brook, which was un-farmed, dry floodplain, with the deepened and straightened channel running along the Southern edge. The channel and floodplain were completely disconnected, and the channel habitat was very poor.<br /> <br /> Previous experience in the Upper Witham Catchment has shown that the only effective option for restoration is to provide the river with a floodplain. In-channel measures alone would not make a worthwhile improvement. This is why other options were not considered. <br /> <br /> 1 ha (the maximum area agreed by the landowner) of inset floodplain was excavated along the 1km stretch with secondary channels, back channels and ponds added and some trees from the site were pulled across the new floodplain, enabling natural processes to be restarted, creating diversity and sinuosity in the channel. Without this action, the habitat will not be improved and a WFD reason for failure will not be addressed. Spoil generated from the excavations was used on the same site to create a 1.7 ha wildflower area adjacent to the floodplain.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A Morph River Condition assessment survey was carried out before with a follow up survey later in the summer and a further one in a year. Ecological surveys also carried out prior to project will be compared to surveys to be carried out next year to assess ecological impact. Results are expected to show a significant improvement in habitat and ecology along the restored 1km stretch. Drone video footage was recorded before and afterwards showing the extent of the works and the increased water storage capacity of the newly instated inset floodplains. Fixed point photography of the floodplain over time will be used to study sediment deposition. Phosphate levels will also be measured upstream between water treatment works and project site and compared with downstream of site to monitor ‘polishing’ effect of floodplain reconnection along the stretch. Baseline data from EA gauging stations should provide evidence of the volume of water storage made available by the and the possible reduction of peak flows in Upper Witham system.<br /> |Lessons learn=Head waters should not be discounted as a place to look to restore even when restoration seems unfeasible due to current condition. The benefits can be significant.<br /> <br /> When lowering floodplains, considering how the material can be landscaped on site and used for other benefits e.g., wildflower habitats but understanding that the site to look a bit stark whilst this establishes.<br /> <br /> The value of an experienced site supervisor and a skilled contractor cannot be underestimated.<br /> Confidence in the contractor's experience enabled them free reign to be creative within the constraints of the given inset floodplain parameters, and to observe and work with the river gives a more organic approach (regular site checks ensure all going to plan and landowner completely happy). <br /> <br /> Concise and transparent communication with landowner to build trust is key, enabling a more flexible approach on the broader principles of work as they were set out, facilitating a more natural approach from the contractors on the ground.<br /> |Project title=Upper Cringle Floodplain Restoration Project<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Before restoration pic early Feb 22.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Post restoration pic late Feb 22.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Before Photo.jpeg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=After photo.JPG<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051560<br /> |WFD (national) typology=limestone river<br /> |WFD water body name=Cringle Brook - Upper<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Straightened, Over deepened,<br /> |Reference morphology=Anastomosing,<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Anastomosing,<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater,<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay, Gravel,<br /> |River corridor land use=Grassland,<br /> |Average bankfull channel width category=Less than 2 m<br /> |Average bankfull channel depth category=Less than 0.5 m<br /> |Mean discharge category=Less than 0.1 m³/s<br /> |Average channel gradient category=0.001 - 0.01<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1000<br /> |Project started=03/02/2022<br /> |Works started=2022/02/03<br /> |Works completed=2022/04/30<br /> |Project completed=2022/04/30<br /> |Total cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=98<br /> |Benefit to cost ratio=2.97<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency,<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Invst and design cost=14<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Stakeholder1 engagement cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Wrk and supervision cost=84<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Post-project1 management and maintenance cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Monitoring1 cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Works were paid for by a Water Environment Improvement Fund Grant and land was contributed to the project by the landowner.<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Channel pattern/planform,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Invertebrates, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations, Oxygen balance,<br /> |Other motivation=Landscape enhancement,<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Introducing large woody debris,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Lowering of floodplain, Wildflower meadows,<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Back channel created, Channel naturalisation, Creation of an island, Creation of pond, Creation of backwater, Habitat creation,<br /> |Management interventions=Associated terrestrial habitat improvements,<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Channel pattern/planform<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 /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Invertebrates: Diversity<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<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=Upper Cringle Brook Restoration Case Study 2024 Update.pdf<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=lincsrivers.org.uk/upper-cringle-brook-gets-a-makeover/<br /> |Description=Press Release<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Upper_Cringle_Floodplain_Restoration_Project&diff=49519 2024-02-27T09:36:16Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Approved<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.824834336618046, -0.6487210410023536<br /> |Kml file=Upper Cringle Project Map SK9077625837toSK9160026376.png<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Project web site url=lincsrivers.org.uk/upper-cringle-brook-gets-a-makeover/?msclkid=6925b300d11011ecbd85ed27680329e8<br /> |Themes=Environmental flows and water resources, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Water quality<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Talton<br /> |Main contact id=LincsRivers<br /> |Contact organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Contact organisation url=lincsrivers.org.uk<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Before and After Collage.png<br /> |Picture description=Upper Cringle Brook Before and After Collagee<br /> |Project summary=The Limestone Becks are located over a 3,000km2 limestone ridge in the west of Lincolnshire and are supplied by consistent flows of high-quality groundwater. They are isolated and unique, and if in good condition, have potential to support a rich aquatic flora and fauna, rarely found in Eastern England. <br /> Cringle Brook is a 12km limestone beck exemplifying both good and poor river habitat. The lower sections of the Brook remain relatively natural whilst the Upper Cringle Brook, historically straightened and deepened, faces a range of pressures including deterioration in habitat quality through changing management practices and diffuse pollution from the wider catchment, damaging it to such an extent it is substantially poorer ecologically. <br /> <br /> The current overall WFD status is moderate with invertebrates and macrophytes at moderate (2019 classification).<br /> <br /> Cringle Brook is also a catchment for supply of public drinking water, currently closed due to elevated pesticide concentrations. The site is also downstream of Skillington village waste-water treatment plant where phosphate treatment options are limited. A separate project is being undertaken in the wider catchment to address diffuse pollution however, it is anticipated that the new wetland areas created by this project will help provide some degree of natural attenuation.<br /> <br /> The project location at the top of the Witham catchment was deemed ideal as natural processes could be used to make space for water and help trap sediment. This project included 1km of the Upper Cringle Brook, which was un-farmed, dry floodplain, with the deepened and straightened channel running along the Southern edge. The channel and floodplain were completely disconnected, and the channel habitat was very poor.<br /> <br /> Previous experience in the Upper Witham Catchment has shown that the only effective option for restoration is to provide the river with a floodplain. In-channel measures alone would not make a worthwhile improvement. This is why other options were not considered. <br /> <br /> 1 ha (the maximum area agreed by the landowner) of inset floodplain was excavated along the 1km stretch with secondary channels, back channels and ponds added and some trees from the site were pulled across the new floodplain, enabling natural processes to be restarted, creating diversity and sinuosity in the channel. Without this action, the habitat will not be improved and a WFD reason for failure will not be addressed. Spoil generated from the excavations was used on the same site to create a 1.7 ha wildflower area adjacent to the floodplain.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A Morph River Condition assessment survey was carried out before with a follow up survey later in the summer and a further one in a year. Ecological surveys also carried out prior to project will be compared to surveys to be carried out next year to assess ecological impact. Results are expected to show a significant improvement in habitat and ecology along the restored 1km stretch. Drone video footage was recorded before and afterwards showing the extent of the works and the increased water storage capacity of the newly instated inset floodplains. Fixed point photography of the floodplain over time will be used to study sediment deposition. Phosphate levels will also be measured upstream between water treatment works and project site and compared with downstream of site to monitor ‘polishing’ effect of floodplain reconnection along the stretch. Baseline data from EA gauging stations should provide evidence of the volume of water storage made available by the and the possible reduction of peak flows in Upper Witham system.<br /> |Lessons learn=Head waters should not be discounted as a place to look to restore even when restoration seems unfeasible due to current condition. The benefits can be significant.<br /> <br /> When lowering floodplains, considering how the material can be landscaped on site and used for other benefits e.g., wildflower habitats but understanding that the site to look a bit stark whilst this establishes.<br /> <br /> The value of an experienced site supervisor and a skilled contractor cannot be underestimated.<br /> Confidence in the contractor's experience enabled them free reign to be creative within the constraints of the given inset floodplain parameters, and to observe and work with the river gives a more organic approach (regular site checks ensure all going to plan and landowner completely happy). <br /> <br /> Concise and transparent communication with landowner to build trust is key, enabling a more flexible approach on the broader principles of work as they were set out, facilitating a more natural approach from the contractors on the ground.<br /> |Project title=Upper Cringle Floodplain Restoration Project<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Before restoration pic early Feb 22.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Post restoration pic late Feb 22.jpg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Before Photo.jpeg<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=After photo.JPG<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Upper Cringle Brook<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051560<br /> |WFD (national) typology=limestone river<br /> |WFD water body name=Cringle Brook - Upper<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Straightened, Over deepened,<br /> |Reference morphology=Anastomosing,<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Anastomosing,<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Groundwater,<br /> |Dominant substrate=Clay, Gravel,<br /> |River corridor land use=Grassland,<br /> |Average bankfull channel width category=Less than 2 m<br /> |Average bankfull channel depth category=Less than 0.5 m<br /> |Mean discharge category=Less than 0.1 m³/s<br /> |Average channel gradient category=0.001 - 0.01<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1000<br /> |Project started=03/02/2022<br /> |Works started=2022/02/03<br /> |Works completed=2022/04/30<br /> |Project completed=2022/04/30<br /> |Total cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=98<br /> |Benefit to cost ratio=2.97<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency,<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Invst and design cost=14<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Stakeholder1 engagement cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Stakeholder engagement Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=50 - 100 k€<br /> |Wrk and supervision cost=84<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Post-project1 management and maintenance cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Post-project management and maintenance Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Monitoring1 cost category=Less than 1 k€<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=Lincolnshire Rivers Trust<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Supplementary funding information=Works were paid for by a Water Environment Improvement Fund Grant and land was contributed to the project by the landowner.<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Hydromorphological quality elements=Channel pattern/planform,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Invertebrates, Macrophytes and/or phytobenthos: Average abundance,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Nutrient concentrations, Oxygen balance,<br /> |Other motivation=Landscape enhancement,<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Introducing large woody debris,<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Lowering of floodplain, Wildflower meadows,<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=Back channel created, Channel naturalisation, Creation of an island, Creation of pond, Creation of backwater, Habitat creation,<br /> |Management interventions=Associated terrestrial habitat improvements,<br /> }}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Hydromorphological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Channel pattern/planform<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 /> {{Biological quality elements header}}<br /> {{Biological quality element table row<br /> |Element=Invertebrates: Diversity<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<br /> {{End table}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}<br /> {{Physico-chemical quality element table row<br /> |Element=Nutrient concentrations<br /> |Monitored before=No<br /> |Monitored after=Yes<br /> |Qualitative monitoring=No<br /> |Quantitative monitoring=Yes<br /> |Control site used=Yes<br /> |Result=Awaiting results<br /> }}<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=Upper Cringle Brook Restoration Case Study 2024 Update.pdf<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional Documents end}}<br /> {{Additional links and references header}}<br /> {{Additional links and references<br /> |Link=lincsrivers.org.uk/upper-cringle-brook-gets-a-makeover/<br /> |Description=Press Release<br /> }}<br /> {{Additional links and references footer}}<br /> {{Supplementary Information}}<br /> {{Toggle content end}}</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Stainby_Road,_Colsterworth&diff=49518 2024-02-27T09:33:34Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.80026977522567, -0.6256366590738383<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Talton<br /> |Main contact id=N/A<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=eastmercia.org/<br /> |Partner organisations=Environment Agency,<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Picture description=October 2023 just after construction<br /> |Project summary=This project was delivered by East Mercia Rivers Trust on land owned by Buckminster Estates. Although the Upper Witham which flows through the site had retained a meandering course, the river had become very disconnected from its floodplain with very little gravel in the channel. The aim of the project was to improve the river’s connectivity with the floodplain and in the process, enhance both river and floodplain habitat across the site. This was achieved by the lowering of areas of floodplain across the site and the introduction of limestone gravel riffles and point bars. The selective addition of woody material at certain locations further improved habitat.<br /> <br /> A backwater was created along with floodplain ponds and the enhancement of spring tributaries from the valley sides allowed the creation of ground water fed scrapes. All material removed from the valley bottom was landscaped on the valley sides outside of the floodplain and planted with wildflower seed.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Project is very recent so just establishing. We have baseline data for fish and river habitat survey as well as detailed drone topo. Post monitoring work will commence from 24 on wards.<br /> <br /> River condition assessment pre and post delivery has taken place.<br /> |Lessons learn=Allow plenty of time for the development and delivery of a large project such as this where the ecological window for delivery is very limited. Involve all stakeholders at the earliest possible stage of development. Due to the sensitivity of the site, archaeology was a major factor and where this is the case adequate funding should be accounted for to the help manage this risk. Future management of the site is very important to ensure that high quality floodplain habitats are created. Here, the tenant farmer will continue with low density, conservation cattle grazing. The project was carefully designed to not back up any water onto the field immediately upstream.<br /> |Project title=Stainby Road, Colsterworth<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly installed Lincs Limestone Gravel Feature<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Post construction October 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 3.jpg<br /> |Caption=New channel form post construction<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=New Ground Water Fed Wetland.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Pre project habitat photo.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Stainby Lane Colsterworth<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - Headwaters to confluence of Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Meandering planform but with very poor connectivity and no gravel.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook - Very well connected floodplain. Wood and gravel abundant.<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Floodplain connectivity improved, gravel and wood added.<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water Fed but quite responsive due to modifications.<br /> |Dominant substrate=Pre project - Clay and fine silts.<br /> |River corridor land use=Grazed - Cattle.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1300<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=318<br /> |Funding sources=EA, Anglian Water<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=1 - 10 k€<br /> |Invst and design cost=30<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Talton<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank Lowering, gravel and wood added<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Ground water fed wetlands<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=In-set floodplains created, bend widening, bank reprofiling.<br /> |Management interventions=Conservation grazing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Stainby Road Colsterworth - Restoration Project - Case Study.pdf<br /> |Description=Project case study.<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Stainby_Road,_Colsterworth&diff=49517 2024-02-27T09:31:19Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.80026977522567, -0.6256366590738383<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Talton<br /> |Main contact id=N/A<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=eastmercia.org/<br /> |Partner organisations=Environment Agency,<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Picture description=October 2023 just after construction<br /> |Project summary=This project was delivered by East Mercia Rivers Trust on land owned by Buckminster Estates. Although the Upper Witham which flows through the site had retained a meandering course, the river had become very disconnected from its floodplain with very little gravel in the channel. The aim of the project was to improve the river’s connectivity with the floodplain and in the process, enhance both river and floodplain habitat across the site. This was achieved by the lowering of areas of floodplain across the site and the introduction of limestone gravel riffles and point bars. The selective addition of woody material at certain locations further improved habitat.<br /> <br /> A backwater was created along with floodplain ponds and the enhancement of spring tributaries from the valley sides allowed the creation of ground water fed scrapes. All material removed from the valley bottom was landscaped on the valley sides outside of the floodplain and planted with wildflower seed.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Project is very recent so just establishing. We have baseline data for fish and river habitat survey as well as detailed drone topo. Post monitoring work will commence from 24 on wards.<br /> |Lessons learn=Allow plenty of time for the development and delivery of a large project such as this where the ecological window for delivery is very limited. Involve all stakeholders at the earliest possible stage of development. Due to the sensitivity of the site, archaeology was a major factor and where this is the case adequate funding should be accounted for to the help manage this risk. Future management of the site is very important to ensure that high quality floodplain habitats are created. Here, the tenant farmer will continue with low density, conservation cattle grazing. The project was carefully designed to not back up any water onto the field immediately upstream.<br /> |Project title=Stainby Road, Colsterworth<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly installed Lincs Limestone Gravel Feature<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Post construction October 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 3.jpg<br /> |Caption=New channel form post construction<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=New Ground Water Fed Wetland.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Pre project habitat photo.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Stainby Lane Colsterworth<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - Headwaters to confluence of Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Meandering planform but with very poor connectivity and no gravel.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook - Very well connected floodplain. Wood and gravel abundant.<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Floodplain connectivity improved, gravel and wood added.<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water Fed but quite responsive due to modifications.<br /> |Dominant substrate=Pre project - Clay and fine silts.<br /> |River corridor land use=Grazed - Cattle.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1300<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=318<br /> |Funding sources=EA, Anglian Water<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=1 - 10 k€<br /> |Invst and design cost=30<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Talton<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank Lowering, gravel and wood added<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Ground water fed wetlands<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=In-set floodplains created, bend widening, bank reprofiling.<br /> |Management interventions=Conservation grazing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Stainby Road Colsterworth - Restoration Project - Case Study.pdf<br /> |Description=Project case study.<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Stainby_Road,_Colsterworth&diff=49516 2024-02-27T09:30:21Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.80026977522567, -0.6256366590738383<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Gail<br /> |Main contact surname=Talton<br /> |Main contact id=N/A<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=eastmercia.org/<br /> |Partner organisations=Environment Agency,<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=yes<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Colsterworth October 2023.JPG<br /> |Picture description=October 2023 just after construction<br /> |Project summary=This project was delivered by East Mercia Rivers Trust on land owned by Buckminster Estates. Although the Upper Witham which flows through the site had retained a meandering course, the river had become very disconnected from its floodplain with very little gravel in the channel. The aim of the project was to improve the river’s connectivity with the floodplain and in the process, enhance both river and floodplain habitat across the site. This was achieved by the lowering of areas of floodplain across the site and the introduction of limestone gravel riffles and point bars. The selective addition of woody material at certain locations further improved habitat.<br /> <br /> A backwater was created along with floodplain ponds and the enhancement of spring tributaries from the valley sides allowed the creation of ground water fed scrapes. All material removed from the valley bottom was landscaped on the valley sides outside of the floodplain and planted with wildflower seed.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=Project is very recent so just establishing. We have baseline data for fish and river habitat survey as well as detailed drone topo. Post monitoring work will commence from 24 on wards.<br /> |Lessons learn=Allow plenty of time for the development and delivery of a large project such as this where the ecological window for delivery is very limited. Involve all stakeholders at the earliest possible stage of development. Due to the sensitivity of the site, archaeology was a major factor and where this is the case adequate funding should be accounted for to the help manage this risk. Future management of the site is very important to ensure that high quality floodplain habitats are created. Here, the tenant farmer will continue with low density, conservation cattle grazing. The project was carefully designed to not back up any water onto the field immediately upstream.<br /> |Project title=Stainby Road, Colsterworth<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Newly installed Lincs Limestone Gravel Feature<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 2.jpg<br /> |Caption=Post construction October 2023<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 3.jpg<br /> |Caption=New channel form post construction<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Col 4.jpg<br /> |Caption=New Ground Water Fed Wetland.<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Pic1.jpg<br /> |Caption=Pre project habitat photo.<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Stainby Lane Colsterworth<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030051570<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham - Headwaters to confluence of Cringle Brook<br /> |Pre-project morphology=Meandering planform but with very poor connectivity and no gravel.<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook - Very well connected floodplain. Wood and gravel abundant.<br /> |Desired post project morphology=Floodplain connectivity improved, gravel and wood added.<br /> |Heavily modified water body=No<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout<br /> |Dominant hydrology=Ground Water Fed but quite responsive due to modifications.<br /> |Dominant substrate=Pre project - Clay and fine silts.<br /> |River corridor land use=Grazed - Cattle.<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1300<br /> |Total cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=318<br /> |Funding sources=EA, Anglian Water<br /> |Investigation and design cost category=1 - 10 k€<br /> |Invst and design cost=30<br /> |Investigation and design Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Investigation and design Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Works1 and supervision cost category=100 - 500 k€<br /> |Works and supervision Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Works and supervision Other contact surname=Talton<br /> |Monitoring Lead organisation=East Mercia Rivers Trust<br /> |Monitoring Other contact forename=Gail<br /> |Monitoring Other contact surname=Talton<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=Bank Lowering, gravel and wood added<br /> |Floodplain / River corridor=Ground water fed wetlands<br /> |Planform / Channel pattern=In-set floodplains created, bend widening, bank reprofiling.<br /> |Management interventions=Conservation grazing<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Stainby Road Colsterworth - Restoration Project - Case Study.pdf<br /> |Description=Project case study.<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Little_Ponton&diff=49408 2024-02-19T14:42:41Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=52.872697880892936, -0.622609752818255<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Picture description=Brushwood mattress in restoration section<br /> |Project summary=Project Objectives <br /> <br /> • To reduce fine sediment inputs caused by bank erosion. <br /> • Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river. <br /> • To improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk. <br /> • To improve in-stream habitats and the bed structure to benefit fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish. <br /> <br /> The Enhancement Scheme <br /> The enhancement scheme was completed in two phases. A short section downstream of Great Ponton Mill was completed in February 2013 and the second, the continuation downstream to Whalebone Lane, Little Ponton, was completed in mid-August 2014. Prior to the enhancement work the in-river habitat was in generally good condition, however opportunities were identified to provide additional cover and food supply for a range of aquatic organisms together with measures to modify the flow to improve the structure of the riverbed and reduce the deposition of fine sediment. <br /> <br /> The works consisted of brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes, improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A fixed point photographic record has been set up and this, together with visual inspections, will be used to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream structures. A programme of fine sediment sampling and Wolman Pebble Counts to monitor the coarser riverbed material has also been established. In combination they will determine and record changes to river morphology as the result of the works. The established crayfish monitoring site at the bottom of the reach is already surveyed every 2 years and this will give an indication of the impact of the scheme on crayfish numbers. Finally additional ongoing invertebrate sampling will identify any ecological and water quality changes that occur.<br /> |Lessons learn=Learning lessons from the earlier GAAFFS work, willow logs were was not used in the subsequent phase of enhancement work. Instead logs, branches and brushwood generated by the management of other riverside tree<br /> and shrub species were used to create a variety of structures to protect vulnerable banks from erosion, narrow the channel and trap suspended fine sediment.<br /> |Project title=Little Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 1.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 2.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 3.png<br /> |Caption=Post Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Little Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1620<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=27000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes.<br /> |Management interventions=Improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Little Ponton Case Study (final) v2 010316.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Little_Ponton&diff=49407 2024-02-19T14:40:24Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=53.152080986038776, -0.6362831748251385<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Picture description=Brushwood mattress in restoration section<br /> |Project summary=Project Objectives <br /> <br /> • To reduce fine sediment inputs caused by bank erosion. <br /> • Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river. <br /> • To improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk. <br /> • To improve in-stream habitats and the bed structure to benefit fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish. <br /> <br /> The Enhancement Scheme <br /> The enhancement scheme was completed in two phases. A short section downstream of Great Ponton Mill was completed in February 2013 and the second, the continuation downstream to Whalebone Lane, Little Ponton, was completed in mid-August 2014. Prior to the enhancement work the in-river habitat was in generally good condition, however opportunities were identified to provide additional cover and food supply for a range of aquatic organisms together with measures to modify the flow to improve the structure of the riverbed and reduce the deposition of fine sediment. <br /> <br /> The works consisted of brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes, improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A fixed point photographic record has been set up and this, together with visual inspections, will be used to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream structures. A programme of fine sediment sampling and Wolman Pebble Counts to monitor the coarser riverbed material has also been established. In combination they will determine and record changes to river morphology as the result of the works. The established crayfish monitoring site at the bottom of the reach is already surveyed every 2 years and this will give an indication of the impact of the scheme on crayfish numbers. Finally additional ongoing invertebrate sampling will identify any ecological and water quality changes that occur.<br /> |Lessons learn=Learning lessons from the earlier GAAFFS work, willow logs were was not used in the subsequent phase of enhancement work. Instead logs, branches and brushwood generated by the management of other riverside tree<br /> and shrub species were used to create a variety of structures to protect vulnerable banks from erosion, narrow the channel and trap suspended fine sediment.<br /> |Project title=Little Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 1.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 2.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 3.png<br /> |Caption=Post Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Little Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1620<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=27000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes.<br /> |Management interventions=Improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<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 /> {{Case study documents<br /> |File name=Little Ponton Case Study (final) v2 010316.pdf<br /> |Description=Project Case Study<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=File:Little_Ponton_Case_Study_(final)_v2_010316.pdf&diff=49406 2024-02-19T14:40:05Z

<p>Dhutchinson: Project Case Study</p> <hr /> <div>Project Case Study</div>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Little_Ponton&diff=49405 2024-02-19T14:38:59Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=53.152080986038776, -0.6362831748251385<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Picture description=Brushwood mattress in restoration section<br /> |Project summary=Project Objectives <br /> <br /> • To reduce fine sediment inputs caused by bank erosion. <br /> • Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river. <br /> • To improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk. <br /> • To improve in-stream habitats and the bed structure to benefit fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish. <br /> <br /> The Enhancement Scheme <br /> The enhancement scheme was completed in two phases. A short section downstream of Great Ponton Mill was completed in February 2013 and the second, the continuation downstream to Whalebone Lane, Little Ponton, was completed in mid-August 2014. Prior to the enhancement work the in-river habitat was in generally good condition, however opportunities were identified to provide additional cover and food supply for a range of aquatic organisms together with measures to modify the flow to improve the structure of the riverbed and reduce the deposition of fine sediment. <br /> <br /> The works consisted of brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes, improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A fixed point photographic record has been set up and this, together with visual inspections, will be used to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream structures. A programme of fine sediment sampling and Wolman Pebble Counts to monitor the coarser riverbed material has also been established. In combination they will determine and record changes to river morphology as the result of the works. The established crayfish monitoring site at the bottom of the reach is already surveyed every 2 years and this will give an indication of the impact of the scheme on crayfish numbers. Finally additional ongoing invertebrate sampling will identify any ecological and water quality changes that occur.<br /> |Lessons learn=Learning lessons from the earlier GAAFFS work, willow logs were was not used in the subsequent phase of enhancement work. Instead logs, branches and brushwood generated by the management of other riverside tree<br /> and shrub species were used to create a variety of structures to protect vulnerable banks from erosion, narrow the channel and trap suspended fine sediment.<br /> |Project title=Little Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 1.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 2.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 3.png<br /> |Caption=Post Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Little Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1620<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=27000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<br /> }}<br /> {{Measures<br /> |Bank and bed modifications measure=brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes.<br /> |Management interventions=Improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<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>

Dhutchinson https://restorerivers.eu/wiki/index.php?title=Case_study:Little_Ponton&diff=49404 2024-02-19T14:38:06Z

<p>Dhutchinson: </p> <hr /> <div>{{Case study status<br /> |Approval status=Draft<br /> }}<br /> {{Location<br /> |Location=53.152080986038776, -0.6362831748251385<br /> }}<br /> {{Project overview<br /> |Status=Complete<br /> |Themes=Fisheries, Habitat and biodiversity<br /> |Country=England<br /> |Main contact forename=Matt<br /> |Main contact surname=Parr<br /> |Contact organisation=Environment Agency<br /> |Contact organisation url=www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency<br /> |Partner organisations=Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section<br /> |Name of parent multi-site project=Upper Witham Restoration<br /> |Multi-site=No<br /> |Project picture=Little Ponton 4.png<br /> |Picture description=Brushwood mattress in restoration section<br /> |Project summary=Project Objectives <br /> <br /> • To reduce fine sediment inputs caused by bank erosion. <br /> • Trap mobile fine sediments already in the river. <br /> • To improve conveyance during higher flows and reduce flood risk. <br /> • To improve in-stream habitats and the bed structure to benefit fish and invertebrates, including white-clawed crayfish. <br /> <br /> The Enhancement Scheme <br /> The enhancement scheme was completed in two phases. A short section downstream of Great Ponton Mill was completed in February 2013 and the second, the continuation downstream to Whalebone Lane, Little Ponton, was completed in mid-August 2014. Prior to the enhancement work the in-river habitat was in generally good condition, however opportunities were identified to provide additional cover and food supply for a range of aquatic organisms together with measures to modify the flow to improve the structure of the riverbed and reduce the deposition of fine sediment. <br /> <br /> The works consisted of brushwood mattress installation, Hinged Trees, Log Flow Deflectors and Vanes, improved stock fencing and ford refurbishment.<br /> |Monitoring surveys and results=A fixed point photographic record has been set up and this, together with visual inspections, will be used to monitor the integrity and performance of the in-stream structures. A programme of fine sediment sampling and Wolman Pebble Counts to monitor the coarser riverbed material has also been established. In combination they will determine and record changes to river morphology as the result of the works. The established crayfish monitoring site at the bottom of the reach is already surveyed every 2 years and this will give an indication of the impact of the scheme on crayfish numbers. Finally additional ongoing invertebrate sampling will identify any ecological and water quality changes that occur.<br /> |Lessons learn=Learning lessons from the earlier GAAFFS work, willow logs were was not used in the subsequent phase of enhancement work. Instead logs, branches and brushwood generated by the management of other riverside tree<br /> and shrub species were used to create a variety of structures to protect vulnerable banks from erosion, narrow the channel and trap suspended fine sediment.<br /> |Project title=Little Ponton<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery}}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 1.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 2.png<br /> |Caption=Post restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Case study image<br /> |File name=Little Ponton 3.png<br /> |Caption=Post Restoration<br /> }}<br /> {{Image gallery end}}<br /> {{Toggle button}}<br /> {{Toggle content start}}<br /> {{Case study subcatchment<br /> |Subcatchment=Upper Witham<br /> }}<br /> {{Site<br /> |Name=Little Ponton<br /> |WFD water body code=GB105030056780,<br /> |WFD water body name=Witham Confluence Cringle Brook to Confluence Brant<br /> |Reference morphology=Lower Cringle Brook<br /> |Heavily modified water body=Yes<br /> |Protected species present=Yes<br /> |Invasive species present=No<br /> |Species=Native Crayfish / Brown Trout,<br /> }}<br /> {{Project background<br /> |Reach length directly affected=1620<br /> |Project started=01/02/2013<br /> |Total cost category=10 - 50 k€<br /> |Total1 cost=27000<br /> |Funding sources=Environment Agency<br /> }}<br /> {{Motivations<br /> |Specific mitigation=Land drainage,<br /> |Biological quality elements=Fish,<br /> |Physico-chemical quality elements=Phosphate<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>

Dhutchinson