Case study:River Ray Rural Flooding - Revision history

Alexrrc at 16:37, 5 November 2018

2018-11-05T16:37:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:37, 5 November 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Case study status		{{Case study status
	\|Approval status=~~Draft~~		\|Approval status=Approved
	}}		}}
	{{Location		{{Location

Alexrrc at 16:36, 5 November 2018

2018-11-05T16:36:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:36, 5 November 2018
Line 47:		Line 47:
	\|Specific mitigation=Flood risk management,		\|Specific mitigation=Flood risk management,
	}}		}}
	{{Measures}}		{{Measures
			\|Other technical measure=Surface drainage systems improved,
			}}
	{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}		{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
	{{End table}}		{{End table}}

Alexrrc at 16:30, 5 November 2018

2018-11-05T16:30:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:30, 5 November 2018
Line 44:		Line 44:
	\|Funding sources=National Farmers Union		\|Funding sources=National Farmers Union
	}}		}}
	{{Motivations}}		{{Motivations
			\|Specific mitigation=Flood risk management,
			}}
	{{Measures}}		{{Measures}}
	{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}		{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}

Alexrrc at 16:29, 5 November 2018

2018-11-05T16:29:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:29, 5 November 2018
Line 39:		Line 39:
	\|Invasive species present=No		\|Invasive species present=No
	}}		}}
	{{Project background}}		{{Project background
			\|Project started=2014
			\|Total1 cost=£33k
			\|Funding sources=National Farmers Union
			}}
	{{Motivations}}		{{Motivations}}
	{{Measures}}		{{Measures}}

Alexrrc at 16:27, 5 November 2018

2018-11-05T16:27:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:27, 5 November 2018
Line 33:		Line 33:
	{{Toggle content start}}		{{Toggle content start}}
	{{Case study subcatchment}}		{{Case study subcatchment}}
	{{Site}}		{{Site
			\|Name=Ray
			\|Heavily modified water body=No
			\|Protected species present=No
			\|Invasive species present=No
			}}
	{{Project background}}		{{Project background}}
	{{Motivations}}		{{Motivations}}

Alexrrc at 16:24, 5 November 2018

2018-11-05T16:24:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:24, 5 November 2018
Line 6:		Line 6:
	}}		}}
	{{Project overview		{{Project overview
	~~\|Project title=River Ray Rural Flooding~~
	\|Status=Complete		\|Status=Complete
			\|Project web site url=www.therrc.co.uk/sites/default/files/projects/34_riverray.pdf
	\|Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality		\|Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality
	\|Country=England		\|Country=England
Line 14:		Line 14:
	\|Contact organisation=National Farmers Union		\|Contact organisation=National Farmers Union
	\|Contact organisation url=www.nfuonline.com/home/		\|Contact organisation url=www.nfuonline.com/home/
			\|Partner organisations=JBA Consulting,
	\|Multi-site=No		\|Multi-site=No
			\|Project picture=34 Ray.png
			\|Project summary=In light of the winter 2013 to 2014 flooding, farmers asked the National Farmers Union (NFU) for assistance in developing pragmatic options to help reduce flood damages to agricultural businesses and rural communities. In an attempt to build consensus on developing community driven approaches to flood and coastal risk management (FCRM), a 2-part investigation based on the River Ray catchment in Oxfordshire was made by NFU South East.
			• A survey of the attitudes of farmers in the catchment to conventional and novel approaches to flood risk management received responses from approximately 47% of all catchment landowners.
			• A hydrological modelling study considered the relative impacts of various land use and land management scenarios on the severity of flooding events. Scenarios included comparisons between watercourse maintenance, pond creation/enhanced flood storage, soil compaction, urbanisation effects and climate change predictions.
			The unconstrained modelling scenarios predicted:
			• damage reductions of 61% (agricultural) and 64% (property) from watercourse maintenance
			• 31–37% reduction in agricultural damages from additional pond storage
			• ±34% (agriculture) and ±166% (urban) damage sensitivity from unconstrained soil compaction
			• 15% damage increase from climate change
			These are not 'real world' predictions but indicate the relative gains possible from a combination of approaches where consensus can be reached.
			\|Project title=River Ray Rural Flooding
	}}		}}
	{{Image gallery}}		{{Image gallery}}

Alexrrc: Created page with "{{Case study status |Approval status=Draft }} {{Location |Location=51.84534859999999, -1.1548345999999583 }} {{Project overview |Project title=River Ray Rural Flooding |Status..."

2018-11-05T16:17:26Z

Created page with "{{Case study status |Approval status=Draft }} {{Location |Location=51.84534859999999, -1.1548345999999583 }} {{Project overview |Project title=River Ray Rural Flooding |Status..."

New page

{{Case study status
|Approval status=Draft
}}
{{Location
|Location=51.84534859999999, -1.1548345999999583
}}
{{Project overview
|Project title=River Ray Rural Flooding
|Status=Complete
|Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Land use management - agriculture, Water quality
|Country=England
|Main contact forename=Tom
|Main contact surname=Ormesher
|Contact organisation=National Farmers Union
|Contact organisation url=www.nfuonline.com/home/
|Multi-site=No
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Image gallery end}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Case study subcatchment}}
{{Site}}
{{Project background}}
{{Motivations}}
{{Measures}}
{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}
{{End table}}
{{Biological quality elements header}}
{{End table}}
{{Physico-chemical quality elements header}}
{{End table}}
{{Other responses header}}
{{End table}}
{{Monitoring documents}}
{{Monitoring documents end}}
{{Additional Documents}}
{{Additional Documents end}}
{{Additional links and references header}}
{{Additional links and references footer}}
{{Supplementary Information}}
{{Toggle content end}}