Case study:Tall River - Revision history

Alexrrc at 12:13, 6 June 2017

2017-06-06T12:13:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:13, 6 June 2017
Line 11:		Line 11:
	\|Main contact forename=Judith		\|Main contact forename=Judith
	\|Main contact surname=Bankhead		\|Main contact surname=Bankhead
	\|Contact organisation=Rivers Agency, Northern Ireland (DARDNI)		\|Contact organisation=Rivers Agency Northern Ireland (DARDNI)
	\|Contact organisation url=www.dardni.gov.uk/index/rivers.htm		\|Contact organisation url=www.dardni.gov.uk/index/rivers.htm
	\|Multi-site=No		\|Multi-site=No

Alexrrc at 12:08, 5 June 2017

2017-06-05T12:08:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 5 June 2017
Line 20:		Line 20:
	A repeat RCS carried out two years post works indicated an increase in emergent vegetation and macrophyte diversity. The bays are inundated at high flows, acting as a fish refuge, however due to siltation these may be becoming too shallow. Following the creation of stone cascades greater flow variation has been ovserved. The success of the bays appears to depend on the presence, or otherwise, of a structure deflecting water into them.		A repeat RCS carried out two years post works indicated an increase in emergent vegetation and macrophyte diversity. The bays are inundated at high flows, acting as a fish refuge, however due to siltation these may be becoming too shallow. Following the creation of stone cascades greater flow variation has been ovserved. The success of the bays appears to depend on the presence, or otherwise, of a structure deflecting water into them.
	If the project was to be carried out again more consideration should be given to the location of the bays within the overall flow regime or alternatively structures that would maintain flows into the bay should be included in the design.		If the project was to be carried out again more consideration should be given to the location of the bays within the overall flow regime or alternatively structures that would maintain flows into the bay should be included in the design.

	Plus, part of a wider scheme developing footpath access along the river.		Plus, part of a wider scheme developing footpath access along the river.
	}}		}}

Alexrrc at 12:07, 5 June 2017

2017-06-05T12:07:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 5 June 2017
Line 20:		Line 20:
	A repeat RCS carried out two years post works indicated an increase in emergent vegetation and macrophyte diversity. The bays are inundated at high flows, acting as a fish refuge, however due to siltation these may be becoming too shallow. Following the creation of stone cascades greater flow variation has been ovserved. The success of the bays appears to depend on the presence, or otherwise, of a structure deflecting water into them.		A repeat RCS carried out two years post works indicated an increase in emergent vegetation and macrophyte diversity. The bays are inundated at high flows, acting as a fish refuge, however due to siltation these may be becoming too shallow. Following the creation of stone cascades greater flow variation has been ovserved. The success of the bays appears to depend on the presence, or otherwise, of a structure deflecting water into them.
	If the project was to be carried out again more consideration should be given to the location of the bays within the overall flow regime or alternatively structures that would maintain flows into the bay should be included in the design.		If the project was to be carried out again more consideration should be given to the location of the bays within the overall flow regime or alternatively structures that would maintain flows into the bay should be included in the design.
			Plus, part of a wider scheme developing footpath access along the river.
	}}		}}
	{{Image gallery}}		{{Image gallery}}

Alexrrc at 12:07, 5 June 2017

2017-06-05T12:07:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 5 June 2017
Line 61:		Line 61:
	\|Floodplain / River corridor=Connection to wider floodplain,		\|Floodplain / River corridor=Connection to wider floodplain,
	\|Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of backwater,		\|Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of backwater,
	\|Social measures=~~Part of a wider scheme developing footpath~~ access ~~along the river~~		\|Social measures=Improved public access,
	}}		}}
	{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}		{{Hydromorphological quality elements header}}

Alexrrc at 10:54, 5 June 2017

2017-06-05T10:54:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:54, 5 June 2017
Line 59:		Line 59:
	{{Measures		{{Measures
	\|Bank and bed modifications measure=Creation of four bays on right hand bank		\|Bank and bed modifications measure=Creation of four bays on right hand bank
	\|Floodplain / River corridor=Connection to wider floodplain,		\|Floodplain / River corridor=Connection to wider floodplain,
	\|Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of ~~slack water areas~~		\|Planform / Channel pattern=Creation of backwater,
	\|Social measures=Part of a wider scheme developing footpath access along the river		\|Social measures=Part of a wider scheme developing footpath access along the river
	}}		}}

UlrikaRRC at 11:31, 26 February 2014

2014-02-26T11:31:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:31, 26 February 2014
Line 48:		Line 48:
	{{Project background		{{Project background
	\|Reach length directly affected=1200		\|Reach length directly affected=1200
	\|Project started=~~2013~~/07/01		\|Project started=1995/07/01
	\|Project completed=1996/12/01		\|Project completed=1996/12/01
	\|Supplementary funding information=Information about cost of scheme not available		\|Supplementary funding information=Information about cost of scheme not available

NickRRC at 13:06, 20 September 2013

2013-09-20T13:06:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:06, 20 September 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Case study status		{{Case study status
	\|Approval status=~~Draft~~		\|Approval status=Approved
	}}		}}
	{{Location		{{Location

SFW Rob at 17:21, 6 September 2013

2013-09-06T17:21:13Z

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 If the project was to be carried out again more consideration should be given to the location of the bays within the overall flow regime or alternatively structures that would maintain flows into the bay should be included in the design.
 }}
 {{Case study subcatchment}}
 {{Site
@@ Line 78: / Line 91: @@
 {{Monitoring documents}}
 {{Monitoring documents end}}
 {{Additional Documents}}
 {{Additional Documents end}}
@@ Line 97: / Line 100: @@
 {{Additional links and references footer}}
 {{Supplementary Information}}

Ascarr at 13:38, 2 August 2013

2013-08-02T13:38:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:38, 2 August 2013
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|Status=Complete		\|Status=Complete
	\|Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity		\|Themes=Fisheries, Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity
	\|Country=~~England~~		\|Country=Northern Ireland
	\|Main contact forename=Judith		\|Main contact forename=Judith
	\|Main contact surname=Bankhead		\|Main contact surname=Bankhead

NickRRC at 12:07, 17 July 2013

2013-07-17T12:07:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 17 July 2013
Line 91:		Line 91:
	{{Additional Documents end}}		{{Additional Documents end}}
	{{Additional links and references header}}		{{Additional links and references header}}
			{{Additional links and references
			\|Link=www.therrc.co.uk/mot/Tall_3.8_25Apr2013_Av.pdf
			\|Description=RRC Manual of River Restoration Techniques entry
			}}
	{{Additional links and references footer}}		{{Additional links and references footer}}
	{{Supplementary Information}}		{{Supplementary Information}}