Case study:Eddleston water: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Location | {{Location | ||
|Location=55.68138856980066, -3.2018255256560905 | |Location=55.68138856980066, -3.2018255256560905 | ||
}} | |||
}} | |||
{{Case study status | |||
|Approval status=Approved | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Project overview | {{Project overview | ||
| Line 94: | Line 98: | ||
Providing the scientific evidence for the effectiveness and impact of NFM is critical for project success and cannot be underestimated. Empirical evidence can be supported by modelling, but it is also very important to try to assess the economic costs and overall value of the project and its outputs. Cost–benefit analysis that we have undertaken shows positive ratios for the range of NFM activities we have undertaken and through modelling for different NFM scenarios; both of which have been of great interest to many stakeholders. | Providing the scientific evidence for the effectiveness and impact of NFM is critical for project success and cannot be underestimated. Empirical evidence can be supported by modelling, but it is also very important to try to assess the economic costs and overall value of the project and its outputs. Cost–benefit analysis that we have undertaken shows positive ratios for the range of NFM activities we have undertaken and through modelling for different NFM scenarios; both of which have been of great interest to many stakeholders. | ||
<br /><br /> | <br /><br /> | ||
{{Image gallery}} | {{Image gallery}} | ||
Revision as of 11:09, 16 April 2025
}}
{{Project overview |Status=In progress |Project web site url=www.therrc.co.uk/sites/default/files/projects/9_eddleston.pdf |Themes=Flood risk management, Habitat and biodiversity, Hydromorphology, Land use management - agriculture, Monitoring, Social benefits, Water quality |Country=Scotland |Main contact forename=Luke |Main contact surname=Comins |Contact organisation=Tweed Forum |Contact organisation url=www.tweedforum.org/ |Multi-site=No |Project picture=Lakewood (1024x540).jpg |Picture description=Eddleston Water catchment restoration, photograph source: Tweed Forum |Project summary=The Eddleston Water project is a partnership project led by Tweed Forum which is working to restore the Eddleston Water and its catchment for the benefit of the local community and wildlife, using an approach based on Natural Flood Management (NFM). Since 2010, a series of practical works have been taking place throughout the catchment as part of the overall plan to restore the river and its catchment; the effects of which are being closely monitored through a detailed and extensive research programme supported by The Sottish Government.
The Eddleston Water
The Eddleston Water is a tributary of the River Tweed, flowing 20 km north to south through its 69km2 catchment, before reaching the main river in the town of Peebles. Over time, the course of the river has been extensively altered and long sections were straightened and embanked in the early 19th century, cutting off connectivity with its floodplain and severely degrading the river channel. Other changes in land management, both in the river valley and on the surrounding hill slopes, have also altered how the land drains. Together, these changes have resulted in an increased risk of flooding to Eddleston and Peebles, as rainfall and flood waters travel ever more quickly and directly from the hill slopes and along the river channels towards these communities. At the same time, these changes have also damaged the river environment itself, leading to the loss of over a quarter of the river’s original length, and habitat loss for plants and animals, including salmon and trout, as well as rare and protected species such as otters and lampreys.
The landscape is typical of many Scottish catchments, with the most wide-spread land use being improved grassland (40%) and coniferous plantations (13%). Moorland and rough grazing occur predominantly on higher ground on the west, the uplands on the east having more coniferous plantations. The valley slopes are mainly improved grassland for grazing sheep and cattle, and valley bottoms improved grassland for grazing and silage production. Altitude varies from 600m to 160m AOD, and the catchment is largely underlain by fractured greywacke sandstones that have been eroded and partially infilled by subsequent glacial and alluvial processes.
The Eddleston Water falls within the EU Special Area of Conservation (SAC) for the River Tweed catchment. The river is designated for its salmon (Salmo salar), lampreys (Lampetra spp), otters (Lutra lutra) and aquatic plants (Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion). It’s qualifying habitat is “River with floating vegetation often dominated by water-crowfoot”. At the time of initiation of the project, the Eddleston was classified as in ‘Bad’ ecological condition under the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), due to the extensive damage to the hydromorphology of the channel and banks, much of it a legacy from past ‘improvements’.
Project aims
The three main aims are: • to assess the effectiveness of NFM measures to reduce flood risk to the communities of Eddleston and Peebles by restoring some of the original natural features of the catchment • to assess the impact of NFM restoration on habitats and species; and • to work with landowners and communities to maximise the benefits to them, while sustaining farm businesses.
Who is involved?
The project is a partnership initiative led by Tweed Forum as Project Managers, with a Project Board consisting of the Scottish Government, Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) and Scottish Borders Council (SBC). The University of Dundee has been the main science provider, with additional inputs from British Geological Survey and other academic institutions. Other key partners represented on the Project Steering Group include NatureScot, Forest Research (FR), Forestry & Land Scotland (FLS) National Farmers Union (Scotland), Scottish Land & Estates, the Tweed Foundation and Environment Agency. The most important partners are the landowners and local community, with whom we work closely.
Funding
The Eddleston Water study is funded by the Scottish Government both directly and through relevant funding streams, such as the Scottish Rural Development Programme. From 2016–2020, funding also came from participation in the EU North Sea Region Interreg programme Building with Nature. In addition, very significant contributions have come from SEPA itself and from key partners, including Dundee University and BGS, not least in terms of in-house monitoring, research, analyses and advice. Other organisations, including SBC, NatureScot, FR, FLS, along with CEMEX, Scottish Power, Forest Carbon and Woodland Trust have contributed. Expenditure to date has topped £3million.
Project Development
The project began with a Scoping Study in 2010, produced by Dundee University, which also included a Restoration strategy, a Monitoring Strategy and a Stakeholder Engagement Strategy. The Restoration Strategy included a characterisation of the catchment and is focused on three main areas: the upper valley and hill slopes (which are the main sources of flood water running off in to the river); the valley bottom or floodplain; and the channels and habitats of the river itself. After a period of baseline monitoring, restoration activities began in 2013 and have been ongoing.
Monitoring
Monitoring the effects of these measures is an important part of this project. A comprehensive network of rain gauges and river level gauges along with water level recorders on selected flood storage ponds and groundwater wells was installed throughout the valley two years before any restoration activities began to capture baseline conditions. This one of the densest hydrological networks of its size in the UK and is being used to collect data on how the implantation of NFM affect river flows and flood frequencies. A parallel ecological monitoring programmes is recording what changes occur to the river’s habitats and wildlife, with a focus on the effect of re-meandering the river channel on riparian habitats and species, and on the biodiversity value of flood storage ponds. Full details of the monitoring programme are given below and in the paper Spray et al (2022).
Project Implementation and Delivery
Working with over 20 land managers we have been able to introduce subtle changes to current land management practices in order to slow water flow off the hills, temporarily store it and reconnect the river with its floodplain. So far, we have implemented: • 116 high flow log structures – to temporary hold back flood waters • 38 flood storage ponds – to temporarily store water • 3.5km of new river meanders – increasing river length and creating new habitats; and • 210 ha of tree planting (>330k native trees) – increasing surface roughness, evapotranspiration and infiltration. In addition, we have built a detailed combined hydraulic-hydrological flood model of the catchment and undertaken studies of costs and benefits of the NFM measures installed.
Dissemination
Sharing our results and spreading the word about River Restoration and Natural Flood Management is a key output for the project. In 2024, we were recognised as a UNESCO Hydroecology Demonstration site, the only one in the UK, and the project won two national awards at the CIEEM annual Award ceremony in 2023. We have hosted many visits from UK and international policy-makers, governments, local councils, environmental agencies, NGOs, farmers, universities and schools, to show what can be achieved on the ground to reduce the effects of flooding and enhance habitats. All our reports, publications and other outputs are freely available on the project website (see below).
Further Information
Full details of the project are available on our website, along with the Project Report and published papers at: at http://www.tweedforum.org/projects/current-projects/Eddleston
The project wishes to thank the farmers and landowners in the Eddleston Water catchment for their help and enthusiasm in taking this initiative forward.
We would welcome your comments and ideas:
Please contact:
• Luke Comins – Tweed Forum, Old Melrose Dairy Steading, Melrose, TD6 9DF (Tel: 01896 849723)
• Professor Chris Spray – Tweed Forum Eddleston Water Science Manager, UNESCO Centre for Water, Law, Policy and Science, University of Dundee, DD1 4HN (Tel: +44(0)7943 031433)
|Monitoring surveys and results===== Monitoring summary ====
As presented in the Monitoring Strategy, the essence of the project is gathering reliable and convincing data from a detailed monitoring network to provide evidence of the effectiveness of NFM on flood risk reduction and for habitat restoration. Our monitoring programme covers hydrology, hydromorphology and ecology, the three elements being integrated to provide a comprehensive assessment of restoration success. It looks both at the impact of individual measures (e.g. temporary storage ponds) and combinations of measures in a wider catchment approach. Where possible, we utilise a Before/After/Control/intervention design, as in assessment of the effectiveness of high-flow log structures to increase lag time to flood peak or the impact of remeandering on aquatic macroinvertebrates.
Flood modelling supports this empirical approach, and JBA have developed a combined hydraulic-hydrological catchment model, which has been added to by recent work by BGS.
Full details of the Monitoring undertaken can be found in the paper Strategic Design and Delivery of Integrated Catchment Restoration Monitoring: Emerging Lessons from a 12-Year Study in the UK (Spray et al. 2022). This paper reviews the monitoring strategy in detail and assesses both how the monitoring network that we developed meets its strategic aims and what subsequent changes were made in monitoring design and implementation.
Results
Full results can be found in our latest Eddleston Water 2021 Project Report available on the website at: https://tweedforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Eddleston-Water-2021-Report.pdf
Since works began, the watercourse has been upgraded from 'bad' status under the Water Framework Directive to 'moderate'. This has been achieved largely by targeting degraded reaches to improve their hydromorphology including remeandering, channel improvements, weir removal and bankside planting.
In summary, emerging results show that:
• Different NFM measures can reduce flood risk through both temporarily storing surface waters and delaying the peak floods, as well as through increased surface roughness and groundwater connectivity
• Appreciable flood risk reduction through NFM is likely only to be achievable by the widespread application of many types of approach throughout the whole catchment
• NFM measures work best in small catchments and in response to lower-level flood events. They will not stop flooding in major events. NFM will be most effective in short-duration events which typically occur in summer (without wet antecedent conditions).
• NFM is about reducing risks overall in combination with other methods taking a whole catchment approach; not just NFM nor just downstream defences
• NFM measures such as remeandering and the creation of flood storage ponds significantly improve catchment wetland biodiversity
• NFM measures and habitat enhancement to improve ecological condition provide a wide range of additional benefits from carbon management and water quality to access and landscapes, recreation and education.
• The economic value of the flood damages avoided and the multiple benefits provided by the same NFM restoration measures can be demonstrated. The added benefits over and above flood damages avoided are some 4 times higher than those for flood risk reduction alone.
|Lessons learn===== Monitoring ====
Undertaking a full scoping study is an important and valuable first step, along with the development of a strategy for integrated monitoring of all aspects of the hydrological cycle under observation using, for example a process-based framework to identify interventions and impacts. Having time to observe the catchment before any interventions is vital, enabling as it does the establishment of baseline conditions. Ideally, this time period should capture the full range of environmental variables pre-restoration and the resulting study should cover the full trajectory of the system’s recovery; in our case two years before and at least ten years after so far. Where possible ,research should be undertaken using a BACI design, with measurements taken Before and After, and in Control locations and those of the NFM Interventions.
Project Partnership
Restoration projects will always require partnerships to effectively deliver the many different outcomes stakeholders will desire and expect, and in this respect this project is no different. Having well-defined roles within the partnership is important, with Tweed Forum undertaking project management and also leading on all communications with the farmers and local community. Project partners need to be clear as to the results they are hoping for and what success will look like.
Trusted Intermediary
A key part of the roles undertaken by Tweed Forum is that of a ‘trusted intermediary’, being able to understand the different perspectives and business operations of all those who have an active interest in the catchment, and to explain these to relevant parties. Based on the respect and trust that Tweed Forum has gained over the years, they are thus able to interpret and work with the opportunities presented by national policy on the one hand and individual farm business operations on the other, This includes seeing and taking up opportunities to bring in diverse funding streams to help deliver multiple benefits to the advantage of all parties concerned.
Stakeholder engagement
We started with the creation of a stakeholder engagement strategy which has proved very useful in maintaining appropriate engagement levels with relevant parties across the catchment. It helps the team identify the best channels and means of communication with different parties. This ranges from activities such as holding a regular informal meeting for the community and local farmers in the village hall to providing bespoke field visits and talks to environmental agencies, policy-makers and visiting researchers.
The science evidence-base and valuing costs and benefits
Providing the scientific evidence for the effectiveness and impact of NFM is critical for project success and cannot be underestimated. Empirical evidence can be supported by modelling, but it is also very important to try to assess the economic costs and overall value of the project and its outputs. Cost–benefit analysis that we have undertaken shows positive ratios for the range of NFM activities we have undertaken and through modelling for different NFM scenarios; both of which have been of great interest to many stakeholders.
Image gallery
|
Catchment and subcatchmentSelect a catchment/subcatchment
Catchment
Subcatchment
Other case studies in this subcatchment: Tweed Catchment Management Plan
Site
Project background
Cost for project phases
Supplementary funding informationFunded by the SEPA River Restoration Fund Scottish Government awarded funding over three financial years 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013
Reasons for river restoration
Measures
MonitoringHydromorphological quality elements
Biological quality elements
Physico-chemical quality elements
Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic
Monitoring documents
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
Supplementary InformationEdit Supplementary Information
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||