Case study:Habitat improvements in the upper Kennet: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Case study subcatchment}} | {{Case study subcatchment}} | ||
{{Site}} | {{Site | ||
|Name=Kennet | |||
|Heavily modified water body=No | |||
|Protected species present=No | |||
|Invasive species present=No | |||
}} | |||
{{Project background}} | {{Project background}} | ||
{{Motivations}} | {{Motivations}} | ||
Revision as of 05:25, 12 August 2013
This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.
Project overview
| Status | In progress |
|---|---|
| Project web site | |
| Themes | Habitat and biodiversity, Social benefits, Water quality |
| Country | England |
| Main contact forename | Charlotte |
| Main contact surname | Hitchmough |
| Main contact user ID | |
| Contact organisation | |
| Contact organisation web site | |
| Partner organisations | Action for the River Kennet (ARK), Marlborough Town Council, Marlborough Area Development Trust, local volunteer and community groups |
| Parent multi-site project | |
| This is a parent project encompassing the following projects |
No |
Project summary
The project to enable fish to swim through Marlborough will build a new channel linking the existing main river with a backstream, which currently flows intermittently down a cascade that is impassable to fish. The new channel will have a gentle gradient which will allow fish, including brown trout and grayling to swim up and down it.
This is phase two of a project to link the river above and below Marlborough. The river above Marlborough is a valuable spawning habitat, but all the fish here died during the 2011/12 drought. Joining the two sections of river should improve the fish populations up and downstream.
The habitat restoration projects use relatively simple techniques and materials and a considerable portion of the work will be done by volunteers. The work will repair eroded parts of the bank and create meanders and changes in flow which will create a more diverse environment to suit a variety of fish species and life stages.
By fencing livestock away from the river the project will reduce bank erosion and keep sediment out of the river as a result. This keeps the natural gravel bed clean, leaving it clear for fish spawning and healthy weed growth.
We will improve water quality, by diverting urban runoff from the road into a reedbed, which will filter out pollutants before the water reaches the river.
Monitoring surveys and results
Lessons learnt
Catchment and subcatchment
Site
| Name | Kennet |
|---|---|
| WFD water body codes | |
| WFD (national) typology | |
| WFD water body name | |
| Pre-project morphology | |
| Reference morphology | |
| Desired post project morphology | |
| Heavily modified water body | No |
| National/international site designation | |
| Local/regional site designations | |
| Protected species present | No |
| Invasive species present | No |
| Species of interest | |
| Dominant hydrology | |
| Dominant substrate | |
| River corridor land use | |
| Average bankfull channel width category | |
| Average bankfull channel width (m) | |
| Average bankfull channel depth category | |
| Average bankfull channel depth (m) | |
| Mean discharge category | |
| Mean annual discharge (m3/s) | |
| Average channel gradient category | |
| Average channel gradient | |
| Average unit stream power (W/m2) |
Project background
| Reach length directly affected (m) | |
|---|---|
| Project started | |
| Works started | |
| Works completed | |
| Project completed | |
| Total cost category | |
| Total cost (k€) | |
| Benefit to cost ratio | |
| Funding sources |
Cost for project phases
| Phase | cost category | cost exact (k€) | Lead organisation | Contact forename | Contact surname |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investigation and design | |||||
| Stakeholder engagement and communication | |||||
| Works and works supervision | |||||
| Post-project management and maintenance | |||||
| Monitoring |
Reasons for river restoration
| Mitigation of a pressure | |
|---|---|
| Hydromorphology | |
| Biology | |
| Physico-chemical | |
| Other reasons for the project |
Measures
Structural measures
| |
|---|---|
| Bank/bed modifications | |
| Floodplain / River corridor | |
| Planform / Channel pattern | |
| Other | |
Non-structural measures
| |
| Management interventions | |
| Social measures (incl. engagement) | |
| Other | |
Monitoring
Hydromorphological quality elements
| Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative | |||
Biological quality elements
| Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative | |||
Physico-chemical quality elements
| Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative | |||
Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic
| Element | When monitored | Type of monitoring | Control site used | Result | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before measures | After measures | Qualitative | Quantitative | |||
Monitoring documents
Image gallery
Additional documents and videos
Additional links and references
| Link | Description |
|---|
Supplementary Information
Edit Supplementary Information
