The role of the RRC - INBO | International Network of ...€¦ · Cheong Gye Cheon Restoration...
57
River Restoration Martin Janes
Transcript of The role of the RRC - INBO | International Network of ...€¦ · Cheong Gye Cheon Restoration...
River Restoration
Martin Janes
‘Environmental Management of Rivers and Wetlands’• Complex ‘active’
landscape scale systems with
multiple economic & social benefits.• Management needed due to human pressure:
1. Understand the system (is it broken?)2. Aid recovery (minimal intervention) 3. Reduce detrimental impacts (mitigation & change)4. Restore the lost/scarce –
process:habitat:ecology
River systems• Process driven dynamic system
– Hydrology input & transport (flow)– Sediment input & transport (erosion & deposition)
• Resulting physical & ecological habitat features– Valleys, floodplains, wetlands, & channels– Support wildlife flora & fauna (bugs, fish, humans)
• Resilient to change and disturbance (natural)– BUT Modification, over use, taming!, = poor
understanding of components and complexity
UK River ‘Taming’• Modified over many centuries.
– Domesday Book 1086
• More rapid over the last 100 yrs (industrialization & machinery)
Due to:– land clearance/deforestation– milling– navigation– land drainage– flood protection– abstraction– urbanisation, – taming by engineers…
• 1998 report indicated 80% of UK rivers have had part of their channel
modified.
Resulted in:• extensive straightening
‐
– damaged wildlife habitats– reduced value of fisheries– reduced aesthetic appeal
• loss of floodplain wetlands
‐– reduced ability of the floodplain to
provide economically viable functions.
EU ‐ River managementEast Europe:
Water pollution & Floods
South Europe: Water Quan & Floods
North Europe: Dams, hydro & e‐flows
West Europe:
Flood risk & Habitat frag.
• Flood ‘Protection’
and ‘Defence’Channelisation, walls, culverts, pipes – local scale (problem or reach)
• Flood ‘Risk Management’Storage, capacity, and how this affects the river (catchment scale)
• Integration ‐
River Basin Management Land (soil) management, sustainable drainage systems, functioning
floodplains, integrated planning policies, ecosystem services.
Historic management
Working with Natural Processes
Habitat Enhancement & River Restoration
River restoration• Restore river catchment processes• Return physical features & habitat niches• Reconnect isolated habitats
• Within the constraints– complexity, land, money, built heritage,
perception, ownership , water quality and quantity....
Benefits• Biodiversity• Access to wildlife and nature• Flood risk management• Climate change resilience• Sustainable planning and redevelopment• Reduced maintenance cost• Safety
Drivers for change• European Directives
– Urban Wastewater treatment Directive (1991)– Habitats and Species Directive (1992) – Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000)– Floods Directive (2007)
• National Poilcy– Espace de Liberté
(France)
– Room for the River (Netherlands)– Making Space for Water (Eng & Wales)– Natural Flood Management (Scotland)– Env. River Enhancement Prog. (Ireland)
• Other global and regional drivers– Climate change (resilience), economy (fishing),..
Targeted at Aquatic Ecosystem River Quality;
Prevents Further ‘deterioration’;
Enhance Aquatic Ecosystem Quality through a program of measures (PoM);
Catchment scale river basin planning (RBMP’s);
Monitoring of compliance;
Penalties for failure;
Cyclical Implementation - by 2015, 2021, 2027on 6 year ‘cycles’.
WF Directive
Présentateur
Commentaires de présentation
Central to WFD is the concept of Ecological Status – which goes beyond what SEPA currently monitors – which is largely a measure of chemical water quality with some invertebrates thrown in. Ecological Status will be measured in 5 classes – High to Good – which are defined based on degress of modification from a pristine state – much debate about how to set class boundaries for High and Good Status – which will obviously drive much of the improvements over the long-term and determine the cost to water users (industry, receration etc. etc.) of those improvements. Three groups of Quality Elements that make up Ecological Status – Chemical (or Physico-Chemistry), Biological and Hydromophological. Discuss which QEs make up each class
Restoration of degraded habitats• Good Ecological Status
(GES)For all watercourses not
impacted severely, or serving an overiding
economic/public service
• Good (Maximum) Ecological Potential (GEP/MEP))
For all watercourses designated ‘Heavily
Modified’, or ‘Artificial’Best compromise (ecol. vs.
needs of society)
Monitoring and assessment
Multiple objective River Restoration Schemes
R. Skerne Darlington
In1994UrbanUK River RestorationProject. £1Mdemonstration.
River Skjern, DenmarkLate 60’s Denmark’s largest land drainage scheme,
4000ha wetlands lost. Deepened, straightened, embanked and pump-drained ……………………………………..……………………2004 cost £22M.
A sustainable solution. 1997, an environmental ‘U’-turn. Act of Parliament to restore the meandering river and 2200ha of wetands
2004 cost of £25M.
Before: Secondary drainage channel
Total earth works: 3,000,000 m3
R. Skjern ready to bend again
Flood Risk Management
Making “Room for the River”
in The Netherlands
City of Arnhem
Satellite image 1995
Urban bottleneck
Urban Development Arnhem 1830-2000
1830 2000
Dike relocation of Bakenhof (nearArnhem)
The Bakenhof area: Natural ‘playground’
floodplain
River Quaggy, Chinbrook Meadows
Quaggy ‐ a river released
400m concrete removed
Quaggy ‐ for flood storage
Historic water meadows restored
Quaggy – for education
Quaggy ‐ for enjoyment
Residents/users:Project improved the park 89%Less anti social behaviour 56%
Bayerisches Landesamtfür WasserwirtschaftRestoration of the Isar River in Munich --- flood control, ecology and
recreation
Urban Re‐development
River Colne, Staines, London
River MardenDesigned to physical
forms defined by river processes
Include native habitat types to colonise
Accessible and visible to users and public
• Flood risk…. & Landscape, Habitat, Amenity, Public pride.
Simulate form & process in a constrained location
Cheong Gye Cheon Restoration Project, Seoul
5.8km, 3 years to completion in 2005. [US$ 280Mil]
Présentateur
Commentaires de présentation
Cheong Gye Cheon Restoration Project, Seoul– three years to complete! 5.8km Cheonggye overpass removed which ran through the heart of Seoul. Where there is the will there is a way! US$280 Million
Multiple benefitsRiver Brent, North London
Design informed by geomorphology to allow for a ‘semi-natural’ river form with active fluvial process in a constrained urban flood storage and amenity parkland environment
August 1998
March 2004
July 2003
Concrete 2002
July 2009
May 2005
March 2003June 2006
Social impactUrban space,Accessibility,Quality of life,Ownership, Social justice.
Fisheries and Biodiversity
Habitat & ecology• catchment scale
– Ecosystem health, repopulationof restored watercourse
• Reach scale– Pools & riffles and the life cycle of fish
• Meso scale– Individual habitat niches
Biodiversity is likely to be greatest in areas of high morphological diversity
Witham, Lincolnshire• Defunct weir• Fisheries problem• Siltation• Disrupting natural
flow regime
• Return free passage• Remove eyesore• Restore natural functions
Gravel ‘riffle’
New Forest MiresSome past realignment, but old
channels still existing in the woodlands.
Restore the natural function of these small systems.
Benefits for biodiversity.
Mire restoration has been very successful, reducing runoff by
infilling the drainage channels.
Gravel and clay fill material raising the bed to previous levels [2006]
Highland Water. Structure ruined by poor management [2002]
London Rivers Action PlanLaunched Jan 2009 by the Mayor of
London’s Office.
To help step up the rate of river restoration throughout the City
Target is to restore 15km of river by 2015
Highlighting opportunities and providing practical guidance to
local authorities, developers, Non Government Organisations and
community groups
www.therrc.co.uk/lrap.php
SAC River Restoration Plans• England based Protected Areas (Habs Dir)
– 47 ‘SSSI rivers’
to favourable condition ‐
2010.– Protected areas (Habs Dir and WFD) where
‘restoration measures’
have been identified ‐ 2015
– 50 year plan for physical restoration• Remove structures, embankments, interruptions to
hydromorphic and ecological processes• Based on walk over survey of morphology & ecology• Long term commitment & for ££
implementation
Current Initiatives• Push towards ‘Natural Flood Management’
–
Scotland, N. Ireland and England & Wales– POST seminar on Tuesday – NFM in England
• Based on ‘working with natural processes’
from the Pitt Review of 2007 flooding – report published Tuesday.
• Judicial Review treat in late 2010 – RBMP’s– Defra announce £112M to bring waterbodies to
GES (EA £9M pa, NE £6Mpa, CRF £8Mpa – Jan ‘12.
• Defra ‘catchment approach’
to water quality– 25 pilot ‘local engagement’
projects ‐
Dec ‘11
Conclusions• River restoration considers the whole river ‘system’;• Multiple, complex interlinkages of biotic and abiotic factors;• Restoration for WHAT? – define targeted measurable
objectives for clarity and assessing outcomes;• Planning at the catchment scale is essential to maximise the
impact of any site or reach scale works;• River managers working with, not against, the natural system
(aiding recovery and WwNP & Room for the River);• Restoring the ability of a river to function naturally (process)
has EU policy backing (Habs, WFD and Floods Dir’s);• Large scale demonstration projects can help develop scientific
and professional expertise, and give confidence to policy makers and the public.
RESTORE: Communicating best practice in river restoration
€1.8m, 50% EU LIFE+6 Partners, 2010 ‐
2013
4 Regions, 21 Countries
Présentateur
Commentaires de présentation
Aim: promote and enable best practice river restoration by: Developing and expanding existing networks e.g. RRC – Who is RRC? We do the same stuff as RESTORE for over 13 yrs, but GB context Holding many events e.g. Workshops, site visits Developing online resources Introduce 6 partners, EA lead, 4 Regions RRC lead activities in West Region
RESTORE common themesCosts and benefits• Long term economic benefits• Costing river restoration• Sourcing funding
What do we mean by RR• What is river restoration• How to undertake river restoration
Drivers through directives• Contribution to flood risk reduction• Contribution to increased biodiversity• How to meet WFD RR targets• Climate change adaptation• Renewable energy conflicts
People and communities• Integrating with urban planning• Social and cultural wellbeing
Regional issues and concerns
East• Access to funds and information,
few networks, promote
understanding
South• Only little progress outside
France, issues of ephemeral rivers,
water quality, bioengineering vs
RR
West• Concept understood, needs
evidence, funding, guidance,
political & planning buy‐in, public
safety.
North• Fisheries and hydropower drivers,
mixed levels of networks in
operation.
3 years ‐ 3 stages• Stage 1 – information collection and collation. What exists as
best practice river restoration & implementation and how is this needed by different countries?
• Stage 2 –
engagement. Building the networks of policy makers, river basin managers and practitioners and forming
the information resource.
• Stage 3 –
Knowledge transfer. Web based database tool
for information sharing, long‐term continuation through the
European Centre for River Restoration (ECRR).
Output
‐
Review of EU Policy Drivers
A demand for river restoration tools and methods...• Legislative Drivers:
– Habitats, Floods, Water Framework directives– UN BioD Plan, Rural Development Prog., CC Adaptation &
Land Use Planning policies.
• Supporting Legislation– CAP, Nitrates & Groundwater directives
But deterioration of habitats despite these drivers. => Difficulties in overcoming obstacles to
implementation for river restoration
Barriers and Constraints
