Restoring the River Axe Site of Special Scientific Interest and Special Area of Conservation

River Restoration Plan

September 2019 River Axe Restoration Plan

CONTENTS

Chapter Page Executive Summary 1

Aim of the restoration plan 1 Working with others 2 Delivering the restoration plan 3

1 Restoration of the River Axe 4

1.1 Introduction 4 1.2 The need for restoration 6 1.3 A restoration vision 6 1.4 How can we deliver this restoration? 7 1.5 Our approach 7 1.6 How to use this plan 9 1.7 Who is this plan for? 10 1.8 Development of the plan 10 1.9 How this plan relates to other plans 10

2 The River Axe Site of Special Scientific Interest 13

2.1 Geology and hydrology 13 2.2 Ecology 14 2.3 Conservation objectives for the River Axe SSSI 15 2.4 Condition of the River Axe SSSI 15 2.5 Water Framework Directive objectives 18 2.6 Land use and land use change 19 2.7 Water quality 20 2.8 Flood risk management 20 2.9 Invasive non-native species and disease 21 2.10 Influences on geomorphology and channel change 21 2.11 Devon Wildlife Trust - River Axe Corridor Survey 24

3 River sector descriptions 25

3.1 Summary of sector descriptions 25 3.2 Upper sector 27 3.2.1 Physical characteristics 28 3.2.2 Historical change 28 3.2.3 Geomorphological behaviour 29 3.2.4 Significant issues 30 3.3 Mid sector 31 3.3.1 Physical characteristics 32 3.3.2 Historical change 32 3.3.3 Geomorphological behaviour 34 3.3.4 Significant issues 34 3.4 Lower sector 36 3.4.1 Physical characteristics 38 3.4.2 Historical change 38 3.4.3 Geomorphological behaviour 39 3.4.4 Significant issues 40

4 Channel modifications and restoration measures 41

River Axe Restoration Plan

4.1 Introduction 41 4.2 Geomorphology and channel change 41 4.3 Impact of existing modifications 42 4.4 Potential restoration and management options 44 4.5 Summary of restoration options –management sheets 45

5 Consultation, actions and implementation 47

Figures

1.1 Map of River Axe SSSI/SAC 5 3.1 Geomorphological reaches within the SSSI/SAC as identified 26 in BBR 2004 3.2 Map showing upper sector SSSI units and geomorphological 27 reaches 3.3 Upper sector length of each characteristic bank type 30 3.4 Map showing mid sector SSSI units and geomorphological 31 reaches 3.5 Mid sector length of each characteristic bank type 35 3.6 Map showing lower sector SSSI units and geomorphological 36 reaches 3.7 Lower length of each characteristic bank type 40 5.1 Remedial actions location plan 49

Tables

1.1 Summary of consultation when developing the River Axe Restoration Plan 2.1 Summary of condition of River Axe SSSI management units 16 2.2 Summary of influences on sediment and morphology in the 22 Axe catchment 3.1 Upper sector features summary 30 3.2 Mid sector features summary 35 3.3 Lower sector features summary 40 4.1 Assessment approach 43 4.2 Remedial priority issues 43 4.3 Summary of potential solutions. 45 4.4 Management Sheets 46 5.1 Indicative remedial action programme 48

Glossary 49

Annex 1 Management sheets A1.1 1 Riparian zone management 2 Weycroft Weir 3 Town Weir 4 Stoney Bridge and Axminster Flood Defence Scheme 5 Whitford gauging station, bridge and blockstone weirs 6 Bow Bridge A35 blockstone weirs 7 Weycroft Bridge 8 Bank Revetments

Annex 2 Decision making related to structures such as weirs A2.1 and sluices

Annex 3 Maps of features and recommendations for riparian A3.1 zone management

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 4 World War II Taunton Stop Line Woodhayne Pillbox A4.1 case example

Annex 5 World War II Taunton Stop Line Whitford Pillbox case A5.1 example

Annex 6 Wadbrook Farm case example A6.1

Annex 7 Summary of Draft Consultation Responses A7.1

Bibliography B.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

Executive Summary

The River Axe is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

The 2011 Natural England condition assessment (ECUS, 2011) of the River Axe SSSI showed that the site is in unfavourable condition. The reasons for unfavourable condition include physical modifications such as weirs, poor riparian habitat quality due to heavily grazed and impoverished riparian structure, invasive plants, diffuse water pollution and siltation.

For the River Axe SSSI, Natural England has identified a range of actions or ‘remedies’ required to get the river into favourable condition. The actions required include developing a river restoration plan and initial implementation of actions. Other actions include implementing a diffuse water pollution plan, catchment sensitive farming initiatives, and an invasive species control strategy.

The River Restoration Plan focuses on actions that can be undertaken within the SAC river channel and river corridor. This then complements the Diffuse Water Pollution Plan that addresses wider catchment input pressure. Catchment Sensitive Farming initiatives provides support and a delivery route for works across both of these plans.

The UK Government’s ‘Biodiversity 2020’ strategy includes a commitment to ensure that at least 50% of designated SSSIs achieve ‘favourable condition’, (i.e. the site is being adequately conserved and is meeting its 'conservation objectives’) and that 95% of sites are maintained in ‘favourable or recovering’ condition by 2020.

In addition, the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires all EU Member States to protect and, where possible, enhance the condition of all bodies of water. The Water Framework Directive requires protected areas including the River Axe Special Area of Conservation to be meeting their objectives by 2015 (or in cases where there are significant pressures to address, 2021 or 2027). The river is not currently achieving the required standard of Good Ecological Status (GES).

As the River Axe is not currently achieving its SSSI or WFD objectives, the Environment Agency, Natural England and others are obliged to undertake work to ensure that the required standards are achieved in the future. This River Restoration Plan and its implementation (in combination with other actions) seeks to ensure that the River Axe achieves its SSSI and WFD objectives.

Aim of the restoration plan

The aim of this strategic restoration plan is to identify high level river restoration or enhancement actions to address the physical conditions of the River Axe that are contributing to unfavourable condition. This includes the following specific objectives:

1. Determine the impacts of physical modifications, condition and management on the geomorphology and ecology of the SSSI river. 2. Provide an outline restoration plan for the SSSI river on a reach-by-reach basis, taking into account immovable constraints. 3. Identify potential delivery mechanisms.

1

River Axe Restoration Plan

The catchment has a complex history of man-made changes, many of which have significant cultural, heritage and social values associated with them. The realistic aim for the Axe SSSI is to manage and restore as much dynamic function to the river as possible, within current immovable constraints in order to provide the conditions required for river wildlife to flourish. We are not aiming to restore the entire river to an unmodified state.

The plan outlines assessments that have been carried out and identifies restoration options intended to naturalise river processes, support catchment sensitive farming initiatives, and encourage riparian management that favours biodiversity. It provides a framework for the improvement in the physical habitat condition of the river over long timescales, and will inform future decision-making.

The plan focuses on the SSSI river and its river corridor and alone cannot deliver favourable condition of the SSSI and SAC. Further work is required throughout the Axe catchment which will be delivered through the Diffuse Water Pollution Plan and the invasive species strategy.

Working with others

Natural England and the Environment Agency are jointly responsible for leading development of the strategic plan. However a range of interested parties and mechanisms will also be involved in developing and implementing particular options - this requires effective and positive engagement with landowners, land managers and stakeholders.

Natural England and the Environment Agency will take steps to involve relevant individuals and representative groups in developing actions from this strategic plan. We will work with the East Devon Catchment Partnership and other interested parties to take it forward, with detailed discussions taking place with landowners and managers to develop reach specific actions. Whilst some actions will be completed relatively quickly over the next few years, other measures will take more time to develop, and be implemented over long timescales.

The detail of any restoration projects will be developed in conjunction with landowners and other stakeholders, in order to identify constraints and design appropriate restoration options. Permissions from landowners, Natural England and the Environment Agency will be required for restoration projects, all of which will be subject to a Habitats Regulations Assessment.

Landowner participation is key to delivery and detailed discussions and agreement with landowners about specific river reaches is recognised as being an essential part of developing detailed restoration projects and undertaking site specific actions in coming years.

The importance of agriculture to the rural economy is recognised and a valid consideration when developing river restoration projects. It is acknowledged that that restoration measures affecting land use may only be appropriate for certain locations, will require support (such as from Countryside Stewardship) and may be implemented over long time scales. Actions will only be taken forward once agreement has been gained from the relevant stakeholders, and will be carried out in close partnership to ensure effective delivery and viability of the solution.

This plan will assist in the targeting and uptake of agri-environment schemes and provide an opportunity for farmers to seek financial assistance to adapt land management practices if required. The restoration plan may be used as means of supporting farmers who wish to apply for grants or other funding streams, to fund adaptive floodplain land management, for example woodland planting may be funded through grant schemes.

2

River Axe Restoration Plan

Delivering the restoration plan

Comments received in the consultation shaped the restoration plan. This will now be implemented by working in partnership with landowners and managers and relevant organisations. It will be used from 2019 onwards to guide the delivery of restoration projects on the ground to improve the habitat along the river. It will also inform decisions made about river management activities including targeting of Countryside Stewardship and catchment sensitive farming.

Restoration actions are suggested in this report as a means to achieve favourable physical habitat condition of the SSSI and SAC. Please note that this report identifies a suite of potential actions based on a strategic assessment of the river. All the potential actions require further detailed planning and permission from landowners, Natural England and the lead flood authority and/or Environment Agency.

In the short term we envisage that work will be done with interested parties to implement agreed restoration activities and to gather evidence of the benefits. This may be initiated by the East Devon Catchment Partnership, or individual organisations or owners.

Over time, restoration of the river will improve it for the species and habitats that depend on it, and help the river become more resilient to future extremes of flow and temperature. This should in turn benefit the people who live and work along the rivers.

Example of features created by dynamic river processes, on the River Yarty outside the SSSI

3

River Axe Restoration Plan

Chapter 1. Restoration of the River Axe

This chapter introduces:

 The River Axe catchment, and a vision for the future of the River Axe SSSI  The River Axe Restoration Strategy Assessment approach

1.1 Introduction

The Axe catchment, situated within Somerset, Dorset and Devon, covers approximately 307km² with the combined length of the Axe and its four main tributaries totalling some 59 km, in addition to many minor tributaries and feeder streams.

13 kilometres of the lower River Axe was designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest in 1999. The SSSI extends from the confluence with the Blackwater Stream down to the tidal limit near Colyford. The primary reason for designation is the river habitat, as a good example of unusually active lowland river types. The river habitat supports a number of associated plant, fish and invertebrate communities and species. The river was also designated as a Special Area of Conservation under the European Habitats Directive of 2002. Over its length, the SSSI displays a river environment modified by centuries or human activity, whilst still retaining many of its natural geomorphological and important ecological features.

River Axe, showing ranunculus beds, bank side willow scrub, and invasive Himalayan balsam in the riparian zone

4

River Axe Restoration Plan

Figure 1.1 Map of River Axe SSSI/SAC

5

River Axe Restoration Plan

1.2 The need for restoration

The River Axe is regarded as being a relatively good, unmodified example of three lowland river types but nevertheless is affected by a number of pressures. The Common Standards Monitoring of the River Axe SSSI (ECUS 2011) showed that the site is in unfavourable condition. Reasons for this include physical modifications such as weirs and bankside revetments, poor riparian habitat quality and structure related to intensity of grazing and cattle access, invasive plants, diffuse water pollution and siltation.

For the River Axe SSSI, Natural England has identified a range of actions or ‘remedies’ needed for the river to achieve favourable condition. These actions include developing a river restoration plan, and initial implementation of actions. The scope of the restoration plan focuses on the direct condition of the SSSI river and of its river corridor. Other actions required to restore the favourable condition of the river include implementing a diffuse water pollution plan (Environment Agency/Natural England 2014) catchment sensitive farming initiatives, and an invasive species control strategy (Newman, 2012). These other actions have a wider focus, considering impacts and measures across the entire river catchment.

The river restoration actions are addressed in this plan, with cross references to other initiatives where relevant.

Returning SAC rivers, such as the Axe, to ‘favourable condition’ is a requirement of the EU Habitats Directive and contributes to England Biodiversity Strategy Targets. The River Axe SAC has a number of measures attributed to it including a ‘river restoration programme for protected areas’ in the current River Basin Management Plan for the South West (Environment Agency 2014). Development of the river restoration plan and its subsequent implementation will help improve the status of the river, contributing to achieving Good Ecological Status as required under the Water Framework Directive.

1.3 A restoration vision

Restoration planning involves generating a challenging ‘vision’ of desirable restoration measures. This ‘vision’ is based on removing artificial constraints to the rivers’ ability to show characteristic habitat form and function for the benefit of the plants and animals typical of the river type.

The proposed vision for the Axe is to ensure the continuance of the dynamic nature of the river. We will seek opportunities to ameliorate artificial constraints that limit the physical form and natural biodiversity of the SSSI and take active steps to manage, protect and enhance the rivers’ ecology.

The restored River Axe will display:

 A channel and floodplain that is morphologically dynamic, but not unstable, and allowed to develop and retain a range of natural features with their associated biodiversity.  A channel and bank flora and fauna representative of this river type; with non-native invasive species being actively controlled.

6

River Axe Restoration Plan

 Wildlife passage within the channel enabled, and impacts on this and river function reduced or mitigated through appropriate alteration or removal of artificial modifications such as weirs, bridges and revetments.  River and floodplain management that is sympathetic to the dynamic geomorphological nature of the river and the existing rich biodiversity of the SSSI.  No new modifications that have adverse impacts on biodiversity or hydromorphology of the catchment.  Water quality and quantity that sustains river biodiversity and river and floodplain form and function.

1.4 How can we deliver this restoration?

 Through appropriate information gathering, wide consultation and engagement with affected parties leading to clear decision-making.  By maintaining those reaches already in favourable condition by a continuing vigilance and by regulating matters that influence water quality, quantity and river channel and bank works.  By allowing the natural recovery of physical features and encouraging ongoing positive management of the riparian corridor and wider floodplain.  By taking opportunities to modify or remove artificial features that constrain the natural processes of the river where these degrade the ecological quality of the SSSI, whilst being aware of the wider needs to protect property, landscape, food production, social and cultural values.  Actively undertake and encourage initiatives to control invasive plants such as Himalayan balsam and promote habitat diversity by planting riverbank trees and woodland blocks in selected areas.

1.5 Our approach

We developed this plan by:

 Identifying key issues based on their geomorphological and ecological impact on favourable condition; using maps, consultation, local knowledge, and existing reports, (i.e. Babtie, Brown and Root 2004) that provide the wider geomorphological context and evidence that underpin this plan.  Field-survey of each significant structural modification mapping and recording the type, location and baseline geomorphological and ecological characteristics at each site. All modifications were assessed in the field for their overall impact on favourable condition and for the need for further assessment to identify options for restoration.

 Desk-based evaluation for each site and key influences identifying potential options for restoration. For each significant structure or key activity, a summary of the impacts, potential restoration options, constraints, priority and next steps is presented.  Development of a plan of restoration actions preparing a programme of actions, timescales and potential funding for wider comment, refinement and agreement.

The river restoration plan is intended to provide a framework for the improvement of the physical habitat of the River Axe SSSI/SAC to 2050.

7

River Axe Restoration Plan

Understanding the modifications of the River Axe SSSI/SAC.

Assessment of modifications and management practices can help to:

 Restore favourable condition to the River Axe SSSI based on an understanding of ecology and geomorphology  Restore sediment connectivity along the river channel

 Restore biological continuity e.g. fish passage  Maximise the potential for assisted natural recovery of river habitat  Identify and prioritise opportunities for restoration

 Encourage management actions that promote more natural river process and biodiversity

 Identify opportunities for natural flood risk management approaches to benefit people and wildlife

Two views of the River Axe SSSI showing features that illustrate the SSSI quality and what could be possible through more of the river catchment - large woody debris, in-channel bars, well vegetated river banks providing a range of in-stream and riparian habitats supporting a range of wildlife.

8

River Axe Restoration Plan

1.6 How to use this plan

The plan’s structure is explained below to help you navigate around it.

Chapter Content Recommendation for use

1 Restoration of the Explains the purpose of this Use this section to River Axe plan. understand: why this restoration plan for physical modification has been developed for the SSSI; how it fits into the vision for the Axe SSSI; and our approach to the assessment.

2 The River Axe Briefly describes the Use this section to obtain a Site of Special geomorphological and background understanding of Scientific Interest ecological context for the the River Axe SSSI. Refer to assessment of modifications BBR (2004) and ECUS and restoration potential. (2011) for more detail.

3 River sector Splits the SSSI into 3 sectors, Use this section to obtain a descriptions describing their physical background understanding of character, historical change and the geomorphology, flows significant issues. and artificial influences within the 3 sections of the River Axe SSSI.

4 Channel A condition summary of the Use this section for a broad modifications SSSI, identifies the key understanding of key and restoration elements impacting on the potential impacts of measures SSSI. Basic assessment sheets modifications in the SSSI, for each of the priority impacts and for a user friendly give a summary understanding understanding of the potential of the nature of individual risks, opportunities and next modifications and the options for steps for each of 9 specific restoration. impacting structures and 3 impacting generic habitat management issues.

5 Consultation, Gives our approach to Use this section to help actions and consulting with river managers implement opportunities for implementation and those interested in river restoration within a restoration related to catchment context and a modifications in the SSSI. Gives strategic framework. a rationale for prioritising action and identifies key delivery mechanisms and next steps.

9

River Axe Restoration Plan

1.7 Who is this plan for?

This plan is primarily intended for use by river managers or asset owners who are planning river restoration related to modifications in the SSSI. The plan is designed to be simple and user-friendly. It does not require specialist technical knowledge of geomorphology or ecology as this is available in technical reports referenced in this plan if needed. Where these are not published, the Environment Agency or Natural England can make these available for future project planning.

It is a stand-alone plan for supporting action towards river restoration by management of modifications in the SSSI. It provides a simple background to the catchment and a way forward for restoration of individual physical modifications within an overall strategic plan. The high level management sheets for each structure in Annex 1 provide a set of simple tools for supporting and making decisions.

This plan aims to inform and provide discussion about the possible options that could be implemented along the River Axe SSSI/SAC to improve the natural function of the river, and increase the extent of habitats for aquatic and terrestrial wildlife. To achieve the aims of this plan the Environment Agency and Natural England want to communicate positively and effectively with landowners, structures owners and managers, and other representative groups.

1.8 Development of the plan

A core steering group of the Environment Agency and Natural England oversaw the development, communication and consultation on this plan.

Consultation on the plan was organised through the East Devon Catchment Partnership. A consultation draft was available for public viewing at Axminster Library, Axminster, and online on the River Restoration Centre’s ‘Designated Rivers’ webpage. Direct mailing of invitations to comment was also carried out for 24 riparian landowners.

Consultations were received from members of the public, Axe Fly Fishing Club, Axe Vale & District Conservation Society, Devon County Council, Dorset AONB, and South West Rivers Association. Comments were also received widely from departments within the Environment Agency and Natural England.

Table 1.1 below provides an overview of the consultation process we carried out when we developed the River Axe Restoration Plan. This includes how we gathered information and involved interested groups in the decision making process.

1.9 How this plan relates to other plans

There are a range of plans and projects aimed at restoring and protecting the River Axe SAC and SSSI. These include:  River Restoration Plan focussed on identifying issues and opportunities for restoring natural river channel functioning in the SSSI/SAC  Diffuse Water Pollution Plan (December 2014) focussed on addressing diffuse pollution impacts on water quality in the SSSI/SAC. This DWPP is being reviewed in the light of the current Judicial Review challenge and the introduction of the new Farming Rules for Water.

10

River Axe Restoration Plan

 River Axe SAC Site Improvement Plan (October 2014)  East Devon Local Plan's Nutrient Management Plan will focus on ensuring adequate mitigation for additional nutrients generate by planned development in and around Axminster,  South West River Basin Management Plan (2015-2021)  South West Flood Risk Management Plan (2015-2021)

All of these plans are interlinked and contribute to the restoration and protection of the River Axe SSSI and SAC. No single plan can secure favourable condition in isolation. Partnership approaches will be essential to deliver actions from across all of the plan as will commitment by all parties to progressing all the proposed actions.

It is envisaged that the River Axe Catchment Partnership will have a major role in progressing the planned actions. The partnership will do this by supporting partners in working on all actions set out in the various plans. Some actions can provide immediate benefits, for example, ensuring compliance with existing Regulatory frameworks. Other actions will require long lead in times for planning, delivery and for outcomes to be realised.

The figures to right show the coverage of these plans. The upper figure shows the River Restoration Plan focused on the river corridor of the SSSI/SAC river. The Diffuse Water Pollution Plan considers the part of the catchment that drains to the River Axe SSSI/SAC. Whilst the Nutrient Management Plan is focused on the planned development at Axminster.

The lower figure shows the extent of both the River Basin Management Plan and the Flood Risk Management Plan. These consider river catchments and coastal areas across the entire South West.

The Hierarchy of plans and projects is shown below

High-level plans and projects e.g. SW River Basin Management Plan, Defra Public Service Agreement Target 3

Strategy development e.g. River Restoration Plan, Diffuse Water Pollution Plan, Nutrient Management Plan

Scheme development: including feasibility studies and design of site-specific options

Implementation and management

11

River Axe Restoration Plan

Table 1.1 Summary of consultation when developing the River Axe Restoration Plan Restoration When did Who did we Why did we consult? What How did we What was the result of the Plan Stage we consult? did we consult on? consult? consultation? consult?

Inception February 2011 Steering Group (from To involve main decision makers in Initial meeting of the Available data identified Natural England and developing the plan steering group Environment Agency) To find out who has what information Written requests for and data on the River Axe data and information

Scoping July 2011 – Steering Group To find out about and understand Electronic Use this section to obtain a background stage August 2011 existing condition of the SSSI consultation, understanding of the River Axe SSSI. individual meetings Refer to BBR (2004) and ECUS (2011) for To propose and discuss objectives and site visits more detail. and plan actions To propose and discuss draft objectives and plan

Scoping October 2011 Steering Group To share understanding of river Electronic Use this section to obtain a background formal - April 2012 restoration process and application consultation and understanding of the geomorphology, consultation Statutory Bodies individual meetings flows and artificial influences within the 3 To develop draft objectives, plan and sections of the River Axe SSSI. period actions

Developing May 2012 – Steering Group To finalise objectives and draft plan Electronic Use this section for a broad the Plan October 2015 consultation and understanding of key potential impacts of (main stage) To determine management action individual meetings modifications in the SSS plan

Draft Plan December Steering Group To share the information and findings Public notices, draft Content of the plan finalised (including formal 2015 – of the plan plan available at reference to WWII Stop Line, clarification consultation January 2016 Statutory Bodies Axminster Library of scope of plan and relationship with To agree the action plan period Consultation Group other plans such as the River Axe Diffuse Direct mailing. Water Plan) General Public Online copy of the Revision of evidence base for Action Plan plan (Action Programme and Management Sheets) Action Plan reformatted and finalised

12

River Axe Restoration Plan

Chapter 2. The River Axe SSSI

This chapter provides an overview of our findings on the geomorphology, river flows and ecological context of the Axe SSSI.

2.1 Geology and hydrology

The River Axe SSSI starts upstream at the Axe confluence with the Blackwater stream on the 43-metre contour AOD and from here meanders to the sea through a wide floodplain characterised by improved dairy pasture. The contrasting patterns of meander formation are of geomorphologic interest and of national importance. The geology in the lower reaches of the Axe consists of silty mudstones with small outcrops of laminated shales and limestones. The middle reaches of the Axe are underlain by thinly bedded limestones and silty mudstones. Throughout, the valley floodplain is filled with alluvium with exposed loam adjacent to the river displaying clayey soil rich in organic matter. The underlying geology of the riverbed is alluvium with areas of valley gravel, clay, shale and marl. At the downstream end of the SSSI the river reaches the tidal limit at the 3m contour, a fall of 40 metres with an average gradient of 1:460.

River flow recorded at Whitford Bridge gauging station since 1964 shows a mean daily flow of 5.11 cumecs with a Q95 of 1.24 cumecs9. The maximum-recorded daily flow of the Axe is 144.72 cumecs with a maximum instantaneous flow of 244 cumecs. Hydrological records indicate that base flow is high reflecting the soils and subsoil conditions. Abstractions for public water supplies, and for industrial and agricultural purposes, reduce the natural river flows. Remaining flows are then locally increased but nutrient enriched by effluent returns from sewage treatment plants.

Flooded meanders showing floodplain features and river sinuosity between Axminster and Cloakham

13

River Axe Restoration Plan

2.2 Ecology

Classification of the lower Axe based on vegetation communities places it in a group of shallow gradient lowland rivers characterised by base rich waters with diverse flows. The SSSI supports an exceptionally diverse aquatic and marginal flora. A variety of plant communities are represented, including in the higher reaches a community type usually confined to sandstone catchments in Scotland. In the lower reaches, this gives way to a community more typical of rivers flowing slowly over clay.

The lower River Axe was designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest in 1999. The primary reason for designation is the river habitat, as a good example of unusually active lowland river types, and for its fluvial geomorphology (river processes). The river habitat also supports a number of nationally important associated plant, fish and invertebrate communities and species. The river was additionally designated as a Special Area of Conservation under the European Habitats Directive in 2002.

The stretch of river designated as an SSSI has a rich and diverse range of plant communities represented, this is in part due to the quality and extent of natural physical features such as riffles, pools, depositional exposed gravels and meanders that are present. Submerged aquatic plants include stream water-crowfoot, river water-crowfoot and the nationally scarce short-leaved water-starwort. Other plant species recorded include perfoliate and fennel pondweed, amphibious bistort, brooklime, horned pondweed and spiked water-milfoil. Emergent and marginal plants include reed canary-grass, branched bur-reed, reed sweet- grass, water mint, marsh woundwort and water forget-me-not, flowering rush and great yellow- cress. The flora becomes slightly richer in the lower reaches and includes small and broad- leaved pondweed, various-leaved water-starwort and common reed mace.

The River Axe is also designated as a Special Area of Conservation under the Habitats Directive for the following habitats and species:

 Watercourses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation. (Rivers with floating vegetation often dominated by water-crowfoot)  Bullhead Cottus gobio  Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri  Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus

The river and adjoining land is also important for a wider range of wildlife. Fish of importance in a European context include Atlantic salmon, with species such as brown and sea trout, sea and brook lamprey and thick-lipped grey mullet well represented. Riparian habitats are also important for birds such as kingfisher, dipper, reed bunting, grey wagtails, green sandpiper and little egrets. Mammals such as otter and water vole are present and many other common and scarcer wildlife species flourish, such as white-legged damselfly and the banded demoiselle and a nationally rare alder fly, two nationally unusual caddis fly species and the uncommon medicinal leech. Many of these species are cited as key features within the designations.

A valuable assessment of the historic ecological condition of the river system, was carried out by Devon Wildlife Trust in the late 1980s. The River Axe Corridor Survey maps the condition and features along the entire river corridor, including the SSSI. It includes recommendations for the habitat protection and improvement to the river corridor and wider floodplain. References to this are included in Chapter 3 to support management actions of this plan.

14

River Axe Restoration Plan

2.3 Conservation objectives for the River Axe SSSI

Common Standards have been agreed for setting conservation objectives, and assessing the condition of freshwater SSSIs and SACs against those objectives (JNCC 2014). Conservation objectives define the desired state for each SSSI site in terms of the features for which they have been designated. When these features are being managed in a way which maintains their nature conservation value, then they are said to be in ‘favourable condition’.

Conservation objectives are based on the environmental integrity of the river habitat to support the characteristic flora and fauna of the habitat type. Integrity is defined in basic terms by a range of chemical, hydrological and physical attribute targets (some quantitative, some descriptive) considered to represent ‘favourable condition’. These targets are encapsulated in a ‘Favourable Condition Table (NE, 2018) for the River Axe.

The conservation objectives as set out in the FCT for the Axe include targets related to maintaining (or restoring where it is currently below standard) the following:

 Habitat extent (rivers and streams);  Characteristic flow regime;  Water quality;  No artificial barriers significantly impairing sediment or wildlife migration;  Predominantly unmodified and characteristic channel form;  No excessive siltation levels;  Appropriate wildlife species composition and abundance; and  No impact on native biota from alien or introduced species.

2.4 Condition of the River Axe SSSI

The condition of all SSSIs in England, including the River Axe, is assessed by Natural England against site-specific targets which are set out in a favourable condition table. A SSSI unit is assessed to be in ‘favourable condition’ if the SSSI is being adequately conserved and is meeting its targets.

The most recent condition assessment of the Axe SSSI took place in 2011 (ECUS, 2011). None of the survey sites were recorded as being in ‘favourable’ status for all of the parameters assessed, and none were found to be universally ‘unfavourable’. The overall assessment was that the Axe SSSI is in unfavourable condition. A summary of the current condition of the SSSI management units is given in Table 2.1.

The latest condition assessment of the River Axe describes the condition of the site as ‘unfavourable declining’ because of:

 Overgrazing  Inappropriate weirs, dams and other structures  Water pollution - agriculture/run off  Water pollution – discharge  Siltation  Non-native Invasive species

The 2014 River Axe SAC Site Improvement Plan (http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/ publication/4527678073864192) identifies pressures including through Water Pollution,

15

River Axe Restoration Plan

Siltation, Inappropriate weirs, dams and other structures. It recommends that these pressures should be addressed through completion of a strategic river restoration plan. This document implements that recommendation.

Widespread siltation is caused by a range of factors including high particulate loads, active bank erosion, lack of riparian vegetation/trees, livestock poaching and presence of Himalayan balsam. The SIP identifies the River Restoration Plan’s role in supporting tree planting along appropriate sections of the river to provide bank structure and physical habitat.

The SIP states that “a major cause of unfavourable/declining condition is the presence of unnecessary and obstructive buildings and structures along the watercourse. Artificial channel modifications can cause reduced flow and increased siltation, altering the physical structure of the river and its ability to support special features. In addition, artificial barriers can significantly impair characteristic migratory species from carrying out essential life-cycle movements e.g. weirs at Axminster and Weycroft where fish passes are required. The River Restoration Project aims to remove inappropriate structures where possible.”

The actions included in this restoration plan will, in combination with other plans already being implemented to control invasive species (Newman 2012), and reduce diffuse water pollution (Environment Agency/Natural England, 2014), contribute to achieving the targets for favourable condition of the River Axe SSSI under the Biodiversity 2020 strategy.

16

River Axe Restoration Plan

Table 2.1 Summary of condition of River Axe SSSI management units (Data from Natural England online summary site condition data with latest assessment date of 20/06/2018)

Unit Unit name Condition Habitat Reasons for failure Action in place Action required

1 Dorset section Unfavourable Rivers and Overgrazing, CSF, DWP plan, RDP CAP 2014- - Declining streams Inappropriate weirs dams and other invasive species 2020, works notice, structures control river restoration Siltation Inappropriate pest control

2 Devon border to Unfavourable Rivers and Overgrazing CSF, DWP plan, RDP CAP 2014- River Yarty - Declining streams Inappropriate weirs dams and other invasive species 2020, works notice, confluence structure, control, AMP fisheries Inappropriate pest control investigations enhancement project, river restoration

3 River Yarty Unfavourable Rivers and Overgrazing, CSF, DWP plan, RDP CAP 2014- confluence to - Declining streams Inappropriate weirs dams and other AMP 2020, works notice, Axe Bridge structure, investigations, river restoration Water pollution - agriculture/run off, invasive species Water pollution - discharge control, implement Inappropriate pest control AMP scheme

4 Axminster Favourable Earth heritage N/A geomorphology

5 Whitford Favourable Earth heritage N/A geomorphology

17

River Axe Restoration Plan

2.5 Water Framework Directive objectives

The Water Framework Directive is European legislation aimed at improving the management of rivers, coasts and estuaries to achieve ‘Good Ecological Status’ or ‘GES’. This is defined by the chemical, biological and physical qualities of the river.

Under the European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0060, the ecological status of a surface water body is assessed according to:  The condition of biological elements, for example fish, benthic invertebrates and other aquatic flora;  Concentrations of supporting physio-chemical elements, for example thermal conditions and concentrations of oxygen, ammonia and nutrients;  Concentrations of specific pollutants, for example copper and other priority substances; and  The condition of the hydromorphological quality elements, including morphological condition and hydrological regime.

Ecological status is recorded on the scale of high, good, moderate, poor or bad. 'High' denotes largely undisturbed conditions and the other classes represent increasing deviation from this natural condition, otherwise described as a 'reference condition'. The ecological status classification for the water body, and the confidence in this, is determined from the worst scoring quality element.

Chemical status is assessed by compliance with environmental standards for chemicals that are listed in the Environmental Quality Standards Directive (2008/105/EC) http://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0105. These chemicals include priority substances, priority hazardous substances, and eight other pollutants carried over from the Dangerous Substance Daughter Directives. Chemical status is recorded as 'good' or 'fail'. The chemical status classification for the water body is determined by the worst scoring chemical.

The Water Framework Directive requires protected sites including Special Areas of Conservation to be meeting their objectives by 2015 (or in cases where there are significant pressures to address, 2021 or 2027). For SAC/SSSIs the targets for Favourable Condition can be more stringent than for WFD due to the particular requirements of the wildlife or habitats at these sites and the WFD states ‘where more than one objective relates to a given body of water, the most stringent shall apply’.

The River Axe SSSI is located in water body GB108045008870 (Axe). Overall biological quality is classified (2016 classification) as poor, chemical quality as moderate and hydro- morphological quality as not high. The Environment Agency, Natural England and others are therefore obliged to undertake work to ensure that the required standards are achieved in the future.

The River Axe Ecological Status of Poor reflects a biological quality elements conditions of Poor for fish, High for invertebrates and Moderate for Macropytes and Phytobenthos. The reasons for failure of these are suspected to linked pressure from nutrient loads.

River Basin Management Plan for the South West attributes a number of measures for the River Axe including a river restoration programme. This river restoration plan and its subsequent implementation will therefore help improve the status of the river, contributing to achieving Good Ecological Status.

18

River Axe Restoration Plan

2.6 Land use and land use change

There are approximately 1,000 individual farm holdings in the catchment which cover around 36,300 hectares (88 %) of the catchment area. A comparison between AgCensus returns between 2000 and 2010 clearly illustrates intensification across the catchment for cattle, sheep, maize and temporary grassland (Natural England 2015). Land adjacent to the watercourses of the catchment is generally agricultural grade 4, due to the presence of clay in the soil which impedes drainage. This land provides rough pasture with fertiliser and field drains employed to help maintain the land (Sweet 2004).

Britain’s soils, seasonality and climate provide the natural ingredients for a productive farming sector both now and in the future. As population grows and climate potentially changes, there could be an increased dependency on agricultural land for food production. It is therefore important to recognise the importance of current and future agriculture and food production within the Axe catchment.

Changing farming practices, particularly the increase in arable farming, have been linked an increase in fine sediment (silt) delivery to watercourses (BBR 2004). Many farmers have already taken steps to minimise pressures on the water environment through the uptake of best practices via initiatives like Catchment Sensitive Farming. However, impacts cannot readily be eliminated in their entirety and it remains a challenge to find a route to achieving favourable condition and good ecological status and maintaining agricultural production. New technology and farming techniques have an important role to play in future sustainable food production.

The importance of agriculture to the rural economy is recognised and a valid consideration when planning river restoration. It is acknowledged that measures affecting land use will require support (such as from Countryside Stewardship) and may only be implemented over long time scales. Further information about the catchment including landscape, cultural heritage and recreation can be found in the fluvial audit (BBR 2004 B) and in the Pollution Risk Assessment for the Axe Catchment (Natural England 2015).

2.7 Water quality

The 2011 condition assessment of the River Axe SSSI found the site to be in unfavourable condition for a number of reasons, including suspended solids and phosphates. The Axe is also classed under the WFD as having a moderate chemical status. Consequently the River Axe diffuse water pollution plan has been developed for the site to assess water quality pressures and management options.

In 2014 the Westcountry Rivers Trust (WRT) carried out a detailed water quality risk assessment for the River Axe SSSI on behalf of Natural England. They assessed catchment wide pollution risks and develop a source apportionment model for the catchment. The objective was to review all the available evidence and to present this information in a way to inform the Diffuse Water Pollution Plan (DWPP) plan and future catchment management initiatives. The resulting source apportionment report (Natural England 2015) should be referred to for detailed information on land use and diffuse pollution risks in the catchment.

The risk assessment and previous investigations identified specific pressures from suspended sediments and phosphorous. The DWPP and the WRT assessment will help Natural England, the Environment Agency and key partners to decide what, where, how and when to target efforts to improve water quality in the River Axe SSSI/SAC.

19

River Axe Restoration Plan

Physical habitat modifications affect the ability of a river to convey sediment, and where combined with elevated inputs of fine sediment can lead to the river bed becoming excessively silty. This reduces the availability of clean coarse sediment, which is required by salmon, bullhead and lamprey to spawn. Elevated levels of silt also mean that water crowfoot is more prone to being washed out in high flows.

A reduction in the amount of fine sediment and phosphates entering the river, combined with restoration of river geomorphology will therefore improve the condition of the river for the habitats and associated species it supports. Measures such as planting riparian buffer strips and blocks of trees should have benefits both for water quality and the physical habitat of the River Axe, and will help deliver the aims of the DWPP and this restoration plan.

2.8 Flood risk management

The South West Flood Risk Management Plan (SWFRMP) was published in March 2016. It highlights the hazards and risks from rivers, the sea, surface water, groundwater and reservoirs and set out how Risk Management Authorities will work together with communities to manage flood risk. It also looks at how to improve the environment and includes links with River Basin Management Plan objectives.

The River Axe is part of the East Devon catchment, with the SSSI falling into the SWFRMP’s areas of the ‘Upper Otter and Axe’, ‘Axminster and Honiton’ and the ‘Rural Mid and Lower Catchment’. According to the SWFRMP there are many sources of flood risk within this catchment. These catchment areas are steep and susceptible to short duration intense rainfall. There has been a history of intense rainfall causing widespread surface water flooding of small communities and isolated properties. However, flooding is one of the natural river processes that are important in maintaining the conservation status of the site

The River Axe generally responds to rainfall, though more slowly than the other East Devon rivers. The flood peaks of the River Axe reduce as they reach wide floodplain, but the river is often slow to recede in its lower reaches. The greensand geology is important in storing and slowly releasing groundwater into the tributaries of the River Axe, maintaining flow through dry periods.

Along the length of the SSSI, Axminster is the main location of flood risk to property. The SWFRMP notes that: “Although the majority of Axminster is on higher ground, properties along the north west side of the town, near Stoney Bridge, are located within the floodplain of the River Axe. Approximately three quarters of these are residential properties with the remainder being commercial. In 2012 there was a significant flood event on the Millbrook where more than 40 properties flooded, resulting in the construction of a new flood defence scheme by the Lead Local Flood Authority. The number of properties at risk in Axminster is not expected to increase in the future.”

The SWFRMP has been developed alongside the River Basin Management Plan so that opportunities for flood risk improvements can integrate water and biodiversity objectives wherever possible. The SWFRMP objectives for the East Devon catchment include the following environmental objectives relevant to this restoration plan:

 Achieve WFD objectives through flood risk management  Protect designated nature conservation sites

20

River Axe Restoration Plan

The following actions may provide benefits both for flood risk and the River Axe SSSI.

 Understand the impacts of manmade structures on the river processes that form the reason for unfavourable status [of the River Axe]. Plan and deliver technically feasible and affordable solutions as part of Flood Risk Management projects.  Identify where working with natural processes can help improve resilience to climate change.  Ensure that flood defence consenting promotes restoration of meanders where appropriate, and enhances floodplain connectivity.  With Natural England, landowners and others, promote improved land management practices to help reduce flood risk and provide biodiversity benefits. Consider ways of reconnecting the River Axe to its floodplain to utilise flood storage and reduce risk to people.

2.9 Invasive non-native species and disease

Himalayan balsam is extensive on the banks of the River Axe. Himalayan balsam out competes native riparian plants during the summer retarding their growth. The Himalayan balsam then dies back in the winter leaving the river channel margins free from vegetation which increases the vulnerability of the riverbanks to erosion.

Diseased alders suffering from Phytophthora root disease are also extensive within the Axe catchment.

To try to tackle the problem of non-native invasive plants in the catchment, Natural England commissioned an Invasive Alien Plant Species Control Programme in 2012 (Newman 2012). This has since been incorporated into the River Axe Improvement Plan: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/6572555716526080). The Axe Invasives Project started soon after and is now in its third year working on the ground to control Himalayan balsam, Japanese knotweed and giant hogweed.

2.10 Influences on geomorphology and channel change

In 2004, Babtie Brown and Root were commissioned to undertake geomorphological studies of the Axe catchment. This provides a key evidence base for the Restoration Plan.

This geomorphological appraisal (BBR2004) assessed influences on the sediment and morphology in the Axe catchment in detail. A time chart for these influences was produced, and is represented in Table 2.2. Key issues for the river were identified as:

 High volume of fine sediment supplied through a combination of bank erosion (caused by channel weathering, invasive species and livestock poaching) together with inputs from the wider catchment (through field drains and surface runoff from arable land).

 Channel modifications such as bank protection; channel re-alignment; re-sectioning culverting and weir construction lead to reductions in channel morphological diversity inhibit natural geomorphological processes and in some instances, such as weirs, inhibit the passage of migratory fish species.  Channel planform changes and associated bank erosion along the River Axe are in part a reflection of the natural behaviour of meandering rivers. However, localised channel modifications such as bend removal, channel re-alignments and bank

21

River Axe Restoration Plan

protection conducted throughout the last 200 years, have complicated the natural behaviour of the river channel. It is therefore extremely difficult to determine the extent to contemporary river behaviour is natural or a result of the anthropogenic interference. It is likely that channel activity represents a combination of natural and artificial influences. Further anthropogenic interference may lead to an unpredictable and undesirable channel response.

 Himalayan balsam is extremely widespread in the catchment. The detrimental effect of this plant on riparian vegetation and riverbank stability is contributing to the transfer of sediment, particularly fine material, to the river channel.

Table 2.2 Time chart of influences on sediment and morphology in the Axe catchment Time Pre 1900 1900s- 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 1940s Floods Large floods in:- Floods:- Flood in Dec Dec 1985 Dec 1992 1965 with 1875, 1881 and 6 Feb 00 2.5% 1894 19 Dec 09 probability. 17 Jul 26 Flood Jul 1968

Capital Localised Fish passes works realignment of the constructed River Axe during at high weirs construction of the railway along the Axe valley

River Ad hoc Sympathetic approach to maintenance protection bank protection promoted and channel by Environment Agency works by landowners

Natural geomorphic Meander growth and occasional cut-off channel change

Land use Nutrient Land Increase in maize change application drainage cultivation measures (agriculture) Increase in Decline in improved stocking grassland densities

Land use Up to 4 active quarries in (minerals) catchment Sand and gravel extraction at Chard Junction and Kilmington

Natural geomorphological changes in the catchment have predominantly taken the form of changes in channel planform along the River Axe, primarily though the growth and cut-off of meanders.

There is little documentation relating to the specific geomorphological impacts of hydrological events. While many of the bend changes recorded are likely to have been encouraged by flood events, they may also have occurred as a result of the gradual but progressive growth of bends which is typical of meandering rivers.

22

River Axe Restoration Plan

A number of additional channel changes along the Axe were initiated by human activity. The river channel at Chard Junction was completely realigned sometime after 1891, possibly to facilitate industrial development in this location. At Westford Mill, downstream from Chard Junction a 400m section of river channel was excavated prior to 1891 in conjunction with the development of the mill. Field evidence indicates that this channel now conveys a greater quantity of flow that the original channel. In addition a number of bends were also removed or shortened during construction of the railway in the mid-nineteenth century.

The railway line follows the flat land in the floodplain for approximately 25km of the Axe catchment, south from Crewkerne, including the SSSI reaches from Broom before heading westwards at Whitford towards Exeter. The line is frequently raised on embankments running parallel to the river, and bridges the river three times through the length of the SSSI. This influence on river and floodplain processes since 1860 has not been significantly studied. However a flood modelling study has been carried out for the Environment Agency, Network Rail and Devon County Council (Environment Agency River Axe scenario testing – Project no. IMSW001762) provides some understanding of the influence of the embankment and bridge openings during flood conditions. Work is now underway that will increase connectivity through the embankment, and so between floodplain cells, which will reduce risk to the rail infrastructure but may also support restoring more natural conditions in the SSSI.

River channel modification ranging from piecemeal bank protection to extended sections of channel re-sectioning or realignment can alter both morphological diversity and the behaviour of the river channels. Channel re-alignment and re-sectioning has been conducted in several locations in the catchment. In these locations the channel morphology is often, but not always, simplified. The impacts of channel modification include reduced bed diversity, loss of natural bank materials and a reduction in gravel bar extents.

A significant and recent example of such channel modification is the A35 Axminster Bypass scheme. Here a natural meandering reach was replaced by a narrowed, straightened and blockstone reinforced channel that reduced the river length by 70m. As part of the works, a 200m oxbow lake feature was also infilled.

The majority of the Axe catchment is largely unprotected from flooding; although major flood defence schemes are in place at Axminster, Stafford Brook and Seaton. There is little regular maintenance on the main rivers of the Axe catchment and any maintenance operations are only conducted where it has been deemed absolutely necessary, such as gravel removals at Stoney Bridge about every three years.

Extensive works were also undertaken along the length of the River Axe as part of the World War II Stop Line. Works included; embankment creation, cuttings across meanders, dredging, pill box and anti-tank block installation. These are referenced in the relevant sections of Chapter 3, with notes on their significance to river processes. Case examples of the interactions between Stop Line features and river processes are presented in Annexes 3 and 4 for Pill Boxes at Woodhayne and Whitford.

It is notable the speed with which the river processes have adjusted to many of the direct World War II Stop Line works. The Anti-Tank ditches have largely infilled, presumably, with floodplain deposits, but have not triggered any channel avulsion during major floods. Bankside embankments may well have influenced more frequent out of bank flooding patterns. Some of these remain intact as low bankside embankments, whereas others have been degraded or lost through river bank erosion. Increased shrub and tree planting proposed in the plan should retard the loss of these features to natural erosion.

23

River Axe Restoration Plan

Proposed sites of significant management actions do include World War II Stop Line features, and full engagement and consultation with Devon County Archaeologists will be required. Where relevant these are noted within the Management Action Plan sheets.

2.11 Devon Wildlife Trust - River Axe Corridor Survey

In 1988 Devon Wildlife Trust carried out a comprehensive survey of the River Axe from the Tidal Outlet at Seaton through to the A3066 Mosterton Road Bridge for the South West Water Authority. The survey followed the ‘Surveys of Wildlife in River Corridors – Draft Methodology’ (1985) to produce maps for all: physical features (such as channel form, substrate, bank formation and flow patterns); biological features (such as tree cover, bankside vegetation, channel vegetation and adjacent habitats); features of interest in the surrounding land; and key sites and features of particular importance to wildlife.

The report provides a set of notes that describe the characteristics of the river and its corridor and emphasize areas of importance. It concentrates on broad areas of importance and localized points of interest.

Of particular use for the Restoration Plan, the report include specific management recommendations including mapped referenced to their location and extent.

Whilst the described features have been subject to natural change as well as artificial modification, they provide a valuable indication of management actions that would improve the natural functioning and form of the River Axe and its associated river corridor. The mapped features and recommendations have been reproduced on maps within Annex 3, and are referenced in relevant parts of Section 3.

24

River Axe Restoration Plan

Chapter 3. River sector descriptions

This chapter provides a sector summary of the geomorphology, flows and artificial influences within the three sectors of the Axe SSSI.

3.1 Summary of sector descriptions

The River Axe may divided into three sectors based on its gradient. Within these, the SSSI may be which are further subdivided into 24 geomorphologically homogenous units based on a range of criteria. The sectors and 24 reaches were defined in the geomorphological appraisal (BBR 2004). Relevant information in that study is reproduced in brief below and has informed this work. The following descriptions cover the three sectors: upper, mid and lower.

The boundaries between these sectors are illustrated in Figures 3, 6 and 7. These were defined by a number of factors, including changes in gradient, planform, cross-sectional profile, major structures, bank material, vegetation cover, channel modification and significant tributaries. The three sectors range from, a medium to high gradient river in the upper sector, through to a medium to low gradient river in the lower sector.

Blackwater River confluence (right) with the River Axe (left)

25

River Axe Restoration Plan

Figure 3.1 Geomorphic reaches within the SSSI/SAC, as identified in BBR 2004

26

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.2 Upper sector

Sector Length Upstream limit Downstream BBR report SSSI unit and NGR limit and NGR geomorphological reaches

Upper 1.5km NGR NGR AXE019 - AXE021 1 and 2 ST3247002315 ST3220401503 Confluence of Confluence of Blackwater River River Kit

Figure 3.2 Map showing upper sector SSSI units and geomorphic reaches

27

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.2.1 Physical character

A medium gradient, U-shaped channel form located within a floodplain of 5-10 channel widths on each side. The planform comprises irregular meanders.

Channel substrate ranges from silt to coarse gravel with some cobbles; clay is also present at the confluence of the Blackwater River. The bed substrate is uniform with a few exposed channel deposits and toe accumulations present. Bank sediments range from silt to fine gravel forming cliffed riverbanks with occasional stepped sections along both banks, there are areas of coarse material up to large cobbles.

Flow is varied with runs, riffles and glides all well represented.

In-channel vegetation includes submerged, floating emergent, and amphibious macrophyte species together with exposed and submerged tree roots.

DWT Axe River Corridor Survey recommended increasing tree and scrub cover and notably retaining and supplementing the willows along the waterline upstream of the rail crossing. The accreted outer meander bend downstream of the Blackwater River was recommended to be left undisturbed to allow its natural regeneration and development.

3.2.2 Historical change

Ordnance Survey maps show the County and Parish boundaries following old river channel meanders. This indicates significant bend enlargement, which may have been in response to the construction of the London and Southwest Railway which opened its Exeter Extension from Yeovil Junction to Exeter Queen Street in 1860. This runs parallel to the river and crosses it once in this sector, between Wadbrook and Axe farms. The river was straightened and shortened in places to accommodate the railway, causing it to readjust by extending and lengthening meander bends.

However, adjustment and meander development continues, with examples of reduction in bend length downstream of the Blackwater River since the 1990s, island forming and subsequent incorporation into the migrating inner bank just upstream of the rail crossing, and bend enlargement midway between the two.

Significant works were carried out as part of the World War II stop line, with an anti-tank trench and ditch cut to the east of the Axe for most of the length of AXE019 (likely to be the ‘bend cut-off’ described in the geomorphological appraisal 2004), and possibly with a raised embankment to the east of AXE020 between the road and Wadbrook Farm. The anti-tank trench remains as a linear wetter depression within the floodplain, the ditch has been partially lost to bank erosion and initiation of meander development.

AXE020, though a short reach, has 50% of its banks protected by wood piling as an attempt to protect Wadbrook Farm buildings. This work was carried out in the early 1990s in collaboration with the National Rivers Authority as a trial using green engineering to protect vulnerable locations from bank erosion. This is now a line of willows with the remains of the spiling work still in-channel.

In 2018, more sympathetic in channel works have been carried out by the Environment Agency through this reach and downstream to Wadbrook Coppice. Details of this are presented in the case example given in Annex 6.

28

River Axe Restoration Plan

River Axe near the River Kit confluence

3.2.3 Geomorphological behaviour

Sediment is supplied to the channel from a range of sources. Bank erosion occurs extensively throughout the watercourse and includes toe scour, cliff erosion, slumping and slips. Point sources such as tributaries, livestock poaching and land drainage also represent important sources of mostly fine sediment. Much of the coarse sediment in the channel has been transferred from upstream with few sources of coarse sediment in this sector.

The dominance of fine sediment delivery in this watercourse is a reflection of the composition of floodplain materials. The frequent occurrence of temporary channel deposits reflects relatively active coarse and fine sediment delivery and transfer. The deposition of sediment within the channel both encourages bank erosion, resulting in local meander bend growth and cut-offs, but also accretion on inner bends and most notably infilling of the outer bend of the former large meander immediately downstream of the Blackwater River.

The reaches show a varied broadly natural behaviour albeit modified in response to land management and infrastructure. The lack of riparian vegetation along the eastern bank in particular is leading to enhanced channel erosion and mobility on a broad scale. This is enhanced by cattle access and poaching form the opposite bank in discrete locations. However, there are also significant areas where accretion and re-vegetation are being allowed to develop to provide a range of habitat and river forms.

The rail embankment cuts across the floodplain and channel, constraining frequent flood flows through the single bridge opening, but with a higher level bypass through Axe farm to the west. This creates a complex influence on hydraulics and geomorphology with ponding of flood water upstream, but concentration downstream towards Wadbrook Farm. Works are ongoing by Network Rail to increase floodplain flows through the embankment here which will reduce this influence.

29

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.2.4 Significant issues

 Limited riparian vegetation, with grazing pressure to the bank top  Fine sediment delivery through bank failure and livestock poaching at discrete locations.  Interruption of natural geomorphological process and floodplain flow distribution due to railway bridges and floodplain embankments, and bank protection at Wadbrook Farm.  Loss of morphological diversity and interruption to natural geomorphological process due to bank protection.  Diseased alders are found throughout the watercourse also single lines of aging bank top trees.

Table 3.1 Upper sector summary of features (BBR 2004) Feature Number River length 1.49km River fall 4m River gradient 1:375 Weirs 0 Artificial fall 0 Road bridges 1 Rail bridges 1 Foot bridges 0 Straightened/reinforced river length 320 m

Upper Sector

3500 2998 3000 Key:  Bank length 2500  Reinforced bank 2000  Embanked 1500  Poached bank 1035 1000  Eroding cliff

Bank length inBank metres  Bank tree cover 500 320 135 0 10 0 BL RI EM PO EC TC Bank characteristics

Figure 3.3 Upper sector length of each characteristic bank-type (BBR 2004)

30

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.3 Mid sector

Sector Length Upstream limit Downstream BBR report SSSI unit and NGR limit and NGR geomorphological reaches

Mid 7.3km NGR NGR AXE022 - AXE031 2 ST3220401503 SY2878797727 Confluence of 100m u/s of A35 River Kit road bridge

Figure 3.4 Map showing mid sector SSSI units and geomorphic reaches

31

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.3.1 Physical character

A low gradient channel located within a valley form that varies from a concave bowl some 1-5 channel across on each side in the upper reaches to a wider terraced form over 10 channel widths across on each side in the lower reaches.

The channel planform is varied with: regular meanders (AXE022, 027, 031); irregular meanders (AXE023, 028-030); straight sections (AXE025, 032) and one anastomosed reach (AXE024).

Bed material is dominated by gravel/pebble but ranges from silt to cobble. Bank materials vary from silts to cobbles with fines being particularly extensive in the middle reaches. Riverbanks are generally steep or cliffed, but in reaches are extensively graded. There are artificial bank materials present in reaches AXE025-031.

Flows include runs, riffles, pools, glides and dead water. Reaches AXE026-027 are exceptions being controlled by historic engineering works. Both coarse and fine channel deposits occur although coarse are generally more frequent. Channel deposits include mid-channel bars, point bars, side bars and berms, although AXE026 has few channel deposition features.

Submerged channel vegetation increases downstream corresponding with a decrease in riparian tree shading, emergent vegetation remains common throughout.

River Axe just downstream of River Kit confluence

3.3.2 Historical change

The current Weycroft mill house dates back to the 18th century but is likely to have been predated by a medieval mill site. Realignment of reaches AXE026 and AXE027 will initially have been linked to these operations.

32

River Axe Restoration Plan

The London and Southwest Railway opened its Exeter Extension from Yeovil Junction to Exeter Queen Street in 1860. This continues to run parallel to the river and crosses it once in this sector, just downstream of Weycroft Bridge. At Town Weir (AXE029-030), the railway embankment wall forms the left bank of the river, which is geomorphologically constrained here by both the railway and the weir.

The Axminster Flood Alleviation Scheme also extends from some 500m upstream of Town Weir to 300 downstream. The scheme includes raised earth embankments, raised walls, and a maintained channel through Stoney Bridge. The embankments constrain flood flows through a narrow channel through Stoney Bridge. The bridge has been extended to the east with an additional culvert arch to increase flow capacity; with associated bank retaining walls extending from 25m upstream to 100m downstream on the eastern bank.

Extensive works were carried out as part of the World War II Stop Line. Anti-tank ditches were cut across meanders that acted in combination with raised embankments: examples include upstream of Bow Bridge at Axminster (AXE030), near Bagley Hill Farm (AXE023 and AXE024), and from Wadbrook Coppice to Axe Bridge (AXE022). Anti-tank obstacles were also installed at Axminster, Cloakham and extensively at Weycroft.

Intermittent bank protection consists of walling and blockstone (AXE026-030). There have also been numerous phases of bridge reinforcement and scour protection, including at Weycroft Bridge and the downstream rail crossing.

River Axe just north of the A35

33

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.3.3 Geomorphological behaviour

The changing character of the river reflects both the physical changes from the narrow floodplain in the north to the wider valley in the south, but also the human induces changes, with significant controlling structures of Weycroft and Town Weirs along with the adjacent road bridges and rail embankments, but also varying land use management pressures.

At Weycroft, the weir impounds the straightened channel upstream and retaining the channel in slightly elevated position above the floodplain to the northwest. This interrupts the natural geomorphic processes and limits the morphological diversity

Immediately downstream, Weycroft Bridge and its embankments constrain the floodplain. This no doubt led to scouring of the river bed at the bridge. Scour protection works to address this take the form of a concrete invert extending across the channel, with sheet piling along the downstream edge. The result is the impoundment and fixing of the channel upstream, and the creation of an unnaturally deep and wide scour pool downstream of the bridge. Flood capacity has no doubt also been reduced at the bridge as a result of the scour protection works.

Past Axminster in AXE 030, Town Weir impounds a short section of river, but in combination with the rail embankment abruptly redirects flows to the west. This discontinuity impacts on coarse sediment transport through the reach, but also leads to misalignment of flows at Stoney Bridge that is driving long term meander migration. The implication of the meander migration at Stoney Bridge, is that the western bank experiences slack waters and accretion whereas flows and erosion pressure are concentrated against the outer eastern bank. Flood defence embankments on the western floodplain further concentrate high flows through this bridge and channel. So whilst the new eastern culvert opening to the bridge provided some temporary relief, the flow pressure on that side of the river continues to build against the engineered bank.

Land use management impacts, appear more subtle than these structure driven impacts, but affect a larger extent of the sector. They have a greater influence on sedimentation and geomorphic processes in terms of channel width, form and stability.

Where the river corridor is free from grazing pressure, and a well vegetated margin has been retained (for instance in reaches AXE23 and AXE24), the channel shows a range of irregular and regular meanders, with a narrow slowly migrating channel.

In other reaches, there are varying degrees of cattle grazing and cattle access to the channel. In reaches AXE029 and AXE030, where cattle grazing of the banktop and riparian vegetation is significant, the channel widens by an additional 1-2m. However, in other reaches there is extensive cattle access to the watercourse with intensive grazing of the bankside and marginal vegetation. In these reaches, the channel width increases by up to 3-4 times; the channel planform become highly unstable; and meanders rapidly elongate and migrate.

Coarse sediment sources are limited in this sector, with indications that this supply cannot keep pace with the more rapidly migrating channel forms.

3.3.4 Significant issues

 Land management (such as livestock poaching, grazing access, and field drains) impacting on riparian banks, channel and old relic features within the floodplain AXE028-30.

34

River Axe Restoration Plan

 Low morphological diversity and interruption to natural geomorphological processes caused by channel modifications particularly Weycroft and Town Weirs and bank protection measures.  Interruption of natural geomorphological process due to railway embankments and bridges.  Himalayan balsam is present along both banks throughout the reach.

Table 3.2. Mid sector summary of features (BBR 2004) Feature Number River length 7.3km River fall 19m River gradient 1:380 Weirs 2 Artificial fall 2.9 Road bridges 3 Rail bridges 1 Foot bridges 3 Straightened/reinforced river length 805m

Middle Sector

16000 14600 14000 Key:  Bank length 12000  Reinforced bank 10000  Embanked 8000 5746  Poached bank 6000 4115  Eroding cliff 4000

Bank length inBank metres  Bank tree cover 2000 805 120 38 0 BL RI EM PO EC TC Bank characteristics

Figure 3.5 Mid sector length of each characteristic bank-type (BBR 2004)

35

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.4 Lower sector

Sector Length Upstream limit and Downstream limit Geomorphological SSSI NGR and NGR reaches unit

Lower 9.8km NGR NGR AXE32- AXE42 2 and 3 SY2878797727 SY2594492635 100m u/s of A35 100m u/s of A3052 road bridge Axe Bridge

Figure 3.6 Map showing lower sector SSSI units and geomorphological reaches

36

River Axe Restoration Plan

River Axe downstream of A35

River Axe just downstream of Axe Bridge, showing high tide locking of the river at this point

37

River Axe Restoration Plan

3.4.1 Physical character

The river displays a low gradient channel within a wide generally symmetric floodplain greater than 10 channel widths. The channel ranges from regular meanders (AXE033, 035, 040, 041), irregular meanders (AXE034, 036, 037) to sinuous (AXE039, 042) and straight sections (AXE 032, 038)

Bed sediments range in size from silt to cobbles. Bank materials are similarly variable ranging from clay to pebble. Silt and sand is extensive at the confluence of the River Yarty. Clay is only found in the lower reaches.

The channel cross-section is typically U-shaped with steep or vertical banks of 1-2 metres. Only reach AXE032 has a rectangular cross-section.

Flow is varied reflecting generally good morphological diversity, which includes runs, riffles, pools, dead water, and glides. Channel deposits vary in frequency; both coarse and fine channel deposits have a high frequency in reaches AXE036, AXE038 and AXE040. Elsewhere, fine deposits occur with moderate frequency while coarse deposits have a low frequency. Channel deposits are predominantly berms, mid-channel bars, point bars and sidebars. Channel vegetation both submerged vegetation and emergent are the dominant types.

3.4.2 Historical change

Historical channel migration is evident along this sector particularly around the confluence of the River Yarty (AXE033-034) and Whitford (AXE037-038)). These represent the most geomorphologically active parts of the Axe catchment. Flood embankments have been installed along reach AXE040. Artificial bank materials are present locally in all reaches.

Upstream of Whitford, the channel has undergone significant historical manipulation and subsequent natural readjustment. Tithe maps dating from the 1840s show a constructed straight channel running to the west of the natural main channel, called the Fishing lane.

There were extensive works carried out as part of the World War II Taunton Stop Line. Pill boxes are located along the entire length of this sector; an example of these is given as a case example in Annex 3, where the isolated Woodhayne Pillbox is gradually being absorbed into the channel as the river migrates past it. However a significant concentration of Anti-Tank obstacles, ditches and barriers were installed around Axe Bridge and Whitford Bridge. At Whitford, concentric rings of defences are focused on the bridge and ford crossing. This site provides a case example (see Annex 5) where the Stop Line features are intrinsically linked to the river morphology and where management considerations at the bridge and gauging station will need to take this into account.

Reach AXE032 was resectioned and realigned when the A35 Axminster bypass road was built and check weirs installed to constrain lateral migration of the channel. The works included loss of the former meander channel and oxbow lake that provided significant ecological and geomorphic values.

38

River Axe Restoration Plan

1947 air photo showing meander bends lost in building of the A35 bypass with inset map of current alignments

3.4.3 Geomorphological behaviour

Particularly in the upper reaches the low bank cohesion of the natural banks allows lateral channel adjustment. High rates of lateral activity are indicated by the frequency of bank erosion, which includes toe scour, cliffs, slumping, slips and active cut offs.

Both fine and coarse material is being supplied to the channel through these diffuse sources. Point sources present also provide additional fine sediment, from localised poaching, field drains and ford crossings.

Sediment transport is interrupted by the modifications in flows caused by bridges and weirs, which in turn promotes bend enlargement. In response to these relatively high rates of channel activity bank protection has been provided throughout the watercourse. This varies from localised protection such as blockstone and builders waste to more extensive lengths associated with historic realignments and infrastructure protection for road and rail routes.

As noted in section 3.4.2 above, in the 1840s at Whitford, flows in the River Axe were split between a man-made Fishing Lane to the west, and a natural meandering channel to the east. Historic maps from the 1880s and 1900s suggest that a combination of flood response and possible inadequate maintenance, lead to the avulsion of the river into the Fishing Lane. With this came a process of natural adjustment of the constructed channel with meander development and migration and ox bow lake formation. The former natural channel now enters the river as an enlarged ditch from the east at Whitford Bridge. The continued adjustment and development of meander forms is now leading erosion of the banks at Whitford Bridge and the misalignment and increased maintenance pressure on Whitford Gauging Station. Details of this process and the linkage with the WWII Taunton Stop Line are presented in Annex 5.

39

River Axe Restoration Plan

The process of meander development and ox bow lake formation noted at Whitford, and which was removed in the A35 bypass works, are prevalent within the Lower Sector of the river. These forms and processes provide a rich mosaic of habitats and geomorphological features. They demonstrate the active nature of channel changes in this sector that contribute to its designation value.

3.4.4 Significant issues

 Lack of morphological diversity in reach AXE032.  Reductions in morphological diversity and interruption to natural geomorphological processes caused by channel modifications and maintenance activities, particularly Whitford Weirs, bridge and gauging weir.  Mechanical infilling of old river features within the floodplain.  Himalayan Balsam is present along both banks throughout the reaches.  Diseased alders.  Impact of transport infrastructure on natural river processes.

Table 3.3. Section summary of features (from BBR 2004) Feature Number River length 9.8km River fall 17m River gradient 1:576 Weirs 3 Artificial fall 1.4 Road bridges 2 Rail bridges 1 Foot bridges 5 Straightened/reinforced river length 2615m

Lower Sector

25000

19600 Key: 20000  Bank length  Reinforced bank 15000  Embanked

10000  Poached bank 5871  Eroding cliff

Bank length inBank metres 5000 2615  Bank tree cover 1190 50 91 0 BL RI EM PO EC TC Bank characteristics

Figure 3.7 Lower sector length of each characteristic bank-type (from BBR 2004)

40

River Axe Restoration Plan

Chapter 4. Channel modifications and restoration measures

This chapter identifies the most significant influences degrading the River Axe SSSI and proposed potential restoration and management solutions.

4.1 Introduction

The original geomorphological assessment of the wider River Axe catchment (BBR 2004) found that broadly the designated reaches of the Axe displayed a morphological diversity within the channel planform and bank structure largely typical of a natural lowland river. However, it identified a number of key issues, including high volumes of sediment reaching the channel, a degraded riparian zone, and priority actions and locations where structures were potentially affecting the designated site, in particular structures such as weirs.

The 2011 Axe SSSI Condition Assessment (ECUS, 2011) found selected sections of the Axe SSSI to be in an unfavourable condition in relation to compliance with river profile targets (historic re-sectioning and bank re-enforcement), bank vegetation naturalness, and vegetation community structure and suggested that restoration of a more natural bank profile may help to improve condition in those areas.

The more detailed and extensive 2011/12 River SSSI Survey again found that broadly the designated reaches of the Axe displayed overall a morphological diversity within the channel planform and bank structure largely typical of a natural lowland river, but that specific structures are having a localised influence on channel functions and form, and that there are riparian vegetation management issues to be addressed.

4.2 Geomorphology and channel change

The historic review of the changes in land use and stability of planform of the lower Axe have shown the Axe to be a naturally dynamic river with a mobile planform. The floodplain has been extensively farmed since the Roman period and by the Medieval period is documented as containing areas of strip farming and with meadow management that incorporated seasonal meadow flooding. Over the years riparian structures have been created and many lost by the lateral river migrations across the floodplain and boundaries pragmatically shifted to accommodate this. The channel alignment, recorded on the first field plans in 1776-78, remain evident today often only as isolated features within the floodplain illustrating the dynamic nature of the channel. The observable failure of many recent blockstone revetments introduced to stop bank erosion shows the ongoing difficulty of restraining the natural erosive lateral forces present on the lower Axe.

In general, the geomorphological quality of the Axe SSSI is very good. Sediment migration and deposition within the channel is widespread along the River Axe; the presence of coarse sediment has promoted good morphological diversity within the channel; and fine sediments were observed to be within normal levels for the river type. This structural diversity continues to support a range of dependant wildlife species that identified the river as of National and European importance (SSSI and SAC).

41

River Axe Restoration Plan

Channel planform changes and associated bank erosion along the River Axe are an essential part of the natural behaviour of meandering rivers. Localised channel modifications such as weirs, rail and road bridge abutments, embankments, channel re-alignments, bank protection and adjoining land management practices, conducted throughout the last 200 years, have interfered with the natural behaviour of the river channel.

River condition surveys carried out between 2010-12 showed that seven weirs and 17 bridges were located along the SSSI reach, in some cases impounding flow and interrupting sediment transfer. Bank reinforcement accounted for 10% of the overall bank structure where it inhibited lateral channel migration and sediment availability. Bank vegetation diversity was constrained by farming practices reducing its biodiversity. Colonisation by non-native exotic plant species both within the channel (Canadian water-weed (Elodea canadensis)) and along the banks Himalayan balsam (Impatiens glandulifera) is a threat to native flora and fauna.

4.3 Impact of existing modifications

Each identified structure or operation that potentially degrades the ‘favourable condition’ of the river has been evaluated, with the following considered:

 Current function  Societal importance and requirement  Geomorphological and ecological impact

In-channel structures such as weirs, bridge abutments and sluices can have a fundamental effect on the physical character of a river, altering the amount, location and value of physical habitat provision to support characteristic flora and fauna. Structures can have three main effects:

 alterations to the geomorphology and hydraulics of the channel through water impoundment and altering sediment transfer;  alterations to flow regime; and  interruption of biological connectivity, including the passage of fish and invertebrates.

Natural England and the Environment Agency recognise the impacts of the many artificial in- channel structures, and the desire, where it is feasible, to remove as many of these structures as possible. The need to do this is heightened by climate change, for which restoring natural river processes, habitats and connectivity are vital adaptation measures. We also recognise that some of these artificial structures may have important functions or historic and cultural associations, which need to be considered carefully with their owners and affected parties when planning and designing river restoration work.

Where there is a clear societal need to maintain a structure, the restoration plan should identify it as immovable in the medium term. However, this does not rule out a change to this status should circumstances allow, with some structures becoming removable in future.

42

River Axe Restoration Plan

Table 4.1. Assessment approach Assessment Comment Geomorphological and The step identifies physical modifications, management neglect ecological appraisal or practices that are impacting on characteristic river geomorphology and habitat and, in turn, on favourable condition status. Over 13 kilometres of SSSI designated river, associated banks and riparian zone management and all structures along it have been screened for this plan. Societal importance and For the issues identified, constraints on restoration action are requirement then considered. These may include flood risk to property, risk to critical infrastructure, water supply, food production, and the historic environment.

After the initial screening assessment the following issues were identified as artificial features or actions or management practices negatively influencing the form and function of the river and in turn the naturalness of the Axe SSSI.

Table 4.2. Remedial priority issues Structures/Activities Impacts on SSSI favourable condition

Riparian zone management: Losses due to alder disease, erosion and poor regeneration due to grazing pressure. Associated Riparian tree cover loss of large woody debris in channel, which would usually create varied physical habitat, and can promote channel recovery where habitat variation is low.

Can increase fine sediment deposition within the Livestock management channel, caused by erosion and bank grazing. This can lead to poor bank and riparian habitat structure and diversity and alteration of channel form; can cause change to aquatic species composition and abundance.

Weirs: Alteration to flow regime; modification of channel form e.g. due to upstream deposition and Weycroft Weir downstream scour on the channel bed; can cause Town Weir change to aquatic species composition and Bow Bridge A35 blockstone weirs abundance; change to bank and riparian zone Whitford Gauging & blockstone weirs structure. Significant impairment to migration of characteristic species, especially eel and lampreys.

Bridges: Alteration to flow regime; modification of channel form e.g. due to upstream deposition and Railway bridges downstream scour on the channel bed; can cause Weycroft Bridge change to aquatic species composition and Stoney Bridge (& associated flood abundance; change to bank and riparian zone defence scheme) structure. Whitford Bridge

43

River Axe Restoration Plan

Bank revetments: examples Direct loss of natural bank habitat and modification of channel form and function Wadbrook Farm. Railway Embankments

Himalayan balsam control It out competes native species for space and light reducing natural biodiversity. Potential for bank and soil erosion during winter when balsam dies back.

Canadian pond-weed It out competes native species for space and light reducing natural biodiversity, and increases fine sediment deposition within the channel.

4.4 Potential restoration and management options

Based on the rationale for SSSI river restoration (Natural England 2006) and experience restoring other SSSI rivers, the following types of restoration and management measures apply to the River Axe:

 Livestock management to stabilise banks and reduce siltation and channel widening. Preferably through reducing stock densities or if not possible through setting back fencing from the channel top to allow some channel movement and occasional grazing/cutting of vegetation as appropriate.

 Restoration of lost bankside and floodplain tree cover to increase structural diversity of the banks, provide shade, encourage complex bank and river corridor habitat structures, and limit excessive channel movement.

 Reduced/modified channel maintenance and other operations, such as fewer removals of gravel shoals and large woody debris, to promote natural recovery of form and function.

 Removal/lowering of in-channel control structures, to re-establish riffle and run habitat, restore characteristic water depths, velocities, reduce siltation and allow free movement of sediment and fauna. Refer to Annex 2 for more information on restoration and structures.

 Remeandering or meander reconnection to restore habitat length/area and improve flow, substrate and depth diversity, thereby providing improved habitat conditions for a wide range of characteristic fauna and flora.

 Sensitive restoration of banks, using soft engineering including strategic tree planting and, where possible, facilitating dynamic channel processes within the floodplain to restore riparian wetland flora and fauna.

 Control of invasive exotic plant and animal species to ensure continuity of native plant assemblage and to reduce impacts to river banks and beds, and to maintain the ecological balance of the watercourse.

Having identified potential key impacts of modifications on the Axe, potentially viable restoration and management options for relevant locations have been identified. The options

44

River Axe Restoration Plan proposed fall into 4 categories, ranging from ‘do nothing’ to ‘remove or modify structure’, as summarised in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3 Summary of potential restoration categories Option Comment

Assist natural This option can lead to restoration over time e.g. where recovery modification or perturbations are minor and the river environment can adjust to negate the impact.

Mitigate impact This option represents a workable alternative where removal is not by modifying viable in the short term and may provide a medium term solution form or operation to restoring favourable condition. This option could include partial of structure lowering of weirs, alteration of artificial abstractions or partial removal and green replacement of bank protection, improvement to migration routes by fish passes or bypass channels.

Remove This represents the ultimate long-term goal of restoration. structure/activity Constraints may restrict the viability of this option. In such cases, opportunities for a more environmentally sympathetic structure or practice should be considered in the longer term.

Other Specific enhancements and management measures can be adopted to limit detrimental change and meet the needs of management activities along the river. These may include reducing channel and bankside management intensity, tree and shrub planting, and weed control.

4.5 Summary of restoration options - management sheets

Potential restoration options have been proposed for each location where geomorphological assessment and ecological interpretation has identified a modification as having an impact on the River Axe SSSI. The rationale for the proposed restoration options is summarised for each location. These are found on the management summary sheets listed in Table 4.4 and presented in Annex 1. These provide the following information:

 A high level description of the site/activity;  A photograph of the place or concern;  A summary of key impacts on favourable condition;  Overall benefits of restoration;  Potential restoration options with their pros and cons;  Recommendations for further assessment and next steps.

Each potential restoration option will require a combination of interested parties to be involved in their consideration and future progress. Permissions from landowners, Natural England and the Environment Agency will be required for restoration projects, all of which will be subject to a Habitats Regulations Assessment.

45

River Axe Restoration Plan

Table 4.4. Management sheets Sheet Location NGR Geomorp. Issue no. reach

1 Throughout All Riparian zone management - bank side vegetation cover and livestock management

2 Weycroft Weir ST309002 AXE026- Weir and bank revetments 027

3 Town Weir SY296989 AXE029- Weir and revetments 030

4 Stoney Bridge and SY294987 AXE030 Bridge and floodplain Axminster flood embankments defence scheme

5 Whitford gauging SY262953 AXE038 Weirs, and bridge station, bridge and blockstone weir

6 Bow Bridge A35 SY288976 AXE032 Weirs and revetments blockstone weirs

7 Weycroft Bridge ST307000 AXE027 Bridge

8 Various e.g. e.g. Bank revetments ST324009 AXE020

Management sheets have not been included for: Railway bridge and embankments; Invasive non-native plant management; and diffuse water pollution.

Invasive non-native plants management and diffuse water pollution are to be dealt with by separate plans that include actions across the entire River Axe catchment rather than the SSSI and SAC river corridor that this plan considers.

Network Rail have carried out a separate study on the impact of the rail line, with its embankments and bridges, in association with the Environment Agency. Works to manage these impacts and the associated impacts of flooding on the rail infrastructure is being funded and delivered by Network Rail.

46

River Axe Restoration Plan

Chapter 5. Consultation, actions and implementation

This chapter identifies the most significant influences degrading the Axe SSSI and recognises potential remedial solutions

Most land within the Axe catchment is privately owned, so planning, detailed development and implementation of any remedial solution will require involvement, consultation and agreement with relevant landowning individuals, tenants, and organisations, and with appropriate county, district and parish councils, local communities and other interested parties.

Restoration actions are suggested in this plan as a means to achieve favourable physical habitat condition of the SSSI and SAC. This plan identifies a suite of potential actions based on a strategic assessment of the river. All the potential actions require further detailed planning and permission from landowners and managers, Natural England and the lead local flood authority and/or the Environment Agency. A Habitats Regulations Assessment will form part of the permitting process.

Working with others Working with natural processes

Working in partnership with landowners Supporting and continuing positive management and communities throughout the in parts of the river that are already in good catchment to find and implement ways health of delivering the vision Supporting and allowing the river to recover Ensuring restoration integrates with where natural processes are already working other initiatives currently being well implemented in the catchment, in particular recognising common Assisting natural recovery through change in objectives and working together to land and river management practices achieve these Ensuring the river and catchment is resilient and Accepting that restoration will take can adapt to future pressures brought about by many years, but ensuring that actions climate change needed to deliver that long-term goal are implemented in good time Understanding how geomorphology and ecology responds to restoration

Each potential remedial action has been considered in terms of its implications, and a management sheet prepared for wider comment. Find these in Table 4.4 and Annex 1.

Restoration options have been outlined on the assessment sheets for nine individual physical modifications and three areas where vegetation changes or management practices are degrading the SSSI. The action plan does not identify the detailed cost for each action however; the criteria for establishing priority for individual tasks are set out in Table 5.1. The programme is based on an initial proposal for Water Environment Investment Fund and the forward 6 Year Environment Programme funding bid. Further support will need to be achieved through working in partnership with others over the next few years and is subject to funding being made available.

It is recognised that not all actions can be taken immediately and it is important to prioritise them to make the restoration plan achievable. Whilst some actions will be completed relatively

47

River Axe Restoration Plan quickly over the next few years, other measures will take more time to develop, assess and be implemented over long timescales.

Table 5.1 Indicative Remedial action programme. Item Programme Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Riparian corridor works – Lower Axe 1x 2x 2x 2x 1x 2x 1x 2x Waterbody 33km. Includes in-channel woody debris works, minor hard bank revetment replacement Feasibility Assessment - A35 Weir and X bank protection removal. May require 300m river restoration. A35 Weir and bank protection removal X X Feasibility Assessment - Town Weir X removal and Flood Risk Management scheme improvement Town Weir removal and channel X X X restoration with tie up to Stoney Bridge and Axminster Flood Alleviation Scheme improvements. Feasibility Assessment – Weycroft weir X removal/bypass/easement Weycroft weir removal/ bypass/ X X X easement implementation. Feasibility Assessment – Whitford X Gauging Station replacement (including Whitford Bridge and Whitford Blockstone weirs). Whitford river restoration – Gauging X X X station removal, bridge and blockstone weir remediation. Weycroft Bridge improvements to invert X and footings feasibility Riparian livestock management if X X X necessary outside of CSF Riparian tree management, if needed X X outside CSF and Woodland grant Invasive non-native plant management X X – where outside of NE strategy

Abbreviations CES Natural England Conservation and Enhancement Scheme CSF Catchment Sensitive Farming (provision of advice) WFD Water Framework Directive

48

River Axe Restoration Plan

Figure 5.1 Remedial actions location plan

This map excludes locations that might be identified through more detailed work on the wider ranging issues, or where specific remedial actions may result from modelling studies for EA, Network Rail and Devon County Council.

49

River Axe Restoration Plan

Next steps

The following next steps are recommended as an immediate outcome of this plan:

Implementation phase (2019 onwards, funding dependant)

 Catchment Partnership to lead on selecting key issues, further exploring options and initiating ways of implement short term actions;  Named organisations to implement short term options.  Catchment Partnership to prioritise next steps for medium and long term sites and identify actions that can start to be progressed alongside short term actions;  Catchment Partnership to maintain a watching brief on sites with long term actions;  Where geomorphology and ecology are good, support ongoing quality;  Environment Agency and Natural England, in collaboration with Catchment Partnership and other stakeholders to revise and update the plan as actions are undertaken or new sites are considered.

50

River Axe Restoration Plan

Glossary

Chemical status is assessed by compliance with environmental standards for chemicals that are listed in the Environmental Quality Standards Directive (2008/105/EC). These chemicals include priority substances, priority hazardous substances, and eight other pollutants carried over from the Dangerous Substance Daughter Directives. Chemical status is recorded as 'good' or 'fail'. The chemical status classification for the water body is determined by the worst scoring chemical.

Ecological status is recorded on the scale of high, good, moderate, poor or bad. 'High' denotes largely undisturbed conditions and the other classes represent increasing deviation from this natural condition, otherwise described as a 'reference condition'. The ecological status classification for the water body, and the confidence in this, is determined from the worst scoring quality element. This means that the condition of a single quality element can cause a water body to fail to reach its WFD classification objectives. Good Ecological Status is defined by the chemical, biological and physical qualities of the river.

European Site Conservation Objectives These Conservation Objectives are those referred to in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the ‘Habitats Regulations’) and Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. They must be considered when a competent authority is required to make a ‘Habitats Regulations Assessment’, including an Appropriate Assessment, under the relevant parts of this legislation.

These Conservation Objectives and the accompanying Supplementary Advice (where this is available) will also provide a framework to inform the measures needed to conserve or restore the European Site and the prevention of deterioration or significant disturbance of its qualifying features as required by the provisions of Article 6(1) and 6(2) of the Directive. These Conservation Objectives are set for each habitat or species of a Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Where the objectives are met, the site will be considered to exhibit a high degree of integrity and to be contributing to achieving Favourable Conservation Status for that species or habitat type at a UK level.

Favourable condition. If a SSSI site is in favourable condition, it means that the site is being adequately conserved and is meeting its 'conservation objectives'. Favourable condition means that all of the targets for the mandatory attributes (population and habitat) used to assess a feature have been met.

Flood Risk Management Plan. The European Floods Directive requires flood risk management plans are produced by December 2015. Flood risk management plans highlight the hazards and risks from rivers, the sea, surface water, groundwater and reservoirs and set out how Risk Management Authorities (RMAs) will work together with communities to manage flood risk.

Fluvial geomorphology. River related landforms and processes

Habitats Directive The main aim of the Habitats Directive is to promote the maintenance of biodiversity by requiring Member States to take measures to maintain or restore natural habitats and wild species listed on the Annexes to the Directive at a favourable conservation status, introducing robust protection for those habitats and species of European importance.

Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora

51

River Axe Restoration Plan

Hydromorphology. Used to describe the combined processes of hydrology and geomorphology that create and sustain the physical structure and habitats in river environments.

Macrophyte. An aquatic plant that grows in or near water and is emergent, submergent or floating.

Riparian. Relating to or located on the banks of a river or stream.

River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) provides a framework for managing water. They set statutory objectives for river, lake, groundwater, estuarine and coastal water bodies, and summarise the programme of measures to achieve them. They also inform decisions on land- use planning. RBMPs are drawn up for the 10 river basin districts in England and Wales as a requirement of the water framework directive.

Unfavourable condition. If a SSSI site is in unfavourable condition, it means that the site is not being adequately conserved and not meeting its 'conservation objectives'. Some or all of the targets for the mandatory attributes (population and habitat) used to assess a feature have not been met.

Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) conserve and protect the best of our wildlife, geological and physiographical heritage for the benefit of present and future generations. SSSIs give legal protection to the best representative sites for wildlife and geology in England under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

Special Area of Conservation (SAC) are internationally important for their wildlife and home to the rarest and most vulnerable habitats and species in Europe. Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) are strictly protected under the EC Habitats Directive and form part of the European network of protected areas known as Natura 2000. In the UK, these European sites are often also SSSIs or a number of SSSIs joined together.

Site Implementation Plan (SIP) includes the priorities and new measures required to achieve water-dependent Natura 2000 objectives under the Water Framework Directive. The actions in the River Axe SIP for the water dependent habitats inform part of the River Basin Management Plan and its consultation.

Water Framework Directive (WFD) is European Legislation aimed at improving the management of rivers, coasts and estuaries to achieve ‘Good Ecological Status’ or ‘GES’. Good Ecological Status is defined by the chemical, biological and physical qualities of the river.

52

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 1 Management sheets

Table A1.1 Management sheets locations and issues Sheet Location NGR Geomorp. Issue no. reach

1 Throughout All Riparian zone management - bank side vegetation cover and livestock management

2 Weycroft Weir ST309002 AXE026- Weir and bank revetments 027

3 Town Weir SY296989 AXE029- Weir and revetments 030

4 Stoney Bridge and SY294987 AXE030 Bridge and floodplain Axminster flood embankments defence scheme

5 Whitford gauging SY262953 AXE038 Weirs, and bridge station, bridge and blockstone weir

6 Bow Bridge A35 SY288976 AXE032 Weirs and revetments blockstone weirs

7 Weycroft Bridge ST307000 AXE027 Bridge

8 Various e.g. e.g. Bank revetments ST324009 AXE020

A1.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 2 Decision making related to structures such as weirs and sluices

In-channel structures such as weirs and sluices can have a fundamental effect on the physical character of a river, altering the amount, location and value of physical habitat to support characteristic flora and fauna. Structures can have three main effects:

 alterations to the geomorphology and hydraulics of the channel through water impoundment and altering sediment transfer;  alterations to flow regime; and,  interruption of biological connectivity, including the passage of fish and invertebrates.

Natural England and the Environment Agency recognise the impacts of the many artificial in- channel structures, and the need where it is feasible to remove as many of these structures as possible. The need to do this is heightened by climate change, for which restoring natural river processes, habitats and connectivity are vital adaptation measures. However, we also recognise that some of these artificial structures may have important functions or historic and cultural associations, which need to be considered carefully with their owners and affected parties when planning and designing river restoration work.

Where there is a clear societal need to maintain a structure, the restoration plan should identify it as immovable in the medium term. However, this does not rule out a change to this status should circumstances allow, with some structures becoming removable in future.

The stages taken in identifying river restoration plan actions for in-channel structures are shown in the Figure A2.1 and described below.

1) Assess impact of in-channel structures on habitat and connectivity Whole river restoration planning includes detailed ecological and hydro-geomorphological appraisal of the river. The appraisal must include an assessment of the impact on in-channel structures on the characteristic SSSI river habitat and favourable condition.

2) Evaluation of societal importance (flood risk, heritage etc.) Whilst seeking to restore habitat and natural hydro-morphological processes wherever possible, constraints such as flood risk, potential impacts on historic environment, landscape, water supply, flow gauging and the stability of buildings and infrastructure must be recognized and considered.

3) Decision on appropriate action Where structures are impacting on the favourable condition of the river, restoration plans should seek to evaluate whether a structure should be removed, mitigated or deemed to be immovable, taking technical and societal constraints into account.

The first option to be considered should be the complete removal of the structure. In the event that the structure cannot be removed due to valid societal constraints, options to mitigate its impact should next be considered. Mitigation options include partial removal, bypassing or lowering, improved weir/sluice management by putting in place an operating protocol, or making the structure as permeable as possible to characteristic biota.

A2.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

Fish passes

Fish passes only resolve connectivity problems for certain fish species, mainly of commercial importance, e.g. salmon or eels, and do not address the habitat and connectivity needs of the diverse biological community as a whole. The effectiveness of any fish pass can vary depending on design and management.

In cases where a structure is judged to be immoveable in the medium term, fish pass improvements may be proposed as a mitigation measure. The longer term restoration plan action should however be to remove or modify the structure. However, where a structure is permanently immoveable, a fish pass may be the only mitigation option. In either case, pass design should consider the needs of the characteristic biological community as a whole, including priority species such as lampreys, bullhead and non-fish species. The potential for a fish pass to be a potential mechanism for further invasive colonisation by non-native invasive species such as American signal crayfish should also be considered.

Figure A2.1. Decision making process for restoration plan actions related to structures

A2.2

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 3 Maps of features and recommendations for riparian zone management

Management of the riparian zone of the river has a significant influence on the overall condition of the SSSI. It effects both the geomorphological responses of the river, but also the availability and quality of specific wildlife habitats that are important to the designation. This zone is generally within agricultural grade 4 rough pasture, due to clays in the soils; with varying degrees of cattle grazing access and vegetation.

Unlike the impact of built structures, there is a greater range of intervention options that could be undertaken that would benefit the riparian zone. In order to provide guidance on measures to deliver management actions on improving the riparian zone, this Annex provides map based indications of approaches and notable habitats or features.

This builds on the Devon Wildlife Trust – River Axe Corridor Survey of 1988 as described in Section 2.11. Whilst some of the features and habitats have changed – both through natural processes and construction works – the management direction, and record of contributing habitats does provide a valuable guide to future management actions.

The following ten maps illustrate the surveys’ management recommendations and Key Sites and Features.

Key sites include notable vegetation assemblages, important nesting or hiding up locations, or river channel and floodplain features. Where these are no longer present, their restoration would provide significant enhancements that would support recovery of the SSSI condition.

Management Actions are split into actions: for managing the river bed (its substrate and flow features, as well as aquatic species); for managing the marginal or bankside habitats, species and features; and, for managing the wider riparian corridor areas adjacent to the river channel. River corridor actions (mainly planting) are intended to provide the rich mosaic of light conditions within the river channel, to support the different ranunculus species, whilst providing resilience to the overall river channel form and route.

Fencing is not explicitly referenced, but may need to be considered to support the development of the river corridor measures.

A3.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

5

4

3

2

1

A3.2

River Axe Restoration Plan

9

8 6 4 7 5

3

2

1

A3.3

River Axe Restoration Plan

5

4

3

1 2

A3.4

River Axe Restoration Plan

12 13

9 11

10 8

7

6 5 4

3

2

1

A3.5

River Axe Restoration Plan

8

7

5

6

4

3

2

1

A3.6

River Axe Restoration Plan

11

10 7 9 8

6

5

4 3

2

1

A3.7

River Axe Restoration Plan

5 2 4

3

1

A3.8

River Axe Restoration Plan

4

3

2

1

A3.9

River Axe Restoration Plan

2

1

A3.10

River Axe Restoration Plan

6 5

4

3

2

1

A3.11

River Axe Restoration Plan

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 4 World War II Taunton Stop Line Woodhayne Pillbox case example

Pillbox S.62 of the Taunton Stop Line (HER MDV39425), is recorded as undermined and tilted over by action of river.

The location of the Pill Box is shown in the images below (red dot). This shows the 1880s and 1900s maps, the 1947 and then 2009 aerial photographs. The historic maps show that River Axe meander was enlarging and migrating to the east, towards a field boundary, which may well have been an even early channel line. When the Pill was constructed in the 1940s, the River Axe was between 5 and 10m from its location. By 2009, the meander had significantly enlarged to the north and east, and had reach the site of the Pill Box.

Figure A4.1 Historic map and air photos

Whilst the Pill box is being affected by larger scale long term channel change, it is itself creating local influences on channel behaviour. Localised scouring is now occurring, with a slight depression created on its upstream and in land side (south east), and significant erosion of the bank and bed for some 10m downstream.

In the longer term, the pillbox is liable to become isolated within the channel, and even longer term still might become incorporated within the northern bank. It is liable to create a slightly enhanced migration of the channel as this progresses, but with a localized influence. The scale of this impact is also small compared to other influences, such as cattle access pressure, and historic realignment of the channels.

A4.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

So whilst there are minor impacts on natural river processes, this can be balanced against the scale of other impacting processes. Furthermore, it is providing a range of habitat niches. The structure itself appears now to being used by otters as a holt. The downstream scour hole provides a deep shaded pool habitat. The depression on the upstream and landward side provides a small persistent riverside pool.

A4.2

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 5 World War II Taunton Stop Line Whitford Pillbox case example

Pillbox S.64 of the Taunton Stop Line (HER MDV52909) provides a contrasting situation to that at Woodhayne, as it and the associated weir have a strong influence on natural river processes and the impacts for the downstream road bridge and gauging station.

The Taunton Stop line infrastructure at Whitford form concentric rings around the ford and bridge crossing. This includes the 1940 Type 24 pillbox with a shell proof porch on the eastern bank of the Axe upstream of the ford. It seems likely that this included works to the adjacent rock weir across the river, due to its proximity and alignment with the pillbox, and that this acts to retain deep water in the river upstream.

Fig A5.1 View north at rock weir to left, pillbox right of centre and track/floodway to right

To understand the influence of the Stop Line features on river geomorphology we need to look back even further in time. The 1880s map of Whitford (to right) shows a very different arrangement from the current situation, and provides insight into the river’s behaviour.

Most notable is that the River Axe flowed down a route further to the east, which remains now as a drainage ditch. The current route of the Axe lies along a then engineered channel known as the Fishing Lane.

Through to the 1900s the balance of flows between the Axe and the Fishing Lane were changing (green to red lines respectively to right); with a meander cut through towards the north, and increases in the size and meanders along the Fishing Lane.

However, by the time of the 1947 Air photograph, the River Axe had avulsed entirely into the Fishing Lane, with the original channel infilled for over 200m. The meander cut through of the 1900s lead to flow reversal along a section of meander and infilling of its upstream loop. Further extension and migration of meanders had developed along the former Fishing Lane.

A5.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

The meanders triggered by the avulsion have continued to migrate downstream towards Whitford, naturalizing the former fishing lane as they move. The 1900s cut through and the meander it flowed into have themselves become cut off to form an oxbow lake. A smaller similar feature has also formed just to the north of the Pillbox

All the while the former River Axe route to the east has continued to infill with sediments from floodwaters.

The future evolution of the river close to Whitford appears to be intrinsically linked to the influence of the Pill Box and the rock weir. This then has an influence on conditions at the downstream bridge and gauging station, and any response to manage them.

The map to the right shows the river and infrastructure changes around Whitford from 1880s through to the present day.

Some infrastructure changes have driven river response. So both the new road and the gauging station construction resulted in changes to the river alignment and connectivity.

The position of the ford, has by comparison moved as the river changed.

However, from upstream, it is clear that there has been significant natural changes in the meanders, with these extending and migrating to the south (see dotted black lines).

There is pressure on the river channel to migrate to the east at the location of the Pill box and rock weir, which is evident in the various high flow routes around these. However, these two structures hold the river in place, and only allow a small amount of pivoting of the angle of flows. This is placing erosion pressure on the western abutment fo the road bridge, and leading to gravel accumulation and misalignment of flows at the gauging station. These pressures are in turn driving unstainable management activities that put a strain on the ecological functions of the river system.

A holistic response to the bridge, gauging station, Pill box and rock weir in relation to the river is therefore required. This will need to balance heritage, environmental and infrastrcuture interests. One option might be the diversion of the river to the east of the Pill box, such that flows are aligned with the bridge better and away form its wetsern abutment. Timing of such large scale actions may be driven by the need and funding availability for re-siting of the Environment Agency’s gauging station, engagement with Devon County Council Archaeology and Highways will be necessary.

A5.2

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 6 Wadbrook Farm case example

Wadbrook Farm provides an example of joint working across Defra bodies and funding streams to provide an holistic farm scale delivery plan of the River Restoration Plan actions.

Joint meetings with the landowner, Environment Agency, Natural England and the Forestry Commission explored land management options that benefited the landowner and delivered river restoration plan objectives. Agri-environment scheme options were proposed through Natural England and Forestry Commission, with the Environment Agency drawing on Water Environment Grant funds to undertake river corridor enhancement works using its internal Field Services workforce.

Wadbrook Farm Countryside Stewardship and Forestry Grants

Options were explored that balanced land take, operational constraints, stewardship payment rates and restriction criteria, with benefits for protection and enhancement of the river corridor. An extract of the agreed Mid-Tier options map is shown below left. Further areas were proposed for the separate Forestry Commission Woods for Water Grant, as indicated in the map to the right.

A6.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

The main options used were SW2 and SW11 through the Mid-Tier stewardship to support the River Restoration Plan objectives.

SW2 provides a 4-6m buffer strip on intensive grassland at a payment rate of £170/ha (2017 rates), to provide new habitat and protection to the adjacent river corridor.

SW11 provides Riparian management strip at £440/ha (2017 rates). The SW11 option provides greater benefits for the riparian corridor regeneration, but reduces accessible grazing land. It prevents livestock access to the watercourse and provides a buffer strip. This will help reduce bankside erosion and the transport of pollutants to the watercourse. It will also provide habitat for wildlife and form links between other habitats. As the scrub develops, it may also help to shade and cool the watercourse.

Woodland Creation Grant is for a 2 year capital works programme to plant and protect young trees. A woodland creation maintenance grant WD1 of £200 per hectare for 10 years is available through Higher Tier.

Wadbrook Farm, Channel and Riparian Zone Enhancement, Bank erosion management project 2017/18

Site Description Permanent pasture farm on the banks of the middle-Axe experiencing excessively accelerated bank erosion resulting from a sparsely vegetated riparian zone and uncontrolled livestock access to bank tops and channel.

Project Description Joint project between Environment Agency (Axe Restoration Plan Flood Risk Management funding), Natural England (Countryside Stewardship Grant Scheme – Mid-Tier) and Forestry Commission (Countryside Stewardship Grant Woodland Creation Grant through the East Devon Woods for Water Project) to install bankside, floodplain and channel tree cover to enhance habitat, reduce livestock access to banks and channel thereby improving water quality, channel and riparian zone and habitats with follow on improvements to the WFD status and condition of the River Axe Special Area of Conservation and Site of Special Scientific Interest.

Project Specifications Coppicing of bankside willow and smaller number of alder with arisings cut to length and live stakes driven into bed of channel adjacent to rapidly eroding banks and backfilled with brash from arisings with intention of establishing new growth along channel edges.  Stakes driven in with 360 excavator and brash pushed in behind, brash wired to secure in place. Installation of willow live stakes (sourced as above) along bank tops set 1m back from edge of channel and driven 1-2 m into ground with intention of establishing new bankside trees along slowly eroding banks.  Stakes driven in with 360 excavator or by hand Installation of stock fencing along 1.68 km of bank to prevent livestock access to channel to allow regeneration/establishment of new ‘planting’ and development of scrubby vegetation and also reducing livestock pressures on banks and channel.  Installed under CSS with margins between 4-8 m depth. Planting of 2200 native broadleaf trees in 6 blocks covering an area of 1.1 Ha to provide floodplain woodland adjacent to the channel to create a more natural pattern of channel

A6.2

River Axe Restoration Plan development and provide beneficial riparian habitat for the watercourse and associated species.  Countryside Stewardship Grant Woodland Creation Grant through the East Devon Woods for water Project Timing Bankside trees coppiced and stakes and brash put in place in winter of 2017-18. Fencing installed in summer of 2018. Woodland blocks planting scheduled for winter 2018-19 (ongoing at time of writing).

Costs Installation of Live Stakes, Large Woody Material and Brash - £40, 000 through Environment Agency Field Service Team Fencing and tree planting costs funded through CSS/Woods for Water.

Example Stake/Brash/Large Woody Material Installations

50m erosion control with live stakes and brash Brash bundled and held against bank. Willow staked to fix bundles. Driven at least 500mm into the bed, and cut to height of bank top. Spacing of stakes approximately 0.5-1m.

Before 4 months after installation

Severe bend erosion control with large woody material Flow

Large tree trunks or branches, with side branches retained, fixed along the toe of the exposed bank. The large woody material fixed in place with willow stakes, and metal ties.

Live tree trunks or Live willow large branches stakes

Before 4 months after installation

A6.3

River Axe Restoration Plan

River Axe Restoration Plan

Annex 7 Summary of Draft Consultation Responses

Consultation on the plan was organised through the East Devon Catchment Partnership, with comments received between 3 December 2015 and14 January 2016. To support this a consultation draft was available for public viewing at Axminster Library, Axminster, and online on the River Restoration Centre’s ‘Designated Rivers’ webpage. Direct mailing of invitations to comment was also carried out for 24 riparian landowners, as well as electronic consultation with major stakeholder organisations.

Consultations were received from members of the public, Axe Fly Fishing Club, Axe Vale & District Conservation Society, Devon County Council, Dorset AONB, and South West Rivers Association. Comments were also received widely from departments within the Environment Agency and Natural England.

A summary of the consultation feedback is given in the table below, along with an indication of the actions taken to address these for the final plan.

Stakeholders Topic Action

Various Lack of clarity on The Executive summary has been amended to scope of the plan, identify the remit of this plan. Details and especially in relation references to the plan’s focus on the SAC river to linkage with the corridor – assessments (Section 2.1.1), linkage Diffuse Water to geomorphology, and management actions Pollution Plan and (including Annex 3) – have been added, Natural England’s strengthened, revised and reprioritised Invasive Non-native throughout the plan. Species Plan

Devon County The plan lacked Significant revision of evidence base, and Council consideration of the management action advice has been made. WWII Taunton Stop This includes:- Line. Need to Section 2.10 Influences on geomorphology and incorporate historic channel change; includes specific references to environment the Stop Line and highlights where further detail information and is included in the plan. demonstrate how this is addressed in Chapter 3 River Section Descriptions: the management references to the Stop line included in the actions. Public rights sections on Historical Change within each of way also to be sector considered. Section 3.4.3: Geomorphological behaviour for the lower sector reviews the Whitford reach, tracing the river processes from the time of the man-made Fishing Lane, through to the linkage with the Stop Line features and the current river process pressures on the bridge and gauging station. Management Actions and sheets for Whitford gauging Station, Whitford Bridge and the blockstone weir are amalgamated into a single

A7.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

holistic action reflecting the need to involve and consider the Stop line in a wider strategy Two Annexes are included looking at Stop Line features, Annex 4 for the Pill box at Woodhayne, and Annex 5 for the Whitford one. More general river management actions have been assessed for adverse impacts on Stop Line features. Management Sheet 6 revised to include consideration of Public Rights of Way and scheduled monument.

Public Effectiveness of Amended Section 2.8, with updated references flood risk to South West Flood Risk Management Plan management and the need to consider working with natural schemes processes and reconnection of the river to the floodplain. Public Concern about River processes have been re-assessed in gravel build up at detail at Whitford. Sections 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 have Whitford Bridge been amended. Annex 5 has been included that considers the reach and WWII features in detail. Management actions for the blockstone weirs, the bridge and gauging station have been combined and amended.

Environment Greater Significance of grazing pressure and riparian Agency consideration of zone management reappraised and highlighted grazing pressure on in Section 3. Management sheets reorganised floodplain and to reflect. Annex 3 included to give further riparian zone. support on riparian and floodplain management actions. Environment Climate Change, Section 2.6 has been amended, increased focus Agency land use and WFD and guidance on riparian tree and shrub planting should support cooling of the river and resilience of the channel to hydrological changes. WFD failures outside of the SAC boundary have not been included.

A7.2

River Axe Restoration Plan

Bibliography

Babtie Brown & Root, 2004B Catchment Fluvial Geomorphological Audit of the Axe Catchment. Detailed Geomorphological Survey (Report B) October 2004 Babtie Brown & Root, 2004C Catchment Geomorphological Action Plan: The River Axe Catchment (Report C) November 2004

Countryside Agency, 1999. Countryside Character. Volume 8: Southwest. ECUS, 2011. Macrophyte surveys of the River Axe SAC. ECUS, 2011. River Axe SSSI Common Standards Monitoring Environment Agency, 1999. Local Environment Agency Plan. Axe and Lim. Environment Agency, 2001. Local Environment Agency Plan. Axe and Lim Action Plan. Environment Agency (2003) River Habitat Survey in Britain and Ireland, Field Survey Guidance Manual: 2003 Version. Environment Agency, 2003a. River Axe Salmon Action Plan. Environment Agency, 2003b. Devon Catchment Flood Management Plan, Environment Agency, 2004. Otter, Sid, Axe and Lim Catchment Abstraction Man. Strategy. Environment Agency (2010) Position paper on hydromorphological river restoration Environment Agency (2014) South west river basin district Consultation on the draft Flood Risk Management Plan. October 2014 Environment Agency / Diffuse Water Pollution Plan for the Axe Natural England (2014) Gregory, K.J. (ed.) (1997) Fluvial Geomorphology of Great Britain, Geological Conservation Review Series, No. 13, Chapman and Hall, London

JNCC (2014). Common Standards Monitoring Guidance for Rivers Version January 2014. Updated from March 2005. Holmes, N., Boon, P. & Rowell, T. (1999) Vegetation Communities of British Rivers: a revised classification. JNCC, Peterborough. Natural England (2007) Rationale for the physical restoration of the SSSI river series in England. (Internal paper) Natural England (2009) Conservation objectives and definitions of favourable condition for designated features of interest (draft) Natural England (2006) Data and analytical requirements of geomorphological appraisal and associated ecological interpretation for SSSI river restoration. Natural England (2015) Pollution Risk Assessment and Source Apportionment: River Axe. Newman, M. (2012) Axe Invasives. Invasive Alien Plan Species Control Programme for Natural England. (Internal paper) Sear, D.A., Hill, C.T. & Downes R.H.E (2008) Geomorphological assessment of riverine SSSIs for the strategic planning of physical restoration. Natural England Research Report NERR013 Sweet, R.J. 2004. Computer Modelling of flood flows and floodplain sedimentation. Unpublished. PhD thesis, University of Exeter, 295pp. STREAM (2010) Planning river restoration advice note

B.1

River Axe Restoration Plan

Available Online

Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora

European Site Conservation Objectives for River Axe Special Area of Conservation: Site code: UK0030248

River Axe SSSI citation http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/citation/citation_photo/2000139.pdf

River Axe SAC citation http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/5728918585737216

River Axe Site Improvement Plan http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/6572555716526080

Natural England latest condition assessment https://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/ReportUnitCondition.aspx?SiteCode=S200013 9&ReportTitle=RIVER AXEx?SiteCode=S2000139&ReportTitle=RIVER%20AXE

B.2