Chalk Rivers-EN-Ea001a
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Appendix 5 Defining Reference Conditions for Chalk Stream and Fenland Natural Channels
Appendix 5 Defining reference conditions for chalk stream and Fenland natural channels Chalk stream geomorphology is poorly understood, and under-researched. What studies exist appear to confirm that the majority of UK and European chalk streams have been modified in form and hydraulics by a long history of river management (Sear and others 1999, WRc 2000). The overriding control these modifications exert on the geomorphology and processes operating within the channel, make it difficult to establish what features and physical habitat diversity a natural, unmodified chalk stream should display. In the absence of semi-natural chalk stream habitats from which reference conditions can be determined, the Water Framework Directive specifies the use of palaeoecological information (Logan and Furze 2002). However much of this research is focussed on interpretations of human activity or climatic reconstruction rather than on the specific determination of river form and associated habitats (Davies and Griffiths 2005; French and Lewis 2002). Despite this, it is possible to reconstruct some information of relevance to characterising the floodplain habitats associated with relatively undisturbed chalk streams and rivers. French and others 2005 report a complex suite of landscape changes in the Dry valley and upper reaches of a chalk stream in Dorset. Their results suggest the presence of a relatively wide shallow low sinuosity meandering channel throughout the Holocene into the early historic period, between 30 - 50m in width and 1.5 – 3m in depth with a width:depth ratio of between 10 and 33. The authors stress that the development of each chalk valley is best considered individually rather than to expect a common history of landscape evolution hence the precise form of the channel system and floodplain habitats is also likely to be valley specific. -
The Frome 8, Piddle Catchmentmanagement Plan 88 Consultation Report
N 6 L A “ S o u t h THE FROME 8, PIDDLE CATCHMENTMANAGEMENT PLAN 88 CONSULTATION REPORT rsfe ENVIRONMENT AGENCY NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE ANGLIAN REGION Kingfisher House. Goldhay Way. Orton Goldhay, Peterborough PE2 5ZR NRA National Rivers Authority South Western Region M arch 1995 NRA Copyright Waiver This report is intended to be used widely and may be quoted, copied or reproduced in any way, provided that the extracts are not quoted out of context and that due acknowledgement is given to the National Rivers Authority. Published March 1995 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY Hill IIII llll 038007 FROME & PIDDLE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSULTATION REPORT YOUR VIEWS The Frome & Piddle is the second Catchment Management Plan (CMP) produced by the South Wessex Area of the National Rivers Authority (NRA). CMPs will be produced for all catchments in England and Wales by 1998. Public consultation is an important part of preparing the CMP, and allows people who live in or use the catchment to have a say in the development of NRA plans and work programmes. This Consultation Report is our initial view of the issues facing the catchment. We would welcome your ideas on the future management of this catchment: • Hdve we identified all the issues ? • Have we identified all the options for solutions ? • Have you any comments on the issues and options listed ? • Do you have any other information or ideas which you would like to bring to our attention? This document includes relevant information about the catchment and lists the issues we have identified and which need to be addressed. -
Groundwater Levels the Majority of Groundwater Sites in Wessex Are ‘Normal’ Or ‘Above Normal’ for the Time of Year
Monthly water situation report Wessex Area Summary – February 2016 February rainfall was 136% of the long term average (LTA) but was distributed mainly in the first 8 days and then around mid month with the last half of the month being dry. The last 3 months have all had above average rainfall resulting in the 3 month total being 132% LTA. Rivers responded to the rainfall then were predominantly in recession from mid month. Soils remain wet close to capacity. Most groundwater sites have had significant recharge and are all normal or above for the time of year. Reservoir storage is almost at its maximum; Bristol water is at 99% of the total reservoir storage and Wessex Water is at capacity. Rainfall The start of the month was wet, 63% of Februarys rainfall fell within the first eight days. The rest of the month was mostly dry apart from a couple of wet days around the 17th. The average rainfall total across the Wessex Area was 136% of LTA (88 mm). Rainfall map and graph Soil Moisture Deficit The soil is wet, as expected for the time of year. The average soil moisture deficit across Wessex on 1 March 2016 was 1.08 mm, well below the LTA of 2.96 mm. SMD graph and maps River Flows River flows across the Wessex area were ‘exceptionally high’ around 6 February and the 18 February in response to the precipitation received at the start and middle of the month. Many of the stations in the north and along the southern edge of Wessex are ‘above normal’ or experiencing flows above the LTA. -
Flood Risk from Groundwater: Examples from a Chalk Catchment in 2 Southern England 3 4 A.G
1 Flood risk from groundwater: examples from a Chalk catchment in 2 southern England 3 4 A.G. Hughes1, T. Vounaki1, D.W. Peach1, A.M. Ireson2, C.R. Jackson1, A.P. Butler2, J.P. Bloomfield3, 5 J. Finch4 and H.S. Wheater2 6 1 British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottinghamshire, UK 7 2 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK 8 3 British Geological Survey, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK 9 4 Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK 10 11 12 13 14 Correspondence Abstract A.G. Hughes, British Geological Survey, 15 Groundwater flooding has moved up the policy-makers’ agenda as a result of the 16 Keyworth, Nottinghamshire, UK Email: [email protected] United Kingdom experiencing extensive groundwater flooding in winter 2000/ 17 2001. However, there is a lack of appropriate methods and data to support 18 DOI:10.1111/j.1753-318X.2011.01095.x groundwater flood risk assessment. The implications for flood risk assessment of 19 groundwater flooding are outlined using a study of the Chalk aquifer underlying 20 Key words the Pang and Lambourn catchments in Berkshire, UK. Groundwater flooding in 21 Q2 ’; ’; ’. the Chalk results from the water table reaching the land surface and producing 22 long-duration surface flows (weeks to months), causing significant disruption to 23 transport infrastructure and households. By analyzing existing data with a farmers’ 24 survey, it was found that groundwater flooding consists of a combination of 25 intermittent stream discharge and anomalous springflow. This work shows that 26 there is a significant challenge involved in drawing together data and under- 27 standing of groundwater flooding, which includes vital local knowledge, reason- 28 able risk assessment procedures and deterministic modelling. -
The Natural Capital of Temporary Rivers: Characterising the Value of Dynamic Aquatic–Terrestrial Habitats
VNP12 The Natural Capital of Temporary Rivers: Characterising the value of dynamic aquatic–terrestrial habitats. Valuing Nature | Natural Capital Synthesis Report Lead author: Rachel Stubbington Contributing authors: Judy England, Mike Acreman, Paul J. Wood, Chris Westwood, Phil Boon, Chris Mainstone, Craig Macadam, Adam Bates, Andy House, Dídac Jorda-Capdevila http://valuing-nature.net/TemporaryRiverNC Suggested citation: Stubbington, R., England, J., Acreman, M., Wood, P.J., Westwood, C., Boon, P., The Natural Capital of Mainstone, C., Macadam, C., Bates, A., House, A, Didac, J. (2018) The Natural Capital of Temporary Temporary Rivers: Rivers: Characterising the value of dynamic aquatic- terrestrial habitats. Valuing Nature Natural Capital Characterising the value of dynamic Synthesis Report VNP12. The text is available under the Creative Commons aquatic–terrestrial habitats. Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) Valuing Nature | Natural Capital Synthesis Report Contents Introduction: Services provided by wet and the natural capital of temporary rivers.............. 4 dry-phase assets in temporary rivers................33 What are temporary rivers?...................................... 4 The evidence that temporary rivers deliver … services during dry phases...................34 Temporary rivers in the UK..................................... 4 Provisioning services...................................34 The natural capital approach Regulating services.......................................35 to ecosystem protection............................................ -
Estuary Assessment
Appendix I Estuary Assessment Poole and Christchurch Bays SMP2 9T2052/R1301164/Exet Report V3 2010 Haskoning UK Ltd on behalf of Bournemouth Borough Council Poole & Christchurch Bays SMP2 Sub-Cell 5f: Estuary Processes Assessment Date: March 2009 Project Ref: R/3819/01 Report No: R.1502 Poole & Christchurch Bays SMP2 Sub-Cell 5f: Estuary Processes Assessment Poole & Christchurch Bays SMP2 Sub-Cell 5f: Estuary Processes Assessment Contents Page 1. Introduction....................................................................................................................1 1.1 Report Structure...........................................................................................................1 1.2 Literature Sources........................................................................................................1 1.3 Extent and Scope.........................................................................................................2 2. Christchurch Harbour ....................................................................................................2 2.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................2 2.2 Geology........................................................................................................................4 2.3 Holocene to Recent Evolution......................................................................................4 2.4 Present Geomorphology ..............................................................................................5 -
River Restoration and Chalk Streams
River Restoration and Chalk Streams Monday 22nd – Tuesday 23rd January 2001 University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield AL10 9AB Organised by the River Restoration Centre in partnership with University of Hertfordshire Environment Agency, Thames Region Report compiled by: Vyv Wood-Gee Countryside Management Consultant Scabgill, Braehead, Lanark ML11 8HA Tel: 01555 870530 Fax: 01555 870050 E-mail: [email protected] Mobile: 07711 307980 ____________________________________________________________________________ River Restoration and Chalk Streams Page 1 Seminar Proceedings CONTENTS Page no. Introduction 3 Discussion Session 1: Flow Restoration 4 Discussion Session 2: Habitat Restoration 7 Discussion Session 3: Scheme Selection 9 Discussion Session 4: Post Project Appraisal 15 Discussion Session 5: Project Practicalities 17 Discussion Session 6: BAPs, Research and Development 21 Discussion Session 7: Resource Management 23 Discussion Session 8: Chalk streams and wetlands 25 Discussion Session 9: Conclusions and information dissemination 27 Site visit notes 29 Appendix I: Delegate list 35 Appendix II: Feedback 36 Appendix III: RRC Project Information Pro-forma 38 Appendix IV: Project summaries and contact details – listed 41 alphabetically by project name. ____________________________________________________________________________ River Restoration and Chalk Streams Page 2 Seminar Proceedings INTRODUCTION Workshop Objectives · To facilitate and encourage interchange of information, views and experiences between people working with projects and programmes with strong links to chalk streams and activities or research that affect this environment. · To improve the knowledge base on the practicalities and associated benefits of chalk stream restoration work in order to make future investments more cost effective. Participants The workshop was specifically targeted at individuals and organisations whose activities, research or interests include a specific practical focus on chalk streams. -
Water Situation Report Wessex Area
Monthly water situation report Wessex Area Summary – November 2020 Wessex received ‘normal’ rainfall in November at 84% LTA (71 mm). There were multiple bands of rain throughout November; the most notable event occurred on the 14 November, when 23% of the month’s rain fell. The last week of November was generally dry. The soil moisture deficit gradually decreased throughout November, ending the month on 7 mm, which is higher than the deficit this time last year, but lower than the LTA. When compared to the start of the month, groundwater levels at the end of November had increased at the majority of reporting sites. Rising groundwater levels in the Chalk supported the groundwater dominated rivers in the south, with the majority of south Wessex reporting sites experiencing ‘above normal’ monthly mean river flows, whilst the surface water dominated rivers in the north had largely ‘normal’ monthly mean flows. Daily mean flows generally peaked around 14-16 November in response to the main rainfall event. The dry end to November caused a recession in flows, with all bar two reporting sites ending the month with ‘normal’ daily mean flows. Total reservoir storage increased, with Wessex Water and Bristol Water ending November with 84% and 83%, respectively. Rainfall Wessex received 71 mm of rainfall in November (84% LTA), which is ‘normal’ for the time of year. All hydrological areas received ‘normal’ rainfall bar the Axe (69% LTA; 61 mm) and West Somerset Streams (71% LTA; 79 mm), which had ‘below normal’ rainfall. The highest rainfall accumulations (for the time of year) were generally in the east and south. -
The State of England's Chalk Streams
FUNDED WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM REPORT UK 2014 The State of England’s Chalk Streams This report has been written by Rose O’Neill and Kathy Hughes on behalf of WWF-UK with CONTENTS help and assistance from many of the people and organisations hard at work championing England’s chalk streams. In particular the authors would EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 like to thank Charles Rangeley-Wilson, Lawrence Talks, Sarah Smith, Mike Dobson, Colin Fenn, 8 Chris Mainstone, Chris Catling, Mike Acreman, FOREWORD Paul Quinn, David Bradley, Dave Tickner, Belinda by Charles Rangeley-Wilson Fletcher, Dominic Gogol, Conor Linsted, Caroline Juby, Allen Beechey, Haydon Bailey, Liz Lowe, INTRODUCTION 13 Bella Davies, David Cheek, Charlie Bell, Dave Stimpson, Ellie Powers, Mark Gallant, Meyrick THE STATE OF ENGLAND’S CHALK STREAMS 2014 19 Gough, Janina Gray, Ali Morse, Paul Jennings, Ken Caustin, David Le Neve Foster, Shaun Leonard, Ecological health of chalk streams 20 Alex Inman and Fran Southgate. This is a WWF- Protected chalk streams 25 UK report, however, and does not necessarily Aquifer health 26 reflect the views of each of the contributors. Chalk stream species 26 Since 2012, WWF-UK, Coca-Cola Great Britain and Pressures on chalk streams 31 Coca-Cola Enterprises have been working together Conclusions 42 to secure a thriving future for English rivers. The partnership has focused on improving the health A MANIFESTO FOR CHALK STREAMS 45 of two chalk streams directly linked to Coca-Cola operations: the Nar catchment in Norfolk (where AN INDEX OF ENGLISH CHALK STREAMS 55 some of the sugar beet used in Coca-Cola’s drinks is grown) and the Cray in South London, near 60 to Coca-Cola Enterprises’ Sidcup manufacturing GLOSSARY site. -
DORSET's INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE Ulh 17
AfarsWs\?l ) •O ITNDUSTRIALONDUS TR I AL • 7/ 'rl/ f / 71 TO l) / vlJI/ b 1-/ |, / -] ) I ) ll ,, ' I ilittu It ,rtlll r ffi I ll I E l! ll l[! ll il- c t!H I I I H ltI --'t li . PETER. STANIER' SeIISIIOG IDVIIUIH IDVIIUIH DORSET'SIVIUISNONI INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE Jeled Peter Stanier JaruEls I r \ • r IT, LaS \-z'- rnol rnol 'r.pJV 'r.pJV lllPno lllPno Lano'ss,our1 Arch, Tout Quarry. INTRODUCTIONNOII)NCOU1NI lHt lINnol lINnol ,o ,o ;er'r1snpu| ]asJoc ]asJoc eql eql qlrr' qlrr' sr sr pa!.raluo) pa!.raluo) lSoloaeq:.re lSoloaeq:.re dn dn e e uorsr^ THE COUNTY of Dorset summonssuouJLLrns up a Industrial archaeology is concerned with the vision 1o lP.rn.r lP.rn.r ]sed ]sed re] plaleru sr;er )llllpr )llllpr ruorl ruorl lllpoedsa pa^ouJar pa^ouJar ue:,futsnpur, 'seqr^rpe s,ueul s,ueul puPl puPl far removed from)pq) 'industry': an idyllic rural land- material relics of man's past activities, especially lnq lnq op op u aq] u aq1 ur qlrM'edels pepoo^ pepoo^ su,^ su,^ qtuaalaLr qtuaalaLr Suruur8aq 'lrnluer 'lrnluer -rale^^ -rale^^ 'selP^ 'selP^ scape, with chalk downs, wooded vales, water- in the nineteenth century, but beginning in1o the aqt aqt ue ue Lnlua: Lnlua: d d aql aql anbsarnp anbsarnp sa8ell^ oppau] pouad pouad e8eur e8eur prur s,^ s,^ qluaatq8ra qluaatq8ra meadows andpLre picturesque villages — an image mid-eighteenth century — the period of the le-r]snpu lq lq jo jo eqt eqt se se euros euros qrns Ll)nLu seu.roqf seu.roqf s8uqr.r,,rl s8uqr.r,,rl pa)uequa pa)uequa 'serrlsnpllr 'serrlsnpllr much enhanced by the writings of Thomas Industrial -
Example Chalk Stream Restoration Techniques Guide
Example Chalk Stream Restoration Techniques Woody Berms Flow Deflectors Dig & Dump Angler Accessible Hinged Trees Introduced Riffles Berms Introduction When it comes to improving habitat on our chalk streams there are several key techniques that we use regularly and form the backbone to many of our projects. Here we introduce some of these techniques to help you envisage exactly what works we propose might look like on your river. As all our key techniques involve working almost entirely with natural materials, there will always be some natural variation in the aesthetics of the finished product. We’ve included plenty of examples, along with a brief description of how we go about the work and what can be achieved with each technique. We’ve also included some examples of our work long after the project has been completed. As you’ll see there can be a significant difference between how works look at installation, and once they are a fully established, naturalistic feature of the river. We hope this information will help us make decisions together about how a finished project could look on your river, ensuring that what we deliver matches your expectations. Healthy rivers for wildlife and people Woody Berms Purpose: Technique: Channel narrowing, meandering and Woody material, placed in the river margins improved marginal refuge/cover habitat. and held tightly in place by stakes and cross braces. Silt that deposits within the structure helps marginal plants to establish and cover over the berm, forming what is essentially new riverbank. Whilst coarse, ‘shaggy’ berms create the best, most natural, habitat, structures can be made neater on sites where presentation is a key constraint. -
Chalk Rivers-EN-Ea001a
l L l L L [ Chalk rivers l nature c~nservation and management I [ l L l [ L [ L ~ L L L L ~ =?\J ENVIRONMENT L G ENGLISH ~~. AGENCY for life [ NATURE L Chalk rivers nature conservation and management March 1999 CP Mainstone Water Research Centre Produced on behalf of English Nature and the Environment Agency (English Nature contract number FIN/8.16/97-8) Chalk rivers - nature conservation and management Contributors: NT Holmes Alconbury Environmental Consultants - plants PD Armitage Institute of Freshwater Ecology - invertebrates AM Wilson, JH Marchant, K Evans British Trust for Ornithology - birds D Solomon - fish D Westlake - algae 2 Contents Background 8 1. Introduction 9 2. Environmental characteristics of chalk rivers 12 2.1 Characteristic hydrology 12 2.2 Structural development and definition of reference conditions for conservation management 12 2.3 Characteristic water properties 17 3. Characteristic wildlife communities ofchalk rivers 20 3.1 Introduction 20 3.2 Higher plants 25 3.3 Algae 35 3.4 Invertebrates 40 3.5 Fish 47 3.6 Birds 53 3.7 Mammals 58 4. Habitat requirements of characteristic wildlife communities 59 4.1 Introduction 59 4.2 Higher plants 59 4.3 Invertebrates 64 4.4 Fish 70 4.5 Birds 73 4.6 Mammals 79 4.7 Summary of the ecological requirements ofchalk river communities 80 5. Human activities and their impacts 83 5.1 The inherent vulnerability of chalk rivers 83 5.2 An inventory of activities and their links to ecological impact 83 5.3 Channel modifications and riverlfloodplain consequences 89 5.4 Low flows 92 5.5 Siltation 95 5.6 Nutrient enrichment 101 5.7 Hindrances to migration 109 5.8 Channel maintenance 109 5.9 Riparian management 115 5.10 Manipulation of fish populations 116 5.11 Bird species of management concern 119 5.12 Decline of the native crayfish 120 5.13 Commercial watercress beds as a habitat 121 5.14 Spread of non-native plant species 121 3 6.