View - the River Restoration Centre

Test and Itchen Restoration Strategy
completed projects in 2013
Name: Heb Leman
Job title: Test and Itchen Restoration Strategy Project Officer
Date: 24th March 2014
Locations of Environment Agency and Natural
England Restoration sites 2013
The ‘Bends’
Houghton Club
Blackbridge
Houghton Club
‘Station Beat’
Bossington Estate
‘Swimming Pool’
Compton Estate
2
Houghton Club, Blackbridge, river Test
Looking downstream
Creating bar from historically dredged material
Collaborative restoration works with the Houghton
club. Blackbridge, river Test, SU34431 31944,
SSSI Unit 101. Management option from T&I
Restoration Strategy = Rehabilitate.
Length 150m
Finished bar looking upstream
3
50/50 funded by Houghton Fishing Club and the
Environment Agency as part of the Test and
Itchen Restoration Strategy 2013.
Finished
Contractor – Brian Parsons
Houghton Club, The ‘Bends’ (Phase 1), river Test
Looking upstream at historically dredged channel.
Dredged material was dumped along left bank.
Flood relief channel to adjacent SSSI
wetland.
4
Meanders created using historically dredged material.
Collaborative restoration works with the Houghton Club.
‘The Bends’, river Test, SU 35872 35947, SSSI Unit 88,
Management option from T&I Restoration Strategy =
Rehabilitate.
Length 200m
Costs = £12,000
50/50 funded by Houghton Fishing Club and the
Environment Agency as part of the Test and Itchen
Restoration Strategy 2013.
Ongoing.
Contractor – Brian Parsons
Bossington, Station beat, river Test
New meanders and re-profiled banks
Collaborative restoration works with Bossington Estate.
Station beat, SU 34399 30452, SSSI Unit 89.
Management option from T&I Restoration Strategy = Restore
Length 300m
Agency contributed £20,000
Finished
Contractor – Cain Bioengineering
5
Compton Estate, the ‘Swimming pool’, river Test
Before
After
Collaborative restoration project with Compton estate to alter a structure, improve fish
passage and restore 250m of artificial channel upstream. SU 33558 29146,
SSSI Unit 89
Cost to alter structure and improve nearby banks = £12,500
50/50 funded by Compton estate and the Environment Agency as part of the Test and
Itchen Restoration Strategy 2013
Ongoing
Contractor – Brian Parsons
6
Compton Estate, upstream of ‘Swimming pool’, river Test
Flattering photo of channel upstream of old structure
Reduced water level with new structure
Collaborative restoration project with Compton estate to restore 250m of
artificial channel upstream of ‘swimming pool’. SU 33558 29146,
SSSI Unit 89
Cost to restore channel upstream = £42,000
50/50 funded by Compton estate and the Environment Agency as part of
the Test and Itchen Restoration Strategy 2013
Ongoing
Contractor – Brian Parsons
7
Vegetation Management
From this....
..to this
‘Conserve and enhance’
One of the easiest ways to improve the status of the both SSSI’s or is it?
8
River restoration strategy:
process and progress
•Survey work conducted by Geodata, and
latterly, Atkins
•Atkins charged with pulling together into
strategy, with recommendations for each reach:
• Conserve and enhance
• Rehabilitate
• Restore
River restoration strategy:
process and progress
•Suggested sites for funding for 14/15 to
enable EA FCRM funding bid, and sign off of
strategy
•Strategy signed off by NE/EA, and
prioritisation principles agreed
•Prioritisation of each reach using tested
approach by NE for other SSSIs.
River restoration strategy:
process and progress
•Prioritisation of sites based on:
• Conserve and enhance reaches must be
maintained and monitored
• Work upstream to downstream
• Link natural and semi-natural reaches first
• Actions relating to structures
• Account for impacts on adjacent floodplain
Mix of objective and subjective scoring
River restoration strategy:
process and progress
•Objective prioritisation criteria:
• Reach category (C&E = high)
• Upstream and downstream reach category
(close to C&E = high)
• % of SSSI unit in C&E condition (high % =
high)
• Structure actions (structure = high)
River restoration strategy:
process and progress
•Subjective prioritisation criteria:
• Potential cost (low = high)
• Length of river improved (major – high)
• Landowner support (supportive = high)
• Bonus points for demonstration site
potential and benefits to other features
(e.g. historic environment, landscape)
River restoration strategy:
process and progress
•Prioritisation spreadsheet created by Atkins
•Spreadsheet will be managed by EA
•Equal weighting given to each criteria, but can
be altered if required
•Detailed technical guidance note on
prioritisation process available on request from
EA or NE
Projects for 2014
River Test
Houghton club (phase 2) - meanders/bed raising cost £13,000, our contribution £6,500 rehabilitate
Polehampton - structure removal/alteration, cost £6,000, our contribution £3000 - rehabilitate
Tufton (phase 2) - meanders/bed profile cost £9,500, our contribution approx £4,500 - restore
Bossington – Options appraisal for structure removal approx £25,000 – restore
River Itchen
Bishopstoke AC Twyford – creation of islands cost £18,500, our contribution £9,250 rehabilitate
Chilland Mill – collaborative project with HWLT £20,000 contribution for works on river rehabilitate.
15
Bossington structure
Tufton phase 1