Difference between revisions of "Regelsbrunner Aue"
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Key features of the case study== | ==Key features of the case study== | ||
| − | Restore hydrological connectivity and ecological integrity between the river and its floodplains | + | Restore hydrological connectivity and ecological integrity between the river and its floodplains in a segment of the Austrian Danube |
| − | |||
'''Attention:''' '' The information presented below has been taken from Tockner et al.(1999)''<ref>K, TOCKNER,F. SCHIEMER, C. BAUMGARTNER, G. KUM, E. WEIGAND, | '''Attention:''' '' The information presented below has been taken from Tockner et al.(1999)''<ref>K, TOCKNER,F. SCHIEMER, C. BAUMGARTNER, G. KUM, E. WEIGAND, | ||
I. ZWEIMU, LLER AND J.V. WARD (1999). THE DANUBE RESTORATION PROJECT: SPECIES DIVERSITY PATTERNS ACROSS CONNECTIVITY GRADIENTS IN THE FLOODPLAIN SYSTEM. REGULATED RIVERS: RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT 15: 245–258.</ref> | I. ZWEIMU, LLER AND J.V. WARD (1999). THE DANUBE RESTORATION PROJECT: SPECIES DIVERSITY PATTERNS ACROSS CONNECTIVITY GRADIENTS IN THE FLOODPLAIN SYSTEM. REGULATED RIVERS: RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT 15: 245–258.</ref> | ||
| − | + | ==Site description== | |
| − | + | The study was conducted in the free-flowing section of the Danube River about 25 km downstream of | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
Vienna (river-km 1895 and 1909). The area designated for restoration is a 570-ha floodplain | Vienna (river-km 1895 and 1909). The area designated for restoration is a 570-ha floodplain | ||
sector on the right orographical bank of the Danube River (‘Regelsbrunner Aue’). At mean water level, | sector on the right orographical bank of the Danube River (‘Regelsbrunner Aue’). At mean water level, | ||
| − | the channel network is 37 km long, corresponding to a floodplain channel density of 6.5 km km<sup>2</sup> and | + | the channel network is 37 km long, corresponding to a floodplain channel density of 6.5 km km<sup>2</sup> and a total surface area of all floodplain water bodies of 120 ha. The backwater system |
| − | a total surface area of all floodplain water bodies of 120 ha. The backwater system | + | |
is dominated by a former river channel (total length, ca. 10 km) that was cut off from the main river | is dominated by a former river channel (total length, ca. 10 km) that was cut off from the main river | ||
channel at its upstream end more than 100 years ago. This main side channel is subdivided by weirs into | channel at its upstream end more than 100 years ago. This main side channel is subdivided by weirs into | ||
| Line 31: | Line 25: | ||
system is dynamically connected to the river via its porous aquifer (seepage inflow). Water levels in the | system is dynamically connected to the river via its porous aquifer (seepage inflow). Water levels in the | ||
floodplain system follow the water level fluctuations of the Danube after only a short time lag.</p> | floodplain system follow the water level fluctuations of the Danube after only a short time lag.</p> | ||
| − | |||
==Measures selection== | ==Measures selection== | ||
| Line 38: | Line 31: | ||
==Ecological response== | ==Ecological response== | ||
| + | The biotic ‘functional describers’ include macrophytes, molluscs, odonates, amphibians, fish and benthic invertebrates. In the present analysis, the first four of these groups are focused upon, because sampling strategies for fish and benthic invertebrates are not compatible with the other groups. | ||
==Hydromorphological response== | ==Hydromorphological response== | ||
Latest revision as of 13:13, 8 April 2010
Regelsbrunner Aue
Key features of the case study
Restore hydrological connectivity and ecological integrity between the river and its floodplains in a segment of the Austrian Danube
Attention: The information presented below has been taken from Tockner et al.(1999)[1]
Site description
The study was conducted in the free-flowing section of the Danube River about 25 km downstream of Vienna (river-km 1895 and 1909). The area designated for restoration is a 570-ha floodplain sector on the right orographical bank of the Danube River (‘Regelsbrunner Aue’). At mean water level, the channel network is 37 km long, corresponding to a floodplain channel density of 6.5 km km2 and a total surface area of all floodplain water bodies of 120 ha. The backwater system is dominated by a former river channel (total length, ca. 10 km) that was cut off from the main river channel at its upstream end more than 100 years ago. This main side channel is subdivided by weirs into semi-isolated water bodies (channel segments I–IX in Figure 1). At present, this side channel has surface water connections to the river at its downstream end for about 180 days annually. Long stagnant periods are interrupted by short-term flood pulses (average duration, B4 days) caused by upstream connections at high water levels via former inflow areas in the streamside embankments. However, the floodplain system is dynamically connected to the river via its porous aquifer (seepage inflow). Water levels in the floodplain system follow the water level fluctuations of the Danube after only a short time lag.</p>
Measures selection
Success criteria
Ecological response
The biotic ‘functional describers’ include macrophytes, molluscs, odonates, amphibians, fish and benthic invertebrates. In the present analysis, the first four of these groups are focused upon, because sampling strategies for fish and benthic invertebrates are not compatible with the other groups.
Hydromorphological response
Monitoring before and after implementation of the project
Socio-economic aspects
Contact person within the organization
Extra background information
References
- ↑ K, TOCKNER,F. SCHIEMER, C. BAUMGARTNER, G. KUM, E. WEIGAND, I. ZWEIMU, LLER AND J.V. WARD (1999). THE DANUBE RESTORATION PROJECT: SPECIES DIVERSITY PATTERNS ACROSS CONNECTIVITY GRADIENTS IN THE FLOODPLAIN SYSTEM. REGULATED RIVERS: RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT 15: 245–258.
Related Measures
- Add/feed sediment
- Establish environmental flows / naturalise flow regimes
- Favour morphogenic flows
- Remove barrier
- Manage sluice and weir operation for fish migration
- Initiate natural channel dynamics to promote natural regeneration
- Remove or modify in-channel hydraulic structures
- Reconnect backwaters and wetlands
- Remove hard engineering structures that impede lateral connectivity
