river improvement fund pdf report

1splash

14 May 2014 17:28:05

RIVERStrustthe

where there’s there’s water life

the umbrella body of the rivers trust movement

River Improvement Fund Programme

An overview of more than two hundred river improvement projects that were delivered by 28 individual rivers trusts throughout England between 2010 - 2014

RT RIF Final Completion Report Summary V2 24pp.indd 1 29/09/2014 14:16:43

2

Cover montage: Before, during and after installation of Head Weir natural fish pass on the River Mole, Taw Catchment, Devon.

River Improvement Fund Programme Project RT57. Delivered by Westcountry Rivers Trust in collaboration with Taw Fisheries

Association and The Environment Agency - 2010-2012

European Fisheries FundInvesting in sustainable fisheries

foundationThe


3

Rivers, lakes and coastal waters are vital natural resources: they provide drinking water, crucial habitats for many

different types of wildlife, and are an important resource for industry and recreation. Protecting and improving the environment is an important part of achieving sustainable

development and is vital for the long term health, wellbeing and prosperity of everyone.

The River Improvement Fund Programme was an initiative of three phases over four years, wholly managed by The Rivers Trust

and actioned by rivers trusts throughout the Country.

It delivered the largest ever river improvement programme by a non governmental organisation in England including:

146 multi fish species barriers eased, passed or removed

87 eel barriers eased, passed or tidal flap valves installed

88 riparian habitat improvements

Over 130 waterbodies with increased ecological potential

44 feasibility studies for further improvement work

Resulting in over 2,800 km of rivers with improved ecological potential

The following document provides an overview of programme management, delivery and achievements.


4

INTRODUCTION - What are the issues?

Barriers to fish MigrationThere are many historic structures remaining from the industrial revolution and before where watercourses were modified to provide water for industry. These barriers frequently prevent fish and aquatic animals from moving upstream and downstream. This can be very detrimental to migratory species such as salmon and sea trout who need to spawn in the clean gravels found in the upper reaches of streams. Eel also need access to freshwater systems to mature before returning to sea to breed. Even Coarse fish that spend all their lives in the river need to be able to move around the system to access different feeding and breeding areas and to colonise.

Lack of spawning habitatNot only do fish have problems reaching historic spawning grounds, many of these sites have suffered from siltation and poor flows which make them far less effective as ‘nests’ and nurseries for the next generation of migratory fish.

Diffuse PollutionRain ends up in watercourses. Unfortunately water can pick up and transport much of what it encounters on it’s journey downstream, this is diffuse pollution. Farms are a common source: run off from concrete yards, a lack of slurry storage forcing spreading in less than ideal conditions are common problems. Drainage from roads can transport silt and other pollutants into watercourses.

Gleaston beck tide door in Morecombe Bay. A barrier to eel migration identified

for eel valve pass installation by South Cumbria Rivers Trust.

A weir on the Cong Burn, Wear catchment, Durham. Identified by Wear Rivers Trust for removal and installation of rock ramp natural fish pass.

Two completely impassable weirs at the confluence of the rivers Brun and Calder in Burnley. Identified by the Ribble Rivers Trust for fish pass installation.

Examples of diffuse pollution from agriculture

The physical problems affecting our rivers


5

Examples of diffuse pollution from agriculture

Channelised section of River Stiffkey in Norfolk, realigned to edge of floodplain prior to restoration. Lack of features encouraged

deposition of silt and created poor fish spawning habitat.

AcidificationIndustrial pollution, coniferous plantations and certain agricultural practices can alter the chemical status of ground water and rivers in the respective catchment which in turn can adversely affect plants and animals in our watercourses.

MorphologyMany of our rivers have had their physical characteristics modified by human intervention such as straightening and dredging, this can have damaging effects on the habitats within the channel to support diverse flora and fauna.

SedimentationDrainage of agricultural land has been common practice for many years. A side effect of this can be the ‘canalisation’ or straightening of watercourses to allow water to escape quickly from the immediate surrounding area. Sudden high flow rates can transport sediment at alarming rates, frequently depositing the sediment into water courses where they coat the bed of the river, starving aquatic life of light and oxygen. Topsoil can also be lost at an alarming rate when fields are ploughed adjacent to rivers and streams.

Heavy rainfall can create severe run-off, causing diffuse pollution and sedimentation in vulnerable areas.

Accelerated bank erosion resulting from unprotected stock access.


6

European DirectivesThe Water Framework Directive This establishes a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. The Water Framework Directive came into force in December 2000. The purpose of the Directive is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface waters (rivers and lakes), transitional waters (estuaries), coastal waters and groundwater. It will ensure that all aquatic ecosystems and, with regard to their water needs, terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands meet ‘good status’ by 2015.

The Habitats DirectiveEurope’s natural habitats are continuing to deteriorate and an increasing number of wild species are seriously threatened. Much of this is as a result of development and agricultural intensification. 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 by introducing robust protection for those habitats and species of European importance. In applying these measures Member States are required to take account of economic, social and cultural requirements, as well as regional and local characteristics. The provisions of the Habitats Directive require Member States to introduce a range of measures, including contribute to a coherent European ecological network of protected sites by designating Special Areas of Conservation for habitats listed on Annex I and for species listed on Annex II.

INTRODUCTION - What are the issues?

6


7

Eel Management PlansThe European eel has suffered significant decline due to loss of habitat, barriers to migration, climate change, pollution, exploitation and parasites. In September 2007 The Eel Directive established measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel and required member states to produce Eel management plans for each catchment. Adoption of eel management plans defined conservation measures to allow eel access to freshwater systems to mature. These include demolition and/or modification of obstacles to migration, construction of eel passes and restocking with the aim of a 40% escapement of the mature silver eel population downstream to the sea to maintain a sustainable breeding population.

Salmon Action Plans The widespread decline in salmon stocks in Western Europe involves many factors including: exploitation, climate change, pollution, barriers to migration, loss of spawning areas due to silt deposition from drainage works and erosion or changes in river structure, pollution from agriculture, industry and development. The National Salmon Management Strategy was launched in 1996 by the Environment Agency’s predecessor the National Rivers Authority and The North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization. This strategy concentrates on the management of salmon fisheries in England and Wales. It is primarily aimed at securing the well being of the stock, but in doing so will improve catches and the associated economic returns to the fisheries. This strategy will be addressed through Salmon Action Plans.

Each plan will review the status of stock and fisheries on a particular catchment and identify the main issues limiting performance, such as barriers to migration and spawning habitat.

7


8

The River Improvement Fund Programme was a strategic national initiative between DEFRA and The Rivers Trust, in collaboration with the Environment Agency, to raise ecological status of identified water bodies to satisfy the requirements of The Water Framework Directive, to maintain and improve Special Areas of Conservation and to satisfy and complement requirements of Salmon Action Plans and Eel Management Plans by:

• Multi species fish migration barrier removal

• Multi species fish migration easements

• Multi species fish migration passes

• Eel migration passes

• Riparian environmental improvements

• Riparian habitat works in Special Areas of Conservation

• Research to identify & facilitate feasibility of the work above

• Monitoring of works & improvements

The perfect choice to deliverThe rivers trust movement is a bottom up grassroots development, initiated by a number of different community groups from around the country working independently to form Trusts. The formation of The Rivers Trust was simply a natural response to mature trusts wishing to share information and work more closely together to help others and provide synergy.

There is an increasing awareness of the importance of rivers for wildlife and of managing catchments and their ecosystems as environmental and ecological service providers. The Rivers Trust provides an opportunity to assist, influence and develop this in a positive way. Improving the river corridor and surrounding catchment is a complex process involving government departments, its agencies and many other diverse organisations.

DELIVERY

The River Improvement Fund Programme

8


9

Important linkThe Rivers Trust provides an important link between these organisations and rivers and fisheries trusts. It also provides a forum to develop ideas, best practice and policy guidance and test transferability. Furthermore it offers a national platform for regional Trusts to “showcase” their work, allowing them to inform and give enthusiasm to others, giving advice and encouragement and ultimately, empowerment, “thinking globally and acting locally”.

The River Improvement Fund ProgrammeLocal catchment knowledgeThis has been epitomised in the River Improvement Fund Programme. Individual rivers trusts have used their unique local catchment knowledge, community contacts, social capital, professional and volunteer base. Also attracting co-finance and in-kind contribution to deliver these works. The Rivers Trust has managed project progress and financial information from rivers trust partners, together with providing administration, audit, financial guidance, technical support and liaison at national level with the Environment Agency, Natural England and the Wildlife Trusts.

9


10

River Improvement Programme inception and designationThe Rivers Trust circulated initial requests for qualifying project proposals to the rivers trust movement during summer / autumn 2009. Individual trusts then prepared and submitted formal project application schedules. These applications were assessed by The Rivers Trust for viability, effectiveness and value. The subsequent short list was technically assessed by the Environment Agency at national level for Water Framework Directive, Eel Management Plan and Salmon Action Plan compliance. Budgets were then allocated and contracts issued. This process was replicated for the additional phases.

IMPLEMENTATION

Guidance DocumentationBuilding on experience during the programme The Rivers Trust developed a series of guidance fact sheets which were incorporated into project contracts to assist project management, delivery, finance, reporting and completion.

The Role of The Rivers Trust

FACT SHEET 2

Defra River Improvement Fund Phase 3: Stage Report

Project Ref RT (Project number) Rivers Trust Project Title Period ending 31st March 2012

Description of Work Undertaken: (500 words maximum) Consents applied for, related plans, contractors identified and invitations to tender plus other work in progress (NB It is recognised that generally work cannot commence in-‐river until the Environment Agency gives its consent and may not begin in earnest until May 2011) Where practicable it should also include a short note of the next steps planned, to put the Project into overall context. Subsequent reports should therefore follow on easily and “tell a story”. Photographs: (guideline maximum of 8 on 2 pages; with a minimum of 2 per page) Photographs are considered important evidence to show “before, during and after” progress. Photographs should therefore be:

• Dated • Have a grid reference and/or other clear indication of location. • Be captioned

Inserting and adjusting photographs in a Word Document: Assuming you have imported pictures on your computer from digital camera try this: From the toolbar select Insert and go to Picture, then From File (or where else you have stored them) open the file select the desired picture, select Insert. The picture will appear where your cursor was in the document. You may type text below the picture where your cursor appears. To adjust (e.g. crop) the picture: From the toolbar select View, then Toolbars, then Picture. A picture toolbar will appear. If you click on the desired picture you want to change the picture toolbar will become active – scroll across the options on the picture toolbar and select the desired effect and apply it (this may take a little practice!). Finally to make your document a manageable size for email, again go to the picture toolbar, scroll to Compress Pictures and select – an option box will appear Select –All pictures in document, then in Change resolution select Web/Screen, then in options tick Compress pictures and tick Delete cropped areas of pictures. Click ok, click apply – your document is ready to be attached for email

394

FACT SHEET 1

Defra River Improvement Fund Phase 3: Project Schedule

Project Ref RT to complete Rivers Trust Project (Working) Title Trust Project Officer/Contact (Name, email & tel. no)

Trust Finance Officer/Contact (Name, email & tel. no)

Brief Description of the Works

Benefiting species E.g. salmon, trout, eels, other

River Basin District/ Catchment River/ Tributary

Please list any statutory designations for the river or site E.g. N2k, SAC, SSSI etc

Contribution to meeting WFD Good Ecological Status

Check/confirm 10 digit NGR of the location of the Works (Via EA or www.streetmap.co.uk)

WFD water body ID of the Works E.g. GB112072071710

Water body status Anticipated water body status Downstream water bodies or sub-‐catchment to benefit from the Works E.g. GB112072071710 or length of river

Upstream water bodies or sub-‐catchment to benefit from the Works E.g. GB112072071710 or length of river

List (any) planning consents or other permissions required for the Works

Budget (£k) NB To assist in the sorting of files, can you please save the completed form with your trust’s abbreviated name & project included e.g. Trent Harlaston Phase 3 Project Schedule.doc? Thank you.

393

FACT SHEET 5 (original in Excel format)

DEFRA RIVER IMPROVEMENT FUND PHASE 3: Claim Form

Project Ref: RT Trust: Name Project Title: Title Grant: £0 Claim Number: 1 Above headings & Column for "This Claim" are auto-filled from (2nd sheet) Claim Schedule which should be completed first

Category

Cumulative brought forward from Previous

Claim

This Claim Cumulative

Claim carried forward

1 Staff Costs £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 2 Volunteer Costs £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 3 Travel & Subsistence £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 4 General Costs & Overheads £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 5 External Services £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 6 Capital Equipment & Materials £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Match Funding (if any) £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Grant Remaining £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 I hereby declare that: - (a) The Trust has incurred the above expenditure in respect of the above Project.

(b) It is eligible (See Fact Sheet 6).

(c) Supporting documentation is attached/enclosed. (d) It is duly signed and dated by an authorised person of the Trust.

NB Incomplete claims will not pass audit & will not be paid.

Signed by: Name: Date: Please post completed claim form to: - James Sowden, Finance Officer, The Rivers Trust Rain-Charm House, Kyl Cober Parc, Stoke Climsland Callington, Cornwall PL17 8PH Tel: 01579 372 142 Email: [email protected]

398

FACT SHEET 6 Defra River improvement Fund Phase 3: Eligible Expenditure

Principle

(a) The underlying principle of expenditure under the Project is that it should relate to expenditure actually incurred, as substantiated by documentary evidence. Estimates (except for Volunteer rates as given below) and amounts claimed without clear workings are not acceptable and will be rejected. (b) Funds may be used for match funding (the unfunded element of co-‐funded projects) but not to double fund any Project. (c) Once a method of calculation has been chosen it must be retained throughout the Project for consistency. (d) Date of eligibility The start date for eligible expenditure is 1 June 2011.

The date for receipt of Final Claims is 31 October 2012. Claim Schedule Categories 1 Staff Costs 2 Volunteer Costs 3 Travel & Subsistence

4 General Costs & Overheads 5 External Services 6 Capital Equipment & Materials

1 Staff Costs (a) General Staff costs are the based on the actual time worked by the employed persons directly carrying out work on the Project. Staff costs may be calculated by the Variable Rate (Interreg) method or the Standard rate (Life+) method. Overhead costs cannot be added to staff costs and should be claimed under General Costs & Overheads. Gross Remuneration = total gross pay + ERNI + Employers’ pension and life assurance costs (per individual employee) Claims must be based on: -‐

• Signed timesheets – evidence of time spent on the Project • Payroll Accounts – evidence of Gross Remuneration • Payslips – evidence of pay actually made

(b) Method 1 -‐ Variable Rate Calculation (per employee) This is: -‐ Hours worked on the Project as a proportion of Total hours worked during the corresponding period (i.e. excluding holidays, time off in lieu or sickness) and applied to Gross Remuneration. This means that unpaid overtime reduces the hourly rate. Conversely it means that holidays, time off in lieu and sickness reduces hours actually worked and increases the hourly rate. Over the course of a year the variations balance out. E.g. Employee V works 42 hours on the Project and works a total of 173.5 hours in the month (based on the timesheet). Employee V’s Gross Remuneration is £2,400 per month. The calculation is: 40/173.5 times £2,400 = £553.31 (rounded)

400


11

FACT SHEET 1

Defra River Improvement Fund Phase 3: Project Schedule

Project Ref RT to complete Rivers Trust Project (Working) Title Trust Project Officer/Contact (Name, email & tel. no)

Trust Finance Officer/Contact (Name, email & tel. no)

Brief Description of the Works

Benefiting species E.g. salmon, trout, eels, other

River Basin District/ Catchment River/ Tributary

Please list any statutory designations for the river or site E.g. N2k, SAC, SSSI etc

Contribution to meeting WFD Good Ecological Status

Check/confirm 10 digit NGR of the location of the Works (Via EA or www.streetmap.co.uk)

WFD water body ID of the Works E.g. GB112072071710

Water body status Anticipated water body status Downstream water bodies or sub-‐catchment to benefit from the Works E.g. GB112072071710 or length of river

Upstream water bodies or sub-‐catchment to benefit from the Works E.g. GB112072071710 or length of river

List (any) planning consents or other permissions required for the Works

Budget (£k) NB To assist in the sorting of files, can you please save the completed form with your trust’s abbreviated name & project included e.g. Trent Harlaston Phase 3 Project Schedule.doc? Thank you.

393

FACT SHEET 6 Defra River improvement Fund Phase 3: Eligible Expenditure

Principle

(a) The underlying principle of expenditure under the Project is that it should relate to expenditure actually incurred, as substantiated by documentary evidence. Estimates (except for Volunteer rates as given below) and amounts claimed without clear workings are not acceptable and will be rejected. (b) Funds may be used for match funding (the unfunded element of co-‐funded projects) but not to double fund any Project. (c) Once a method of calculation has been chosen it must be retained throughout the Project for consistency. (d) Date of eligibility The start date for eligible expenditure is 1 June 2011.

The date for receipt of Final Claims is 31 October 2012. Claim Schedule Categories 1 Staff Costs 2 Volunteer Costs 3 Travel & Subsistence

4 General Costs & Overheads 5 External Services 6 Capital Equipment & Materials

1 Staff Costs (a) General Staff costs are the based on the actual time worked by the employed persons directly carrying out work on the Project. Staff costs may be calculated by the Variable Rate (Interreg) method or the Standard rate (Life+) method. Overhead costs cannot be added to staff costs and should be claimed under General Costs & Overheads. Gross Remuneration = total gross pay + ERNI + Employers’ pension and life assurance costs (per individual employee) Claims must be based on: -‐

• Signed timesheets – evidence of time spent on the Project • Payroll Accounts – evidence of Gross Remuneration • Payslips – evidence of pay actually made

(b) Method 1 -‐ Variable Rate Calculation (per employee) This is: -‐ Hours worked on the Project as a proportion of Total hours worked during the corresponding period (i.e. excluding holidays, time off in lieu or sickness) and applied to Gross Remuneration. This means that unpaid overtime reduces the hourly rate. Conversely it means that holidays, time off in lieu and sickness reduces hours actually worked and increases the hourly rate. Over the course of a year the variations balance out. E.g. Employee V works 42 hours on the Project and works a total of 173.5 hours in the month (based on the timesheet). Employee V’s Gross Remuneration is £2,400 per month. The calculation is: 40/173.5 times £2,400 = £553.31 (rounded)

400

Practical guidance and workshopsThe Rivers Trust provided river improvement workshops that were attended by all participating rivers trusts. The team undertook reviews of the current environmental legislative requirements, together with an overall review of completed projects. Individual trusts gave presentations of case studies from previous projects, highlighting lessons learnt with open question and answer sessions. Worked examples of the reporting and finance guidance fact sheets were presented to ensure the reporting and claims process on eligible expenditure was clearly understood.

Technical support and guidanceIn collaboration with the Environment Agency and Natural England, The Rivers Trust made available a series of technical courses for rivers trust project officers regarding fish pass design and hydraulics, fluvial geomorphology and catchment management. Technical support visits by Rivers Trust staff were provided to individual trusts where required.

FACT SHEET 7

Reviewed: Oct 2011 THE RIVERS TRUST: PROCUREMENT POLICY

Introduction Procurement means the acquisition of goods (supplies), services and/or works required to enable the Trust to operate, deliver projects etc. The Trust’s over-‐riding principle is to endeavour to achieve best value in all its procurement activity. Best value is measured in terms of quality, reliability, fitness for purpose, reputation, “after sales” support, and ethical considerations as well as price. The Trust will achieve best value through appropriate leadership, skills, systems and processes, thereby promoting efficient and effective procurement of goods, services and works. Risk will be reduced by the Trust clearly communicating its requirements. Throughout the process the Trust will adopt the highest standards of equality and probity and maintain appropriate audit control. Quantitative Framework To provide a consistent framework for procurement, the Trust has adopted a cascading system based on the value of the goods, services and works to be acquired. The principle is the obvious one that higher values generally relate to more complex issues and greater risks and therefore demand a higher level of scrutiny and analysis. The framework provides a simple guide. It adapts the threshold tables published under the Irish and Welsh National Procurement Rules (in the absence of corresponding English & Scottish tables), where there is a similar requirement to obtain value for money. To this extent it provides a firm foundation.

Estimated Value Tender Action Below £1000 Prior knowledge or Informal shop around £1,000 to £5,000 Minimum of one quote £5,000 to £49,999 Minimum of three written quotes £50,000 to £100,000 Minimum of three written quotes. Formal tender process. Over £100,000 EU procurement process (or non-‐public sector equivalent)

Qualitative Framework

• Quality, reliability, fitness for purpose, reputation and after sales support The Trust recognises that there is good legal protection and redress for purchasers in the UK. However, the legal process is considered a last resort. It may be expensive and is stressful and time consuming. The Trust therefore adopts the precautionary principle of trying to avoid or prevent a problem at “source” by placing procurement based on a proven track record of good quality, reliability, fitness for purpose, reputation and after sales support. To this extent the quantitative guidelines below the EU threshold shall be construed accordingly.

• Ethical Considerations The Trust will incorporate ethical considerations in its procurement process, as more particularly described in its Ethical Policy (e.g. non-‐abuse of human rights and sustainability). They also

404


12

RT 16 Padiham Weir - Ribble Rivers Trust. The weir was impassable to fish, the upper section of the weir crest was removed and the remaining height difference eliminated by installation of a rock ramp allowing multi fish species passage

RT 305 Hadfield Weir - Don Rivers Trust. Another weir impassable to fish. A section of the weir was de-watered and a concrete fishway installed with a super active Larinier baffle providing optimum water flow and attracting flume for fish to traverse. Special substrate tiles were also installed alongside to enable eel to traverse the slope.

RT 30 Belasit Weir - South Cumbria Rivers Trust. A hydrometry weir impassable to eel. Sections of bristle channel with a

pumped water flow installed alongside the weir provides a swimming/crawling medium for elver/eel traverse.

Larinier baffle

Bristlechanneldetail

Eel tiles

Weir removal with rock ramp natural fish pass

EXAMPLES OF COMPLETED PROJECTS

Weir bypassed using bristle channel with pumped water flow.

Weir bypassed by installation of fish and eel ways

1.

2.

3.

1.

2. 3.


13

RT 37 Gleaston Beck Tide door - South Cumbria Rivers Trust.Tidal doors/flaps exclude the tide at mid and higher levels to prevent flooding inland and unfortunately restrict eel access for migration at the same time. Installation of “pet flap” float controlled valves allow elver and eel passage at mid tide without compromising flood prevention.

RT 41 Rivers Dove and Manifold - Trent Rivers Trust.

Spring fed cattle drinker - Alternative

drinking point created by piping spring water

into a trough. This solution complements

riparian fencing and exlusion of stock from

the watercourse

RT 107 Easington Brook Habitat Scheme - Ribble Rivers Trust. Overgrazed section of channel restored and tree planting undertaken to provide shading, bank stabilisation and buffering from surface water run-off.

RT 308 Minor barriers - Eden Rivers Trust. Stone Beck road bridge culvert and bridge base were identified as a barrier to fish migration. These were eased by a rock ramp approach and installation of baffles to provide a fish-friendly flow.

Tidal flap access improved by delay valve installation

Bridge culvert barrier eased by rock ramp natural fish pass and baffle sections

Riparian management

Habitat improvement

1. 2. 3.

5.

4.

Barrier to migration

Rock ramp

Baffles

Riparian fencing - This fence has only been in place for two months and the picture clearly demonstrates the difference between the heavily grazed field, and the protected bank on the other side of the new fence.


14

COVERAGE

Project coverageThe blue dots indicate the location of water bodies where the 204 individually contracted projects, some with multiple sub-projects and actions, were delivered by 28 rivers trusts in England between 2010 and 2014.

KEY - Rivers Trusts in England & Wales

1 Action for the River Kennet2 Aire Rivers Trust3 Arun & Rother Rivers Trust4 Bristol Avon Rivers Trust5 Calder & Colne Rivers Trust6 Cam Valley Forum7 Cambridgeshire Acre8 Carmarthenshire Rivers Trust9 Clwyd and Conwy Rivers Trust10 Cotswolds Rivers Trust11 Don Catchment Rivers Trust12 East Yorkshire Rivers Trust13 Eden Rivers Trust14 Essex & Suffolk Rivers Trust15 Galloway Fisheries Trust16 Healthy Waterways Trust17 Irwell Rivers Trust18 Lincolnshire Rivers Trust19 Lune Rivers Trust20 Norfolk Rivers Trust21 Northumberland Rivers Trust22 Ouse and Adur Rivers Trust23 Pembrokeshire Rivers Trust24 Ribble Rivers Trust25 River Nene Regional Park CIC26 River Thame Conservation Trust27 River Waveney Trust28 Severn Rivers Trust29 South Cumbria Rivers Trust30 South East Rivers Trust

(including Wandle Rivers Trust)31 South East Wales Rivers Trust32 Tees Rivers Trust33 Teifi Rivers Trust34 Thames 21, Thames Rivers Trust &

Thames Explorer Trust35 Trent Rivers Trust36 Tweed Foundation & Tweed Forum37 Tyne Rivers Trust38 Wear Rivers Trust39 Welland Rivers Trust40 Welsh Dee Trust41 Wessex Chalk Streams and Rivers Trust42 West Cumbria Rivers Trust43 Westcountry Rivers Trust44 Wye and Usk Foundation45 Wyre Rivers Trust46 Yorkshire Dales Rivers Trust47 Yorkshire Esk Rivers Trust

Alaskan ‘A’ fish pass, before and after.River Rea Fish Access Scheme - Severn Rivers Trust

Clifford Weir improvement. Teign catchment. Westcountry Rivers Trust.

Installation and completed elver pass valves on tide flaps. Morecombe Bay.

South Cumbria Rivers Trust

Public information board for Morecombe Bay Elver

Tidal Flaps board. Lune Rivers Trust


15

Cong Burn weir removal and rock ramp natural fish pass installation. Wear catchment. Wear Rivers Trust .

Volunteer work force from Ouse and Adur Rivers Trust.

Ravensbury II eel pass over tilting weir being fitted. River Wandle

Catchment. Wandle Trust

Fitting a bristle board eel pass. River Brent. Thames Catchment. Thames Rivers Trust.


16

OUTPUTS & FINANCE

Main Project Type Contracted Number

Salmon Action Plan (SAP) obstruction (multi fish access) 140

Eel Management Plan (EMP) obstruction (eel access) 34

Special Area of Conservation/EMP/SAP habitat (also benefiting coarse fish) 30

Total 204

Targeted to Achieve Ecological Improvement Number

Multi fish species barriers eased, passed or removed 146

Eel barriers eased, passed or tidal flaps installed 87

Riparian habitat improvements (areas with multi action works) 88

*Waterbodies with increased ecological potential >130

Feasibility studies for further improvement work 44

*NB. Work completed in one water-body (e.g. barrier removal) may increase the ecological potential of adjacent water bodies.

River Improvement Fund Programme Outputs

Over 2,800* kilometres of rivers with improved ecological potential

* source - Environment Agency GIA Master Programme


17

River Improvement Fund Programme Finance

River Improvement Fund Project

Spend

Co-finance achieved

Contribution in kind technical specialist or

other volunteers

Contribution in kind assets/time from riparian

owners or farmers

Total co-funding achieved

Phase 1 £1,816,307 £741,340 £228,591 £64,235 £1,034,166

Phase 2 1,331,949 403,737 139,772 21,475 564,984

Phase 3 2,850,744 496,196 169,327 98,991 764,514

Totals £5,999,000 £1,641,273 £537,690 £184,701 £2,363,664

Co-finance contribution achieved: Based on the returns from the completed works, where

completion statements have been received from the participating rivers trusts at 31 March 2014.

Total River improvement Project Value

£8,362,664


18

Action for the River KennetRT 200 Barton Holt weir removal & habitat improvementRT 301 Doghead Stakes fish passage reinstatement, NewburyRT 302 Ramsbury Old Mill Stream feasibility studyRT 303 Marlborough Town Mill weir fish easement

Aire Rivers TrustRT 371 Systagenix Weir fish & eel passage feasibility study

Calder & Colne Rivers TrustRT 372 Sterne Mill Weir fish & eel passage feasibility study

Cotswold Rivers TrustRT 304 Lower River Coln enhancement project

Don Catchment Rivers TrustRT 1 Eel Management strategy and restoration projectRT 202 Hadfield (Meadow Hall) fish pass feasibility studyRT 305 Hadfield (Meadow Hall) fish pass

East Yorkshire Chalk Rivers TrustRT 306 Foston Mill fish and eel passRT 307 Lowthorpe Mill - water control & access for fish and eelRT 373 Pickering Beck fish passage & restorationRT 382 Scalby Beck fish pass

Eden Rivers TrustRT 2 Restoring Eden - River Petteril projectRT 7 Leith fish easementsRT 203 Minor barrier easementsRT 308 Minor barriers easements

Essex and Suffolk Rivers TrustRT 390 Dingle tidal flap eel passage

Irwell Rivers TrustRT 204 Kirklees Brook fish easement - Island LodgeRT 205 Kirklees Brook weir removal - Coffin LodgeRT 309 Cheesden Brook Kershaw weir removalRT 310 Cheesden Brook Papertech 3 barrier easementRT 311 Kirklees Brook Olives Valley weir removalRT 312 Naden Brook confluence weir removal

Lune Rivers TrustRT 10 Havera Beck Road culvert replacementRT 11 Eskew Beck ford replacementRT 13 North West Eel Management PlanRT 14 Winterscales Pipe bridge enhancementRT 102 River Condor restorationRT 103 River Greta habitat soft engineeringRT 104 Keasden Beck improvementRT 105 River Wenning erosion/bank fencingRT 106 Acidification study with Ribble Rivers TrustRT 206 Roeburn fish pass feasibility studyRT 207 Lune eel passesRT 208 Lower Tarn Beck weir removalRT 209 Tarn Beck weir removalRT 313 Cant Beck restoration weir removalRT 314 Morecambe Bay elver passes on tidal flap valves

Norfolk Rivers TrustRT 315 River Nar Castle Acre restorationRT 316 Bayfield Lake bypass channel and restorationRT 317 River Stiffkey catchment restoration

PROJECTS SUMMARY

Northumberland Rivers TrustRT 318 Coquet and Aln fish pass easementsRT 319 River Aln - Lesbury Dam larinier passRT 374 Cawledge Burn fish & eel passageRT 375 Acklington Dam restoration for fish & eel passageRT 391 River Coquet - Warkworth North fishway & eel passRT 392 Hartburn easementRT 393 Long Nanny easementRT 394 Humford Weir enhancement and eel passRT 395 Waren Burn fish and eel passage

Ouse and Adur Rivers TrustRT 25 Reinstatement of gravel bed substrate in tributariesRT 26 Addressing fish passage obstructionsRT 39 Habitat enhancement of the Andrews StreamRT 213 Newhouse Farm weir modificationRT 214 Buxted Weir Phase 1 monitoring RT 215 Plumpton Mill Stream weir removal and culvert modificationRT 216 Herrings Stream passage easementRT 217 Wineham Culvert passage easement & habitat improvementRT 218 Barcombe Mills passage easement RT 219 Sutton Hall Weir fish pass modificationRT 320 Costers Brook connectivity projectRT 321 Bay Bridge Weir fish easementRT 322 Buxted Weir removal: assessment & preparatory worksRT 323 Homelands Farm tidal flap projectRT 396 Barcombe eel easements – new weir channel

Ribble Rivers Trust RT 16 Padiham Weir natural fish passRT 17 A59 culvert fish pass and West Bradford fish passRT 18 Swanside and Eel Beck fish easementRT 19 Barrowford 1 & 2 weir easementsRT 21 Barrowford Weir 3 fish passRT 22 Montford fish easementRT 80 Hodder gauging pass initiativeRT 107 Easington Brook habitat schemeRT 108 Pendle Water habitat schemeRT 109 Stock Beck habitat improvementRT 110 Acidification study with Lune RT (Gayle and Cam Beck)RT 210 Calder & Brun confluence easementsRT 211 Brun connectivity (fish passes)RT 212 Boyces Brook weir removalRT 324 Talbot Bridge fish pass (Chipping)RT 325 Brun Phase 3 urban river enhancement schemeRT 326 Darwen restoration studyRT 327 Easington barrier removal and restoration schemeRT 328 Stock Beck fish passageRT 329 Skirden Bridge easements

Severn Rivers TrustRT 27 River Rea fish access schemeRT 28 River Rea habitat improvement schemeRT 29 River Worfe habitat feasibility studyRT 220 Lower Forge Weir fish passRT 221 Prescott Weir fish passRT 222 Detton Mill Weir feasibility studyRT 257 Dinham Weir feasibility studyRT 330 River Rea fish access scheme (Detton Mill) fish passRT 331 River Teme fish access scheme Lingen feasibility RT 332 Walcot by pass channel improvements for eelRT 376 Dinham Weir fish pass


19

South Cumbria Rivers TrustRT 30 Elver pass InitiativeRT 35 Newlands beck tide door eel/elver flap valveRT 36 Colton Beck tide door eel/fish friendly flap valvesRT 37 Gleaston beck Ttde door eel/elver flap valveRT 111 River Eea restoration worksRT 250 Kent barrier assessmentRT 251 Kent tide gate tide door eel/elver flap valveRT 333 Basinghyll Counter eel passRT 334 GrizeBeck fish and eel passageRT 335 High Shaw Beck tide gate fish and eel passRT 336 Leighton Beck tide gate fish and eel passRT 337 Mealbank eel passRT 338 Newby Bridge Gauging Weir eel passRT 339 Newby Bridge Impounding Weir eel passRT 340 Stramongate Weir eel pass

Tees Rivers TrustRT 40 Clow Beck - fencing and fish easementRT 112 Potto Beck - Scugdale fencingRT 223 Upper Tees - gravel augmentationRT 343 River Leven - fish passage

Thames Rivers Restoration TrustRT 341 Boston Manor Weir eel passRT 342 Osterley Weir eel passRT 377 Sarrat Meadows weir removalRT 385 Brentford Lock eel pass (Stoney Sluice)

Trent River TrustRT 41a Fencing - Rivers Dove & Manifold. Gauledge FarmRT 41b Fencing - Rivers Dove & Manifold. Lower Redfern FarmRT 41c Fencing - Rivers Dove & Manifold. Bridge End FarmRT 41d Fencing - Rivers Dove & Manifold. Olde Mixon Haye FarmRT 41e Fencing - Rivers Dove & Manifold. Nettletor FarmRT 42 Elver passes - Lower TrentRT 43a Fish pass: Hoo MillRT 43b Fish pass: Longbridge (feasibility)RT 43c Fish pass: Duffers (feasibility)RT 225 Harlaston Weir removalRT 344 Burton Weir fish pass consents and designRT 345 Darley Abbey fish pass consents and designRT 346 Millford Weir fish pass consents design

Tweed Forum (England)RT 347 Haughhead fish passage feasibility study

Tyne Rivers TrustRT 226 New Brough Burn fish passageRT 348 March Burn ford / weir fish and eel easementsRT 349 Stocksfield Burn ford / weir fish and eel easements

Wandle Trust (part of South East Rivers Trust)RT 227 Butter Hill fish passageRT 228 Croydon-Wandsworth fish easement feasibility studyRT 229 Merton Abbey eel passRT 350 Croydon Arm passage feasibility studyRT 351 Poulter Park: eel passRT 352 Ravensbury I: eel passRT 353 Ravensbury II: eel pass (over tilting weir)RT 354 Ravensbury III: fish easementRT 355 Ravensbury IV: lake eel passRT 397 Clattern Bridge eel passage easements

Wear Rivers TrustRT 113 Shittlehope Burn feasibility studyRT 230 Cong Burn fish passRT 231 Lumley Park Burn feasibility studyRT 356 Bedburn Weir easementRT 357 Eastgate Weir removalRT 383 Deerness river improvementRT 398 Cong Burn rock ramp enhancementRT 399 Lumley Park Burn easement repair

West Cumbria Rivers TrustRT 201 Bloomer Beck eel passRT 364 Bitter Beck fish and eel passageRT 365 Black Beck fish and eel passageRT 366 Millbeck Gill pipe improvementRT 367 Stainburn Beck culvert improvement

Westcountry Rivers Trust (including Frome, Piddle & West Dorset Fisheries Association)RT 45 River Axe diffuse pollution controlRT 46 River Dart improvementsRT 47 River Camel improvementsRT 48 Collaton fish pass feasibility studyRT 56 Fal eel habitat access workRT 57 Head Weir removal and natural fish passRT 70 Palmers Brewery feasibility studyRT 101 River Frome Salmonid Improvement ProjectRT 114 River Exe habitat improvementsRT 235 Clapworthy fish passRT 236 Head Weir completionRT 237 Palmers Brewery fish passRT 252 Teign obstructionsRT 253 Dart obstructionsRT 254 Irishman’s Wall removal (River Taw)RT 245 N. Tawton Weir easement (River Taw)RT 256 St James Weir feasibility study (River Exe)RT 358 Forton Brook fish access (River Axe)RT 359 Teign obstructionsRT 360 Dart obstructions (eel)RT 361 Dart obstructions (fish passage)RT 362 Fal eel passageRT 363 Keaton Weir fish & eel passRT 378 Frome migratory passage & habitat ImprovementRT 379 Piddle migratory passage & habitat ImprovementRT 380 Wey migratory passage & habitat ImprovementRT 381 Brit & Asker migratory passage & habitat Improvement

Wye and Usk Foundation (England)RT 58 Wye catchment farm diffuse pollution controlRT 60 Arrow fish passageRT 61 Garren fish passageRT 62 Escley easement feasibility study RT 239 Hindwell fish passage feasibility study RT 240 Downfield Weir fish passageRT 241 Mowley Weir fish passageRT 242 The Leen Weir fish passageRT 243 Arrow Green fish passageRT 244 Tramway fish passageRT 245 Tuck Mill fish passageRT 246 Trebandy fish passageRT 247 Dayhouse fish passageRT 248 Blakeney fish passageRT 368 Wye WFD Restoration Phase iii (farms)RT 369 Arrow & Lugg WFD Restoration Phase iii (easements)

Wyre Rivers TrustRT 384 Help 3 Brooks project

Yorkshire Dales Rivers TrustRT 370 Kirkbridge rock ramp easement feasibility study


20

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

River improvement Fund Project RT 227Butter Hill Mill Fish Easement - March to July 2011Designed managed and delivered by South East Rivers Trust (formerly the Wandle Trust)

Background Historically the upper reaches of the River Wandle, South London, held a good population of wild brown trout but industrialisation, urbanisation and flood defence works resulted in pollution and habitat fragmentation leading to the local extinction of fish populations. Recently water quality has improved and trout inhabit the Wandle once more. However, several weirs on the Carshalton arm of the Wandle present barriers which obstruct the movement of fish, and in particular trout, from reaching suitable spawning grounds. This is one of the reasons that the water body was classified as having poor ecological potential for fish in the 2009 Thames River Basin District Management Plan.

This project built on existing Environment Agency work by removing a Pan weir at Mill Pond Place on the River Wandle. Additional trout habitat has been opened up comprising almost one kilometre of the Carshalton arm of the river as well as linking it to a further 1.5 km of the Croydon arm of the river before the next barrier.

From a few individual trusts in the 1990s, the rivers trust movement has grown to become active in every catchment nationally.

This has lead to engaging thousands of river stakeholders. Rivers trusts are now active in every Water Framework Directive River Basin District with more than 40 rivers trusts and river groups in England & Wales fielding over 150 technical specialists in fisheries and catchment management and having access to more than 20,000 active volunteers.

Rivers trusts have the unique ability to engage with government and public and private bodies to draw down resources to deliver river and catchment improvements.

The weir at Millpond Place before work took place March 2011

Engaging and empowering communities

Stakeholder engagement and project delivery - an example

Re-engaging the residents of Wellington village with their brook - Wye & Usk Foundation


21

OutcomesPrimary outcome: Improved fish passage for all species with access to habitat linked up over 2.5 km and improved ecological potential of two Water Framework Directive water bodies.

Secondary outcomes: Improved in-channel morphological diversity and hydromorphology. Enhanced ecological value of marginal aquatic habitats, banks and the riparian zone. Flow has been improved in a reach where low flows have effected biodiversity to the extent that impacts of groundwater abstraction are being investigated. The project has also improved access to an existing Environment Agency fish pass allowing free movement of fish over the weir.

A volunteer event involving 14 people representing over 74 hours of

work was held to narrow the river and secure the banks. The new

bank edge was marked by faggot bundles secured in place with

chestnut stakes and wire.

Weir notching with a disc cutter to improve fish passage.

Importantly, the aesthetic attributes of the river have been significantly enhanced through the introduction of gravel beds and marginal aquatic plants. Additional outcomes include greater in-channel morphological diversity and improved hydromorphology, enhanced ecological value of marginal aquatic habitats, banks and the riparian zone.

Faggot bundles were used to retain recovered sediment and to form the base of a new bank. This narrowed the river, improved flow and helped to reduce costs as potentially contaminated material was not taken off site. Topsoil was then added to the newly formed silt banks ready for planting.

New gravels were introduced to the river in several phases and sculpted to form riffles, pools and glides which enabled the head loss through the reach to decease gradually. It also improved hydromorphology and created diversity of fish habitat.

Biodegradable sediment mats and associated trapped silt were incorporated into the site at the end of the work ready for planting that involved 22 volunteers and 99 hours work planting up the banks to secure the silt accumulations. One thousand native plants and three planted coir rolls were introduced. Mesh fencing was placed around the planting for safety and to stop trampling by people and pecking by wildfowl, completing the fish passage work. Further volunteer events were then undertaken through a separately funded habitat project which was designed to complement and maximise the benefits of the improvements to fish passage at Mill Pond Place.


22

Additional benefits• A partnership with Sutton and East Surrey

Water Company means good quality baseline and monitoring data is being collected for fish, invertebrates, plants and hydro-geomorphology which will enable the impacts of weir notching and associated river narrowing to be well monitored.

• Spawning, fry and Invertebrate habitat has improved through the introduction of gravels, marginal and aquatic plants.

• The project enabled £32,000 of match funding to be drawn down to undertake a complementary habitat project which will improve the ecological state of the whole reach. Co-finance was also provided through a Vodafone World of Difference Award which funded an employee to work on this fish easement project.

• The project contributes to reinstating the once thriving fishery that existed on the Wandle.

• The use of plants to secure the banks creates a more aesthetically pleasing riverside setting for neighbouring residents.

• New relationships have been forged between local residents and the Wandle Trust. Local people have been very supportive and happy to see what is regarded as a forgotten area being improved.

• Communication via posters, website and on the bank was very successful in increasing local people’s awareness and knowledge of fish passage and wider river ecology issues.

• Most volunteers were from the local community, from all age groups and appear to have gained an increased sense of ownership and pride in their environment. Volunteers have gained increased skills having been trained in river restoration techniques. Working outdoors on conservation type activities has been demonstrated to yield distinct health benefits, both physical and mental, to participants.

• The project enabled the Wandle Trust to expand its capacity, reach more people and prove itself as a successful deliverer of river improvement and Water Framework Directive measures. This has resulted in improved working relationships with the Environment Agency. The project was recently showcased to Lord Chris Smith, Environment Agency Chairman, as a demonstration of what local river trust partnerships can deliver. The Wandle

Trust has developed a trusted relationship with the London Borough of Sutton (LBS) who are now more amenable to river restoration projects being delivered on LBS land (this will lead to reduced transaction costs in future projects). There is the prospect of further funding from a variety of sources to deliver Water Framework Directive measures.

• The project site has become an educational resource for university students. Data from the site has contributed to two Phd projects and three MSc degrees.

• The Rivers Trust have also undertaken a detailed consideration of the project suggesting quantifiable benefits will be experienced by people waking past the site (informal recreation users benefiting from improved aesthetics) and nearby property owners who are likely to experience increased property values, again due to the improved visual appearance of the river. The estimated total cost benefit ratio of the project is 34:1.

In common with other River Improvement Programme funded work, the project inputs (costs) required to deliver the project have been sourced from a variety of non-governmental sources. Indeed, the Butter Hill Mill project has been able to facilitate and raise the majority of inputs from private sources either in cash or in kind.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

Butter Hill Mill Project Quantitative Evaluation – Input Profile

River Improvement

FundBusiness Cash

Private Cash

EU FundingBusinessin-kind

Private in-kind

Environment Agency

LocalAuthority


23

Sample Economic Evaluation(Full report with calculations available from the Rivers Trust or can be found on RT website: www.theriverstrust.org)

The following is a summary of main findings from an economic evaluation of a suite of typical projects undertaken under the Programme.

Sample projects evaluated were: Head Weir Removal Project RT57 - Westcountry Rivers Trust

Butter Hill Mill Fish Easement Project RT256 - Wandle Rivers Trust

Aln and Coquet Fish Barriers Removal Project RT318, 319, 374, 375 - Northumbrian Rivers Trust

The evaluation takes the form of a social and environmental Cost Benefit Analysis to gain an understanding of the relationship between the costs of delivering these projects and the benefits they deliver to society. The results from this exercise will to be used to compare projects delivered by Rivers Trusts and/or other organisations to assess relative performance and determine optimal allocation of resources in the future.

Quantitative outputs from the economic evaluation are essentially two-fold:

• Net Present Value (NPV) - the difference between the present value of benefits (outcomes) and the present value of costs (outflows). NPV can be interpreted as a means of determining the ‘return on investment’ of a project

• Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) – this is derived by dividing the benefits by the costs and can be used to assess the optimal distribution of funds across a range of projects

The methodology used to carry out the economic evaluation has been based on the Benefits Assessment Guidance 2003 (BAG) and subsequent User Guide (2012). This toolkit (funded by the Environment Agency) was originally developed to provide a consistent approach to the monetary evaluation of the environmental and social costs and benefits of water quality and water resources schemes within the Periodic Review process.

It is possible to draw the following conclusions from the economic evaluation undertaken:

• The sample projects demonstrate positive NPV outcomes. In terms of cost benefit ratios, results from 25:1 to 43:1 have been estimated which indicates these sample projects offer very good value for money

• Rivers trusts have been able to leverage the central funds provided by Defra by drawing in contributions from a variety of third party sources. With public sector funds likely to be in short supply in the short to medium term, such co-financing attributes suggest these projects offer a useful model for achieving further river restoration outcomes going forward.

Combined Evaluation of sample projects co-finance input profile

River Improvement

Fund

Private CashBusiness Cash

EU FundingBusiness in-kind

Private in-kind

Environment Agency

Local Authority


24 splash

14 May 2014 17:28:05

Dinham Weir Larinier multi fish

pass installation

Severn Rivers Trust

Completed late summer 2013

Rain-Charm HouseKyl Cober Parc

Stoke ClimslandCallington

Cornwall PL17 8PHUnited Kingdom

T: +44 (0)1579 372 142

www.theriverstrust.org
