 |
| Titel |
Insightful monitoring of natural flood risk management features using a
low-cost and participatory approach |
| VerfasserIn |
Eleanor Starkey, Mhari Barnes, Paul Quinn, Andy Large |
| Konferenz |
EGU General Assembly 2016
|
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
en
|
| Digitales Dokument |
PDF |
| Erschienen |
In: GRA - Volume 18 (2016) |
| Datensatznummer |
250126730
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 EGU/EGU2016-6497.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| Pressures associated with flooding and climate change have significantly increased over
recent years. Natural Flood Risk Management (NFRM) is now seen as being a more
appropriate and favourable approach in some locations. At the same time, catchment
managers are also encouraged to adopt a more integrated, evidence-based and bottom-up
approach. This includes engaging with local communities. Although NFRM features are
being more readily installed, there is still limited evidence associated with their ability to
reduce flood risk and offer multiple benefits. In particular, local communities and land owners
are still uncertain about what the features entail and how they will perform, which is a huge
barrier affecting widespread uptake. Traditional hydrometric monitoring techniques are well
established but they still struggle to successfully monitor and capture NFRM performance
spatially and temporally in a visual and more meaningful way for those directly affected on
the ground.
Two UK-based case studies are presented here where unique NFRM features have
been carefully designed and installed in rural headwater catchments. This includes
a 1km2 sub-catchment of the Haltwhistle Burn (northern England) and a 2km2
sub-catchment of Eddleston Water (southern Scotland). Both of these pilot sites are subject
to prolonged flooding in winter and flash flooding in summer. This exacerbates
sediment, debris and water quality issues downstream. Examples of NFRM features
include ponds, woody debris and a log feature inspired by the children’s game
‘Kerplunk’. They have been tested and monitored over the 2015-2016 winter storms using
low-cost techniques by both researchers and members of the community (‘citizen
scientists’).
Results show that monitoring techniques such as regular consumer specification
time-lapse cameras, photographs, videos and ‘kite-cams’ are suitable for long-term and
low-cost monitoring of a variety of NFRM features. These techniques have been compared
against traditional hydrometric monitoring equipment. It is clear that traditional techniques
are expensive, require specialist skills and outputs are complicated to the untrained eye.
These alternative methods tested are visually more meaningful, can be interpreted by
all stakeholders and techniques can be easily utilised by citizen scientists, land
owners or flood groups. Such techniques therefore offer a before, during and after
NFRM monitoring solution which can be more realistically and readily implemented,
supports engagement and subsequent uptake and maintenance of NFRM features on a
local level. Although monitoring techniques presented are relatively simple, they
are regarded as being essential given that many schemes are not monitored at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|