General National Id Austria_01 Site name 4 specific sites: Obergottesfeld, Rosenheim, Amlach/St. Peter and Feistritzbach Summary At three different sections of the Austrian Drau the river bed was enlarged and restoration works have taken place. Moreover, 25 ha of riparian forest were created as well as meadows, lakes and several river branches. Light or indepth? In-depth The in-depth description of the case study cs-at-1-final_version.pdf Location description The project side lies close to the Italian border in the west of Klagenfurt. The revitalized parts of the Drau are between Spittal i.Dr. and Oberdrauburg. NUTS Code Kärnten RBD code AT1000 Transboundary 1 Data provider Sabine Tutte, ACTeon Source(s) Life vein-Upper Drau River ; Carinthia†™s largest nature restoration campaign (2006-2011) NWRMs experience from Austria Telephone Interview with Norbert Sereinig (project responsible) LIFE Projekt Auenverbund Obere Drau NWRM(s) implemented in the case study Floodplain restoration and management Re-meandering Stream bed re-naturalization Riverbed material renaturalization Natural bank stabilisation Lake restoration Longitude 12.96743 Latitude 46.748666 Site information Climate zone cool temperate moist Mean rainfall 1100 Mean rainfall unit mm/year Average temperature 7 Mean runoff 73,8 Mean runoff unit 600 - 750 mm Type Actual Test Site Average slope range 0-1% Vegetation class In the surroundings of the upper Drau one can find a big variety of different landuses: forest, meadows, fields. Monitoring maintenance Monitoring location In-Stream Administrative annual costs 10000 Administrative annual cost information costs for the running monitoring programme Monitoring parameters The monitoring is still ongoing for the riverbed. It is controlled whether bedload balance is reached and whether the erosion of the bed is stopped. Given that the Drau is let more freedom to form its river bed monitoring is done how the shape of the river develops. The biological monitoring is accomplished. The number of fisch, amphibian and insect species were counted Performance Performance impact estimation method Catchment outlet Performance impact estimation information -Assessment of aerial photos - Geodetic survey of cross profiles (echolot) - Laserscanning with drones - Steel plates are on the bottom of the river in order to measure the transported load in size and volume with ultrasound - Life space mapping Design & implementations Application scale River Basin Installation date 2011 Performance timescale 5 - 10 years Area (ha) 26 Size 5 Size unit km Constraints The availability of land determines which measures can be used and how expensive the implementation of the measures will be. Favourable preconditions The erosion of the river bed should be stopped. This goal determined the choice of measures. Public consultation 1 Contractural arrangements 0 Design contractual arrangement Arrangement type Responsibility Role Comments Name Design consultation activity Activity stage Key issues Name Comments Implementation phase Implementation phase Implementation phase Design phase Other Implementation phase Implementation phase public inaugauration feasts e.g. for the new dam or the different enlarged riverparts Implementation phase information day for school children Implementation phase tree planting event for children Design phase tourism concept, guided routes within the national park Other post card showing before after pictures of the drau Implementation phase VIP event: Mimi Hughes (marathon swimmer and environmental activist swam through the drau until danube Design land use change Land use change type Design authority Authority type Role Responsibility Name Comments National water authority Initiation of the measure Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, represented by the Carinthian State Government, department 8- Competence Centre environment, Nature and Water conservation, subdivision water management Other Implementation Torrent and avalanche control, section Carinthia, regional management supervision 4 Upper Drau Valley and Mí¶ll Valley reconstruction of the open check dam Other Other Carinthian State Government, department 8, competence centre environment, water and nature protection, subdivision Nature Conservation and National Park Law supervision of nature conservation measures Monitoring University of Vienna Analysis of the river bed before and after the LIFE Project, Study of the composition of the fish fauna, calculation of the transported bedload in the Feistritzbach Monitoring Ökoteam search for indicator species in order to document the improvement of the ecological state Other Implementation Agrarian Regional Office of Villach Purchase of land Other LIFE Natur Project Control for the EU Implementation REVITAL Ziviltechniker GmbH Project Coordination Monitoring DI Dr Peter Mayr and team geodetic survey of the river National water authority Financing Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management (rural development section) department II/4 Lessons, risks, implications... Key lessons By adapting open check dams the bed load balance of a river can be improved. The reconnections of side arms, the creation of riparian forests and meadows support a greater biodiversity. Financing mechanism 0 Financing difficulties 0 Success factor(s) Success factor type Success factor role Comments Attitude of the public main factor Existing staff and consultant knowledge main factor Other secondary factor Attitude of decision makers main factor Financing Financing type Comments EU-funds: LIFE+ 1.5 Moi € Sub-national funds Carinthian State Government: 0.2 Million €; Torrent and Avalanche Control: 0.2 Million € National funds Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management 2.7 Mio € Barrier Barrier type Barrier role Comments Other main barrier The project had to be replanned several times since farmers didn't want to sell ground or sell it for very high prices. Others changed their opinion suddenly and new possibilities openend up. Lacking coordination between authorities secondary barrier There is always tension between the disciplines agriculture, nature protection and hydraulic engineering which have different priorities. Driver Driver type Driver role Comments Other main driver Erosion of the river bed was observed (becoming deeper and deeper). There was furthermore a risk that floodplains fall dry and can't operate anymore, as well as a risk of a falling ground water table. Financing share Financing share type Share Comments European funds 33 View National funds 67 View Policy, general governance and design targets Policy description WFD pressure: physical alteration of channel/bed/riparian area/shore of water body for agriculture and transportation. Bed load balance shall be achieved. Due to missing pebble supply the Drau river bed became deeper and deeper. Thus the groundwater level decreased, bank stabilization became insecure and flood plains inoperable. Part of wider plan 1 Policy target Target purpose Runoff control Improved Biodiversity Increase Water Storage Policy pressure Pressure directive Relevant pressure Policy area Policy area type Policy area focus Name Comments Policy impact Impact directive Relevant impact Policy wider plan Wider plan type Wider plan focus Name Comments Catchment-based Water water body-development-concept Plan made in the middle of 90s (93 or 94). Programme for the whole river Drau. Policy requirement directive Requirement directive Specification Socio-economic Direct benefits 3250000 Direct benefits information Total expenses for the implementation of the project given to regional companies, planning offices. Ancillary benefits information The tourism department definitetly benefitted from the Drau project but this cannot be quantified yet. Costs investment 92 Costs investment information longlasting infrastructure goods (measuring instruments, gauge installation) Costs capital 2275000 Costs capital information construction Costs land acquisition 670000 Costs land acquisition unit € (total value) Costs land acquisition information purchase of land and compensation Costs operation maintenance No special, project-linked expenses. Every few years maintenance has to be done as on every other river like cutting grass or trees. Costs total 4475000 Costs total information total costs of the project Economic costs other annual 98000 Ecosystem improved biodiversity 1 Information on Ecosystem improved biodiversity Number of amphibian species multiplied by six. Number of insect and fish species increased as well. Until mid 2011 28000 km3 were mobilized by the open checked dam and 16000 km3 arrived at the Drau. As consequence the bedload balance could be improved and the riverbed stabilized. Ecosystem provisioning services 0 Information on Ecosystem provisioning services no information available Ecosystem impact climate regulation Increased permanent biomas Information on Ecosystem impact climate regulation Given that buffer strips, riparian forests and meadows were created/restored permanent biomas has increased. Biophysical impacts Information on retained water No quantitative data. However riparian forests were planted and buffer stripes installed along the river shore. These measurements favour an increase of water storage capacity. Information on increased water storage No quantitative data. Side arms were reconnected to the main channel and the riverbed itself was enlarged. As a consequence storage capacity must have increased. Information on runoff reduction no data available Water quality overall improvements N/A info Information on Water quality overall improvements Riparian forests may act as buffers for diffuse pollution input for water from fields (nitrogen, phosphorous, herbicide flux). Soil quality overall soil improvements N/A info Information on Soil quality overall soil improvements No monitoring is done on this aspect since it was not targeted in the project. Full Context Pathway(aka Context) Default view Area(aka Level or Site) ALL