Revitalization of the upper Drau River in Austria

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.

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:

Data provider:

Sabine Tutte, ACTeon

Source(s):

Life vein-Upper Drau RiverÂ ; 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:

Mean runoff:

73,8

Mean runoff unit:

600 - 750 mm

Type:

Actual Test Site

Light or indepth?:

In-depth

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

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.

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:

Financing difficulties:

Success factor(s):

Type	Role	Comments
Existing staff and consultant knowledge	main factor	20 years of experience exist on restoring the river to a more natural state. Moreover, there is good cooperation between the different stakeholders for nature conservation and hydraulic engineering.
Attitude of the public	main factor	Since the revitalization measures on the Drau are a subsequent project to former projects and measures, much less publicity had to be done. The responsibles hadn't to face the fears and worries of farmers and citizens.
Attitude of decision makers	main factor	The purchase of land was combined with a reallocation of land process. Lots were exchanged between farmers. There were a lot of farmers willing to give land for the project and there was also political support of the action. A company constructing/operating hydropower plants had bought lots in the 90s. After their project of building 4 new power plants on the Drau was refused they were nevertheless ready to give their lots to the project partners for a fair price.
Other	secondary factor	The regional touristic department supported the measure and furthermore helped to merchandise the Drau project. They looked amongst others at the following questions: How to design picnic areas? Where are the best places for information boards? How can we conduct tourists through the region?

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:

Type	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:

Type	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:

Share type	Share	Comments
European funds	33
National funds	67

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:

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:

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:

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.

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:

Policy pressure:

Policy requirement directive:

Policy 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 area:

Policy target:

Target purpose
Runoff control
Improved Biodiversity
Increase Water Storage

Design & implementations

Application scale:

River Basin

Installation date:

2011

Performance timescale:

5 - 10 years

Area (ha):

Size:

Size unit:

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:

Contractural arrangements:

Design contractual arrangement:

Design consultation activity:

Activity stage	Name	Key issues	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:

Design authority:

Authority type	Role	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

Last updated: 18 Jun 2015 | Top

Miscellanous

Main menu

Revitalization of the upper Drau River in Austria

Partners