Abstract
This paper presents a new methodological approach, using hydromorphological monitoring data from river networks, to identify stream elements that may negatively influence the course of floods, as well as elements suitable for modifications that will reinforce the natural retention potential of the floodplain. The approach uses data derived from hydromorphological monitoring that conforms to the EN 14614 standard “Water quality — Guidance standard for assessing the hydromorphological features of rivers.” Four major aspects of stream modifications that can potentially affect the course and consequences of floods, and that can be derived from hydromorphological monitoring, were identified. These are: (1) modifications that increase the speed of runoff, (2) modifications that restrict the retention potential of the floodplain, (3) potential obstacles to the flood course, and (4) improper alterations of stream route modifications. A GIS is used to identify and locate these critical aspects of stream and floodplain modification. This method was applied in the Blanice River basin, an area in central Europe hit by a severe flood in August 2002. The critical modifications identified were compared with geomorphological mapping to display the different effects of individual types of modifications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.References
Baptist, M. J., Penning, W. E., Duel, H., Smits, A., Geerling, G. W., Van der Lee, G., & Van Alphen, J. (2004). Assessment of the effects of cyclic floodplain rejuvenation on flood levels and biodiversity along the Rhine River. River Research and Applications, 20, 285–297.
Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B. D., & Stribling, J. B. (1999). Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: Periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. Washington, DC: EPA, Office of Water.
Bates, P. D., & De Roo, A. (2000). A simple raster-based model for flood inundation simulation. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 236, 54–77.
Beffa, C., & Connell, R. J. (2001). Two-dimensional flood plain flow. I: Model description. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 6, 397–405.
Birkland, T. A., Burby, R. J., Conrad, D., Cortner, H., & Michener, W. K. (2003). River ecology and flood hazard mitigation. Natural Hazards Review, 4, 46–54.
Blackwell, M., & Maltby, E. (2006). Ecoflood guidelines: How to use floodplains for flood risk reduction. Luxembourg: European Commission.
CEN (2005). CEN/TC230/WG2/TG5 prEN 14614. Water quality — Guidance standard for assessing the hydromorphological features of rivers. Brussels: CEN.
Davy-Bowker, J., & Furse, M. T. (2006). Hydromorphology? Major results and conclusions from the STAR project. Hydrobiologia, 566, 263–265.
De Roo, A., Odijk, M., Schmuck, G., Koster, E., & Lucieer, A. (2001). Assessing the effects of land use changes on floods in the Meuse and Oder catchment. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Part B: Hydrology, Oceans and Atmosphere, 26, 593–599.
Disse, M., & Engel, H. (2001). Flood events in the Rhine basin: Genesis, influences and mitigation. Natural Hazards, 23, 271–290.
EC (2006). Common implementation strategy for the water framework directive. WFD and Hydro-morphological pressures. Brussels: European Communities.
Furse, M. T., Hering, D., Brabec, K., Buffagni, A., Sandin, L., & Verdonschot, P. (2006). The ecological status of European rivers: Evaluation and intercalibration of assessment methods. Hydrobiologia, 566, 1–2.
Gilvear, D. J., Davids, C., & Tyler, A. N. (2004). The use of remotely sensed data to detect channel hydromorphology; River Tummel, Scotland. River Research and Applications, 20, 795–811.
Hladný, J., Krátká, M., & Kašpárek, L. (2005). August 2002 — Catastrophic flood in the Czech Republic. Prague: Water Research Institute TGM.
Hooijer, A., Klijn, F., Pedroli, G., & Van Os, A. (2004). Towards sustainable flood risk management in the Rhine and Meuse river basins: Synopsis of the findings of IRMA-SPONGE. River Research and Applications, 20, 343–357.
Janauer, G. A. (2000). Ecohydrology: Fusing concepts and scales. Ecological Engineering, 16, 9–16.
Kamp, U., Binder, W., & Hölzl, K. (2007). River habitat monitoring and assessment in Germany. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 127, 209–226.
Kašpárek, L., Novický, O., Hanel, M., & Horáček, S. (2007). 2006 Spring flood in the Czech Republic. Prague: Water Research Institute TGM.
Křížek, M., & Engel, Z. (2003). Geomorphological consequences of the 2002 flood in the Otava river drainage basin. Acta Universitatis Carolinae — Geographica, 38, 125–138.
Langhammer, J. (2007). HEM — Hydroekologický monitoring. Metodika pro monitoring hydromorfologických ukazatelů ekologické kvality vodních toků [HEM — Hydroecological monitoring. Methodology for monitoring of hydromorphological indicators of ecological quality of streams]. Praha: MŽP ČR [Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic] (retrieved March 28, 2008, from http://www.ochranavod.cz. In Czech).
Langhammer, J., & Vajskebr, V. (2003). Historical shortening of river network in the Otava River Basin. Acta Universitatis Carolinae — Geographica, 38, 109–124.
Langhammer, J., & Vilímek, V. (2008). Landscape changes as a factor affecting the course and consequences of extreme floods in the Otava river basin, Czech Republic. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment DOI 10.1007/s10661-007-9941-6
Legleiter, C. J., Roberts, D. A., Marcus, W. A., & Fonstad, M. A. (2004). Passive optical remote sensing of river channel morphology and in-stream habitat: Physical basis and feasibility. Remote Sensing of Environment, 93, 493–510.
Nienhuis, P. H., & Leuven, R. (2001). River restoration and flood protection: Controversy or synergism? Hydrobiologia, 444, 85–99.
Piegay, H. (1997). Interactions between floodplain forests and overbank flows: Data from three piedmont rivers of Southeastern France. Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters, 6, 187–196.
Sparks, R. E., Nelson, J. C., & Yin, Y. (1998). Naturalization of the flood regime in regulated rivers. BioScience, 48, 706–720.
Szoszkiewicz, K., Buffagni, A., Davy-Bowker, J., Lesny, J., Chojnicki, B. H., Zbierska, J., Staniszewski, R., & Zgola, T. (2006). Occurrence and variability of river habitat survey features across Europe and the consequences for data collection and evaluation. Hydrobiologia, 566, 267–280.
Tockner, K., & Stanford, J. A. (2002). Riverine flood plains: Present state and future trends. Environmental Conservation, 29, 308–330.
Verwey, A. (2001). Latest developments in floodplain modelling-1D/2D integration. In: Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Hydraulics in Civil Engineering: The State of Hydraulics (pp. 13–4). Hobart: Institute of Engineers.
Yin, H., & Li, C. (2001). Human impact on floods and flood disasters on the Yangtze River. Geomorphology, 41, 105–109.
Zalewski, M. (2000). Ecohydrology — The scientific background to use ecosystem properties as management tools toward sustainability of water resources. Ecological Engineering, 16, 1–8.
Zalewski, M., Janauer, G. A., & Jolánkai, G. (1997). Ecohydrology. A new paradigm for the sustainable use of aquatic resources. Technical documents in hydrology no. 7. Paris: UNESCO.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Langhammer, J. Applicability of hydromorphological monitoring data to locate flood risk reduction measures: Blanice River basin, Czech Republic. Environ Monit Assess 152, 379–392 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0323-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0323-5