Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Skerne, where the river was widely considered
to be in poor condition beforehand, the river
rehabilitation measures were recognized as a major
improvement to the riverscape. Local residents
could more easily understand the benefits of re-
meandering the straightened river channel, and
despite some worries about increased flood risk,
people recognized that the scheme was bringing
something positive to the local community -
notably a safe, high quality green space. At
the River Skerne the rehabilitated corridor has
provided a well-used urban recreational space
where green space and wildlife contributed to high
scores for attractiveness.
At the River Cole, a lower percentage of
the respondents saw the rehabilitation project as
beneficial to the local community; a predominant
reason for this was the increase in over-bank flows.
This was seen as having a negative effect on the
local community, as well as reducing recreational
opportunities along the river. Since local affinity
for the River Cole was already well-established,
many villagers considered rehabilitation work
unnecessary. Because the site was considered to
be 'attractive', 'natural' and 'good for wildlife'
before rehabilitation, there was no reason to 'mess'
with the river (Tunstall
et al
., 2000) and the
rehabilitation measures were therefore less well
regarded. In the 2008 survey two respondents
even wanted the upstream rehabilitated reach
to be 'put back' to its pre-rehabilitation state.
Historical modification to this part of the river - the
replacement of the original river with a mill leat in
the early 1800s - had been present for generations,
and familiarity with the pre-modification character
was not within living memory. For many, the mill
leat was therefore considered part of the 'natural'
cultural landscape. It is possible that over time the
1995 rehabilitation will also come to be viewed as
the 'natural' landscape.
People generally have a preference for what
appears familiar and natural to them; this may
not always accord with professional expert opinion
on 'good' or 'high' 'ecological status' using
WFD terminology (Council of the European
Communities, 2000). On the River Cole, there was
more opportunity for comprehensive rehabilitation
measures, such as river-floodplain reconnection.
This potential for increased ecological quality
was disliked by some local residents because it
conflicted with their interests and fundamental
beliefs in land and river management. Those
interests were based on the premise that farmland
should be protected from flooding, supported by a
Government policy that dominated for over three
decades following the Second World War (Tunstall
et al.
, 2004; Johnson
et al.
, 2005). Rehabilitation
on the River Cole was designed to increase
the river-floodplain connectivity and thereby the
frequency of over-bank flows. About half the
survey respondents considered over-bank flows as
a negative factor, while the others gave either
strong positive comments, or no particular opinion.
Describing the perception of suburban residential
landscapes, Joan Nassauer argued that 'people
who are knowledgeable about ecological systems
are more likely to perceive increased biodiversity
and improved landscape structure as attractive
than are people who are less knowledgeable'
(Nassauer,1993; page 60). On the River Cole people
who were clearly familiar with river ecosystems
and the ecological benefits of over-bank flows
were supportive while those who appeared less
knowledgeable of these were opposed.
Public participation has been shown to be vital
in exchanging scientific and local knowledge about
river systems and improving the understanding
and appreciation of the objectives for river
rehabilitation. Early and effective participation
is needed to achieve this, using joint learning
opportunities and information exchange (Newson
and Chalk, 2004; Eden and Tunstall, 2006; Reed,
2008; Raymond
et al.
, 2010). Building community
support through their involvement is crucial to the
ecological enhancement of our rivers.
Conclusions
Our research has clearly demonstrated the social
benefits that river rehabilitation can provide,
particularly in urban areas. It has also increased
the understanding of public perception of such
schemes in the short and longer term. Public
engagement has been shown to create not only
positive attitudes, but also pride and a long-term
