Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme...• Energy infrastructure – overhead & underground network e.g. ESB lines, Bord Gáis supply • Water mains and private wells •

MGE0262/1.3/CR0009

Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme

Environmental Assessment of Viable Options

rpsgroup.com/ireland

November 2011

Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme Stage 2 - Environmental Assessment of Viable Options

MGE0260RP0005 i Rev. F01

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1

2 SYNOPSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS STUDY ....... ........................................... 2

3 PROPOSED FLOOD ALLEVIATION MEASURES ............... .................................................... 5

4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................. ........................................................................... 9

4.1 DO-NOTHING ................................................................................................................... 9

4.2 PREFFERED SCHEME MEASURES .................................................................................... 10

4.2.1 Lough Corrib to Curraghmore Bridge ............................................................. 10

4.2.2 Montiagh South .............................................................................................. 11

4.2.3 Montiagh North ............................................................................................... 13

4.2.4 Claregalway Village ........................................................................................ 15

4.2.5 Kiniska ............................................................................................................ 19

4.2.6 Lakeview ......................................................................................................... 21

4.2.7 Caherlea/Lisheenavalla .................................................................................. 23

4.2.8 Carnmore/Cashla ........................................................................................... 30

4.2.9 Footbridge ...................................................................................................... 32

4.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................................................................................... 34

5 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................... 36

5.1.1 Socio-Economic.............................................................................................. 36

5.1.2 Archaeological, Architectural and Cultural Heritage....................................... 36

5.1.3 Terrestrial Ecology ......................................................................................... 36

5.1.4 Aquatic Ecology .............................................................................................. 37

5.1.5 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology .................................................................. 37

6 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 38

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1 Locations of Proposed Measures

Figure 3.2 Preliminary design for proposed footbridge at Claregalway

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Environmental Constraints identified during Stage 1 of the Study .................................... 2


MGE0260RP0005 1 Rev. F01

1 INTRODUCTION

In May 2011 the Office of Public Works (the OPW) appointed RPS as environmental consultants for the Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme. The Clare River and main tributaries form part of the Corrib Clare Arterial Drainage Scheme, which was constructed in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, for which the OPW have a statutory maintenance responsibility. These original Arterial Drainage Scheme works involved substantial widening and deepening of the existing channel and tributaries with the purpose of providing outfall for the drainage of agricultural lands. In March 2010 the OPW commissioned Ryan Hanley Consulting Engineers to undertake two studies. The first related to the Clare River and its main tributary, the Abbert River, within a study area from Corofin to Lough Corrib. The study was commissioned as a result of severe damage and disruption caused by flooding in the area in November 2009. The second study related to the townlands of Carnmore East and Cashla on the R339 Galway to Monivea Regional Road, which was also affected by flooding in November 2009. These studies should be read together, and are referred to as the Engineering Studies for the remainder of this report.

The OPW are now progressing the Flood Relief Scheme to design stage and the required environmental outputs associated with the Scheme are set out in three distinct stages as follows:

Stage 1 - Environmental Constraints Study - Public Consultation

Stage 2 - Environmental Assessment of Viable Options - Screening for Appropriate Assessment

Stage 3 - Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - Appropriate Assessment (if deemed necessary as a result of the Appropriate Assessment

Screening). - Public Consultation

Stage 1 Environmental Constraints Study and Public Consultation were completed in early June. This report fulfils one required element of Stage 2 – to complete an Environmental Assessment of Viable Options for the proposed Flood Relief Scheme.

The Environmental Assessment of Viable Options is tasked with reviewing the assessment of the environmental effects of the flood alleviation options that have been identified in the Engineering Studies, and suggest mitigation measures, where feasible (as per Tender documents, December 2010). This review will inform the Design Team in refining or changing the preferred scheme option. This assessment also includes the environmental effects of the proposed footbridge.


MGE0260RP0005 2 Rev. F01

2 SYNOPSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS STUDY

The purpose of completing the Environmental Constraints Study was to identify where constraints may impact upon specific proposed flood relief measures and in so doing inform both the stakeholder consultation and design process for the scheme from an environmental view point. This report should be read in conjunction with the Environmental Constraints Study. The Study identified a number of significant environmental constraints as follows (*refers to figure and table numbers from the Environmental constraints Study Report): Table 2.1 Environmental Constraints identified duri ng Stage 1 of the Study

CATEGORY SUB

CATEGORY SOURCE CONSTRAINTS MAP/TABLE

REFERENCE*

Socio Economic

Land Use & Communities

Galway County Development Plan 2009 – 2015 Stakeholder constraints Angler’s Guide to Game Fishing in the Western Fisheries Region

• Existing land uses • Fisheries • Clare River Walkway

Project

Figure 2.1 Table 2.3

Material assets • Existing road network – impact on commuters

• Energy infrastructure – overhead & underground network e.g. ESB lines, Bord Gáis supply

• Water mains and private wells

• Proposed new WWTP at Claregalway

• Local authority licensed discharges to the Clare River

Figure 2.1 Figure 2.14 Table 2.12

Landownership and access

• Liaison with local landowners in relation to works proposed

• Storage or disposal of excavated materials

Archaeology & Cultural Heritage

Legislative Constraints

Galway County Development Plan 2009 – 2015

Assessment by Irish Archaeological Consultancy

• Three Protected Structures

• Two NIAH structures • 19 Archaeological

Heritage sites (including 52 separate RMP listings and a national monument)

• Three Areas of Archaeological Potential

Figure 2.2

Tables 2.4.1 & 2.4.2


MGE0260RP0005 3 Rev. F01

CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY

SOURCE CONSTRAINTS MAP/TABLE REFERENCE*

Landscape & Visual

Galway County Development Plan 2009 – 2015

� 2 protected focal points & views

Figures 2.4

Ecology Legislative Constraints

Stakeholder constraints

NPWS databases Published literature

• Compliance with the Habitats and Birds Directives and National legislation

• Designated habitats and species Protected Flora and Fauna

• Fisheries – salmonids, lamprey

� Local Ecological Important Areas

Figure 2.6

Tables 2.5 - 2.7

Hydrology & Water Quality

Stakeholder Constraints

Legislative constraints

Western River Basin Management Plan

� Important fisheries zones

� Compliance with the Water Framework Directive

Figure 2.8

Table 2.2

Soils/Geology/ Hydrogeology

� Aquifer vulnerability � Surface water and

groundwater interaction

Figures 2.11 - 2.13 Tables 2.9 – 2.12

Other Constraints

Waste Management

Requirement to handle, store, remove and dispose of waste material in accordance with relevant waste management legislation

Traffic - Crusheeny Bridge measures will lead to traffic diversions

- Local roads in Montiagh North and Montiagh South townlands – Raising sections of access roads and increasing the size of a culvert in Montiagh South will cause traffic delays and possible diversions

- Construction of the footbridge at Claregalway will cause traffic delays and disruption

Figure 2.14

Noise � Galway County Council Draft Action Noise Plan

Figure 2.15


MGE0260RP0005 4 Rev. F01

CATEGORY SUB CATEGORY

SOURCE CONSTRAINTS MAP/TABLE REFERENCE*

2008

� Noise generated by the timing of works associated with the implementation of alleviation measures may impact on residential, commuting and visitors to the study area.

Air � Key Indicators of Ambient Air Quality in Ireland

� Works associated with implementation of flood alleviation measures and the machinery involved may generate emissions and dust e.g. bridge works, storage and removal of waste material etc.

Figure 2.16


MGE0260RP0005 5 Rev. F01

3 PROPOSED FLOOD ALLEVIATION MEASURES

The appointed design team have reviewed/altered/refined the proposed flood alleviation measures for the Scheme. This has resulted following a review of the Engineering Reports (June and August 2010), a review of the Environmental Constraints Report, June 2011 and analysis of comments received during the public information evening held in Claregalway on the 8th of June 2011. In addition, unsteady state modelling was undertaken, the purpose of which was to refine the measures proposed by the Engineering Reports if deemed necessary.

Table 3.1 sets out the preferred flood relief scheme, and Figure 3.1 illustrates their locations.

Table 3.1 Summary of the Preferred Scheme

Summary of Potential Flood Relief Measures

Proposed Measures Comments

1 Lough Corrib to Curraghmore Bridge

No measures proposed

2 Miontach South 2a 2b 2c

Raise approx. 1km of road, to a minimum level of 8.60m OD. Upsize existing road culvert in conjunction with road works Clean Drains in existing vicinity

Images 3.1 and 3.2 below show the road section proposed to be raised and the existing culvert to be upsized.

3 Miontach North 3a 3b

Raise approx. 0. 460 km of road to a minimum of 9.0m OD. Raise approx. 0. 785 km of road to a minimum of 9.0m OD.

Images 3.3 and 3.4 below show the road sections proposed to be raised.

4 Claregalway Village 4b 4c 4d

Regrade Clare River channel upstream of and under the Claregalway bridge Fill gap in wall at An Mhainistir housing estate Provide local embankment at old Nine Arches bridge

Images 3.5 and 3.6 show the location of the Nine Arches bridge and Clare River downstream of Claregalway bridge.

5 Kiniska 5a 5b

Increase capacity of culverts on OPW C3/5 stream Clean OPW stream C3/5

6 Lakeview 6a Provide surface water outlet through fields and along N17 to upstream of Claregalway Bridge

It was agreed that the outlet from the surface water drain from Lakeview would discharge to the Clare River upstream of the Claregalway bridge rather than downstream of the bridge as originally proposed. Images 3.7 and 3.8 illustrates the proposed route from the corporate park through Cúirt na hAbhainn Estate.

7 Gortatleva No additional measures proposed (Measures for Area 4 apply)

8 Caherlea/Lisheenavalla 8a 8b 8c

Replace Crusheeny Bridge Channel widening from 0.9km upstream of Crusheeny Bridge to Claregalway Cleaning and regrading of Islandmore OPW C3/7 and F.799/1 arterial drains

A Bridge Options Report was prepared by RPS which recommended the provision of a three span bridge to minimise the in-river works. A Preliminary Report is currently being prepared to obtain NRA approval. The bridge demolition


MGE0260RP0005 6 Rev. F01

8d Raise local road in Caherlea/Lisheenavalla (future measure)

and replacement is to be undertaken as advance works to ensure that the works are progressed as soon as possible. Crusheeny Bridge Cross-Section

Width (m)

Parapet beam 0.5

Raised verge / verge 1.0

Hardshoulder / Hard Strip -

Carriageway 2.75

Central Reserve -

Carriageway 2.75

Hardshoulder / Hard Strip -

Raised verge / verge 1.5

Parapet beam 0.5

Total Width 9.0

The channel widening works will result in a large amount of material being excavated. The majority of the excavation works are on the southern bank of the river, with some excavation on the northern bank in the vicinity and upstream of Crusheeny bridge. It is proposed that this material will generally be spread adjacent to the river as much as possible. The approximate quantities of materials to be excavated is 305,000 m3. This does not include the existing spoil heaps adjacent to the river which will also need to be removed in areas where channel widening works are proposed. The total volume is currently being quantified. Images 3.9 and 3.10 illustrate the existing bridge at Crusheeny and the view downstream from the bridge of the Clare River.

9 Carnmore/Cashla Drainage of floodwater from the affected area via a new drainage pipeline/open drain to a local surface water stream at Islandmore

In addition, a Footbridge is proposed for Claregalway, to be constructed alongside the Claregalway Bridge. This Footbridge, is also assessed as part of this report. Figure 3.2 illustrates a preliminary design for the footbridge.

Images 3.1 to 3.12 illustrate the locations of the various measures proposed.


MGE0260RP0005 7 Rev. F01

Image 3.1 Road to be Raised Image 3.2 Existing culvert to be upsized

Image 3.3 Road to be Raised at Miontach North

Image 3.4 Road to be Raised at Miontach North

Image 3.5 Nine Arches Bridge Image 3.6 Clare River Downstream of

Claregalway Bridge

Image 3.7 Cúirt na hAbhainn Estate Image 3.8 Claregalway Corporate Park


MGE0260RP0005 8 Rev. F01

Image 3.9 Crusheeny Bridge Image 3.10 Clare River Downstream of

Crusheeny Bridge

Image 3.11 Proposed Start of Surface Water Drain

Image 3.12 Proposed Rout e of Surface Water Drain


MGE0260RP0005 9 Rev. F01

4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This section consists of an environmental assessment of each of the preferred flood relief measures. Impacts have been described in accordance with the Glossary of Impacts set out in “Guidelines on the Information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements” (EPA 2002). Where relevant, mitigation measures and/or environmental enhancement measures are proposed.

It should be noted that the assessment below and the potential mitigation measures set out may be subject to refinement during the EIA process, which requires more in depth desktop analysis and an in depth review of field inspections. Additional mitigation measures at EIA stage may be recommended e.g. geophysical surveys and archaeological testing.

4.1 DO-NOTHING

In the absence of the flood relief measures proposed, impacts of periodic flooding are likely to continue. Flooding in Claregalway town and in the Clare catchment above Claregalway Bridge is caused exclusively by river floods, the characteristics of the river channel and their effect on the discharge of high runoff volumes from the river catchment through Claregalway Bridge (Ryan Hanley, 2010). The flooding of the Clare River which followed the extreme rainfall in November 2009 caused severe and prolonged hardship to businesses, to residents within the Clare catchment and to commuters using the N17 and other minor roads in the vicinity. Flooding has also been recorded on other occasions including the winter of 1990, December 1999, January 2005, and December 2006.

The worst affected areas from the November 2009 flood within the study area were:

• Miontach townland downstream of Claregalway Bridge. One house was flooded, and a neighbouring house came close to flooding. Miontach townland was totally isolated by flooding;

• Claregalway village, where access to the N17, housing estates (An Mhainister) and commercial properties (e.g. Arches Hotel) was hampered;

• Kinishka townland – access road flooded but remained passable;

• Lakeview – Cuirt na hAbhainn housing estate road flooded and houses almost flooded. Minor flooding in front of the park. Lakeview housing estate roads were at risk of flooding;

• Gortatleva – land was flooded and one home flooded;

• Caherlea/Lisheenavalla townlands where sixteen houses were completely flooded or were at risk of flooding. Local road access was hampered by raised water levels in turlough area;

• Carnmore/Cashla – three houses were flooded, and seven houses and two business premises were at risk of flooding. Many houses were cut off by the flooding of local roads and the Regional Road R339. Land was also flooded.

Modelling undertaken by Ryan Hanley (2010) indicated that, serious flooding at Claregalway and in the Crusheeny area with potential flood levels of 11.31m OD upstream of Claregalway Bridge and 13.93m OD at Caherlea/Lisheenavalla under potential future climate change conditions, would occur under the ‘do-nothing scenario’.


MGE0260RP0005 10 Rev. F01

Such events are likely to continue to exert disruption and hardship within the study area in the absence of the flood relief scheme.

4.2 PREFFERED SCHEME MEASURES

4.2.1 Lough Corrib to Curraghmore Bridge

There are no works planned from Lough Corrib to Curraghmore Bridge. This part of the study area suffers from flooding relating to lake levels in Lough Corrib, and the main impact of this flooding is on agricultural land and bog. No property or property access was affected in this area in November 2009. The N84 Headford road is raised above flood levels. However the following is noted in terms of archaeology:

- This area is characterised by the presence of an Area of Archaeological Potential (AAP) associated with the riverine environment around the Clare River (AAP1) and the surrounding bog land below Claregalway village is also an AAP (AAP2) (for the location of AAP1 and AAP2 –refer to Figure 2.2 of the Environmental Constraints Study).

- Curraghmore Bridge is of modern construction and is of no architectural heritage merit.


MGE0260RP0005 11 Rev. F01

4.2.2 Montiagh South

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Suggested Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements

Terrestrial ecology Local habitat disturbance at culvert and drain site (habitats comprise Improved Agricultural Grassland GA1 and species-poor Wet Grassland GS4)

Negative

Short term Reversible. The habitats at this location will most likely recolonise naturally and return to their previous form.

Slight None required

Socio-economic Disruption to local road users and services Negative Short term Cumulative Significant • Provide prior warning of road closure to

road users. • Provide local diversion during works.

Aquatic ecology 2a: Raised road construction over and in proximity to drain at M35606, 33525 has the potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) to the watercourse. There are many smaller drains adjacent and perpendicular to both sides of the existing road in this area, and whilst they have low habitat value, they are conduits to the larger drain and on into the Clare River, downstream, where there could be impacts on fisheries values there.

Negative

Short term Construction phase + Cumulative (inputs of silt to Clare River) in association with other measures.

Slight local impacts due to low value of drain habitat. Sluggish nature of drain means that silt is likely to settle within the drain rather than discharge immediately to the Clare .Works are outside the cSAC.

A detailed design and method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid, (a) sediment or soil loss and; (b) hydrocarbon contamination, associated with all aspects of the road construction phase, and how these will be monitored for effectiveness.

2b: Culvert replacement - method for replacement is undefined – potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) to the watercourse. As for 2a. Localised habitat disturbance.

Negative


Slight local impacts due to low value of drain habitat. As for 2a. Works are

As for 2a.


MGE0260RP0005 12 Rev. F01


outside the cSAC.

2c: Drainage operations - physical habitat disturbance and/or loss over a significant linear length of watercourse. There were a number of different habitat types within the drains earmarked for cleaning, most have only low value of local importance. The more easterly of the Montiagh South drains earmarked for cleaning, is a broad deep channel (probably a tributary), which nevertheless has no suitable salmonid habitat and is unlikely to be important for lamprey ammocoetes given the absence of suitable spawning areas. The habitat however would be suitable for coarse fish such as roach, other cyprinids and perhaps small pike. The other drains in the Montiagh South area, centred on M33918 33078 have no obvious fisheries value, although non-protected species such as 3-spined stickleback may be present.

A high abundance of newt tadpoles in the more westerly drainage network at M 34194 32996. There were also small frogs observed on land around the drains. The area is clearly important for amphibians.

Negative

Short term Construction phase Moderate, local, impacts, with slight impact overall. Works are mostly outside the cSAC.

There is a huge amount of low value drain habitat in this vicinity, so cleaning of those highlighted, whilst causing localised habitat loss, will have negligible impact overall and will not affect the integrity of this habitat type within the cSAC.

All drainage operations should be carried out in accordance with OPW’s Environmental Management Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) (Appendix A)

All drainage operations should be carried out in close consultation with Inland Fisheries Ireland.

Cleaning of these channels should be delayed until late summer when all amphibians have adopted more terrestrial behaviour.

Both newts and frogs are protected under the Wildlife Acts (1976 and 2000).

Any disturbance to a newt breeding site would require a licence from NPWS and potentially a compensation plan would need to be proposed if the site was to be lost. Further investigation of the drains in that area may be necessary to see how much residual habitat will remain after the proposed drainage.

2c: Drainage operations – mobilisation of silt during in-channel works which may have impacts on fisheries values of the Clare River to which all drains in this area are a conduit. The sluggish nature of the drains in this vicinity means that silt is likely to settle within them, but may become mobilised during events.

None of these drains has recognisable salmonids fisheries habitat and are also unlikely to contain lamprey ammocoetes due to absence of suitable spawning areas nearby. Non protected species

Negative


Moderate local impacts, with a possibility of slight impacts within the Clare River. Works are mostly outside the cSAC.


All drainage operations should be carried out in close consultation with Inland Fisheries Ireland. Carry out works in a downstream direction so that in-situ vegetation can act as a buffer to the mobilisation of silt downstream to the Clare River.


MGE0260RP0005 13 Rev. F01


such as 3-spined stickleback may be present.

There are no known spawning areas in the lower section of the Clare, so low levels of silt that escape to the main channel would not impact salmon redds.

Undertake this measure in different sequence to other measures to limit cumulative impacts. Both the OPW and the Engineering Report indicate that the Clare has a flow regime that does not favour excessive silt deposition and limited intermittent inputs should have negligible impact on the river, overall. Works should be timed to occur in predicted low rainfall period.

Archaeology and cultural heritage The proposed road raising and upsizing the existing road culvert may have an adverse impact on archaeological features or deposits that have the potential to be located beneath the current ground level within Area of Archaeological Potential 2 (bogland). This would be caused by excavation required as part of the proposed scheme.

No adverse impact is anticipated on AH 1 (children’s burial ground), as it is located 260m SW of the proposed road works.

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that ground disturbances associated with the proposed works be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. Full provision should be made for the resolution of any archaeological features or deposits that are discovered, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

Soil, geology and hydrogeology Imperceptible impact on soils and geology due to the disturbance and loss of soils and rocks during works.

Negative Permanent Residual Imperceptible Any excavated soils/rock should be reused in the scheme or disposed in an appropriate local waste facility.

4.2.3 Montiagh North

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements

Terrestrial ecology 3a: Localised disturbance of Cutover bog habitats on either side of the road. These habitats are considered to be of Local Importance (Higher Value). 3b: Localised disturbance of Wet Grassland and

Negative

Short Term Reversible (the habitats should naturally recover post-construction)

3a: Moderate 3b: Slight

3a: Works should be minimised on the northern side of the road at this location, in order to avoid the areas of species-rich marsh and cutover bog. Works here should be supervised by an ecologist.


MGE0260RP0005 14 Rev. F01


Marsh habitats on either side of the road. These habitats are of Local Importance (Lower Value).

3b: No mitigation required.

Socio-economic Disruption to local road users and services Negative Short term Cumulative Significant • Provide prior warning of road closure to

road users. • Provide local diversion during works.

Aquatic ecology 3a: - Raised road construction at, and near, the tributary running from Gortadooey, has the potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) to the watercourse, which could impact on fisheries values identified in the lower section of stream. Silt can smother spawning gravels and benthic fauna upon which fish feed. It can also abrade and clog fish gills, affecting respiration.

There are indications from observations of this stream between the road bridge and the Clare River confluence of a varied habitat including short riffles and shallow glides, and trout and possibly brook lamprey spawn within the stream. This part of the stream is not earmarked for cleaning but would still be susceptible to siltation from road raising and culvert replacement, which could degrade the habitat.

Negative


Significant local impact due to fisheries values. Works are outside the cSAC.

The tributary upstream of the road has been recently maintained (20/7/11) and there is an agreement between IFI and OPW about the section downstream of the road where spawning gravels are present, however, a detailed design and method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid, (a) sediment or soil loss and; (b) hydrocarbon contamination, associated with all aspects of the road construction phase, and how these will be monitored for effectiveness. A pre-construction electrofishing survey is also recommended in order to assess the current status with regard to salmonids (probably only trout) and lamprey ammocoetes (probably only Brook lamprey) in the Gortadooey Stream.

3b: Raised road construction at, and near, a large (4m) sluggish drain at M36155 34276 has the potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) to the watercourse. There are many drains along both sides of the existing road in this area, and whilst they have low habitat value, they are all conduits to the Clare River and could have impacts on fisheries values there.

Negative


Slight – due to low gradient and flow in drain, where silt is likely to settle before reaching the Clare. Works are outside the cSAC.

A detailed design and method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid, (a) sediment or soil loss and; (b) hydrocarbon contamination, associated with all aspects of the road construction phase, and how these will be monitored for effectiveness.

Archaeology and cultural heritage The proposed road raising may have an adverse impact on archaeological features or deposits that

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that any ground disturbances associated with the proposed


MGE0260RP0005 15 Rev. F01


have the potential to be located beneath the current ground level within Area of Archaeological Potential 2 (bogland). This would be caused by any excavation required as part of the proposed scheme.

works that require the excavation of virgin ground, be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. Full provision should be made for the resolution of any archaeological features or deposits that are discovered, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

Soils, geology and hydrogeology Imperceptible impact on soils and geology due to the disturbance and loss of soils and rocks during works.

Negative Permanent Residual Imperceptible Any excavated soils/rock should be reused in the scheme or disposed in an appropriate local waste facility.

4.2.4 Claregalway Village


Socio-economic Disruption to local land users and anglers Negative Short term Cumulative Significant • Provide prior warning of disruption to

land owners and angling clubs. Potential for disruption to power supply. The 110kv line to the west of Claregalway crosses the Clare River approximately 0.3km west of the Friary. A 38kv line roughly follows the route of the main N17 road from north to south and crosses the Clare River approximately 0.8km east of the castle located in Claregalway village. The medium voltage 10KV ESB line follows the N17 primary road and crosses the Clare River in Claregalway village.

Negative Short term Residual Slight • Liaison with ESB is required prior to any works being undertaken

• Prior notice to those supplied by this linke required

Disruption to utilities: The village of Claregalway, and Lakeview townland, are also supplied with natural gas by An Bord Gais. The distribution network follows the N18 from Carnmore Cross Roads and turns right at the N18/N17 junction in Claregalway to supply Claregalway village.

Negative Short term Residual Slight • Liaise with Bord Gais regarding potential disruption and provide prior warning to facilitate works.


MGE0260RP0005 16 Rev. F01


Terrestrial ecology 4b Destruction of potential otter holt and localised habitat disturbance. 4c Neutral Impact 4d Localised habitat disturbance (Marsh habitat)

4b Negative Impact 4c Neutral Impact 4d Negative Impact

Short Term 4b: Irreversible (loss of Otter holt may result in the death of an animal) 4d: Reversible (the habitats should naturally recover post-construction)

4b: Major 4d: Moderate

4b: Otter holt should be monitored for activity, excluded (if necessary) and excavated under licence from the NPWS. 4d: Works should be minimised on the eastern side of the road at this location, in order to avoid the area of species-rich Dry Calcareous and Neutral Grassland. Works here should be supervised by an ecologist.

Aquatic ecology 4b: Mortality to in-channel flora and fauna owing to, in-channel, mechanical, works along the Clare River from 900m upstream Crusheeny Bridge to Claregalway Bridge. It is unknown what methods are proposed to carry out ‘regrading’ works and methodology will exert a considerable bearing on impact significance. For example, channel dewatering for works to occur in the dry will have different effects than in-channel works in the wet. Crayfish were not identified in the stretch near the bridge, but access was limited by construction works. Otter spraint with white clawed crayfish remains were recorded here during 1981 and 1991 studies, but these records are now too old to be reliable indicators of current presence. Also, otters can range considerable distances and crayfish remains may not have been those of local populations. At present it is unlikely that crayfish are present in any great numbers, if at all, near the bridge since habitat is poor-to-sub optimal with swift flows, a lot of bedrock, embedded boulder, and very little marginal habitat owing to channelisation. But the possibility of presence can not be entirely ruled out.

Negative

Long-term Construction phase + cumulative (in association with other measures)

Significant, but largely unknown until methods are defined. Works are within the cSAC.

All drainage operations should be carried out in accordance with OPW’s Environmental Management Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) (Appendix A). Particular attention should be given to SOP for white-clawed crayfish.


Works in the dry give rise to the potential to rescue and relocate crayfish if they are present (unlikely) and they emerge from refuges during a draw down. However, in the event that channel works occur in-channel – this would cause direct mortality as it is unlikely that animals could be efficiently trapped/captured and removed.

All efforts should be made to minimise the loss of crayfish and methods and resulting channel characteristics should be conducive to habitat reinstatement and recolonisation. This may be very difficult, if not impossible given the depth of excavation proposed. Given the significance of this measure, further investigations may be necessary to


MGE0260RP0005 17 Rev. F01

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements determine the overall significance should this part of the river become uninhabitable for crayfish following measures.

A pre-construction electrofishing survey is recommended in the riffle/rapid section downstream of Claregalway Bridge.

4b: Changes to hydromorphology and flow dynamics, in particular, the loss of a riffle/rapid downstream of the bridge where loss of flow diversity will result in changes to the benthic fauna, perhaps a decrease in diversity and loss of more sensitive species that inhabit faster flows. Fish also utilise these areas, but the densities are unknown.

This is the only section of turbulent water and cascade / boulder weir throughout this part of the Clare. It provides significant re-aeration potential and is likely to contribute to an elevated density of juvenile salmon and trout in the waters within 50 to 100m downstream. In low flows it provides a depth of water upstream of as far as the bridge and beyond. The loss of this feature may see a reduction in densities of younger salmon and trout in that stretch. It may lead to very shallow water upstream during very low flows making fish passage difficult.

The section beneath the bridge and upstream of it is already quite uniform and the habitat probably won’t change significantly as a result of deepening.

Negative Long term Construction phase and residual

Significant - careful mitigation may well reduce the degree of impact but the habitat alteration will remain significant in terms of reduced habitat diversity for salmonids in particular. Works are within the cSAC.

IFI in-house experts should be commissioned to assist in the detailed design of the channel regrading and reinstatement. Retaining finer substrate elements within the regraded stretch will be a challenge because the regrading is likely to uncover mainly bare bedrock.

IFI in Galway have suggested that a deeper low flow channel should be cut parallel to the southern bank throughout the regraded stretch to facilitate fish passage during very low flows.

Consider reinstating similar habitat at the downstream end of the regraded section, possibly by using similar sized boulders excavated during regrading works in the upstream section. The design could incorporate the creation of flow characteristics similar to the existing situation by grading the channel specifically towards the downstream end. The rapid/riffle should be qualitatively electrofished to determine fisheries values.

4b: Mechanical works in the river will lead to increased suspended solids levels which may abrade the gills of any juvenile salmon in the area increasing the risk of stress or disease.

Negative Short term Construction phase Moderate to Significant, but largely unknown until methods are defined.

Define methodology.


All drainage operations should be carried


MGE0260RP0005 18 Rev. F01

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements out in close consultation with Inland Fisheries Ireland.

4b: Habitat disturbance and loss associated with regrading of channel. Given that crayfish are unlikely to exist here in any great numbers, if at all, the impacts will mostly affect salmonids and lamprey.

Loss of the riffle/rapid has been discussed, and may be significant given the rarity of the habitat unit. The rest of the habitat is a long glide which is well represented on the Clare and is of less significance.

Negative Short term Construction phase + Cumulative

Moderate to Significant, but methods as yet unknown.

Define methodology.



4b: The section of deepened channel may cause changes to hydromorphology in (an unknown length of) the channel upstream of the proposed works. The effects could be, for example, reduced depths and alteration to flow dynamics, such as increased local velocities which may affect aquatic habitat. For example, increased upstream velocities may benefit fauna by the creation of riffle areas and clean, bouldery glides which are more optimal habitat for juvenile salmon and trout and sensitive macroinvertebrate species.

Positive Long term Residual Slight to moderate, but unknown until levels are defined.

Modelling of the drop in upstream water levels would be useful to determine the full impact significance. It may be that a small weir is required to maintain upstream water levels, however, the creation of riffles and runs is also desirable for fisheries. It is probably important that any lowering of the water levels upstream during regrading occurs in such a way that levels drop slowly so that fish occupying marginal habitat can escape to the main channel. There would need to be a well defined low flow channel incorporated in the design to ensure fish passage and low flow connectivity. The creation of an upstream riffle/rapid area that may result could compensate for the loss of the downstream riffle/rapid.

4c: Wall blocking will have no impacts

Neutral N/A N/A No impact N/A

4d: The extent of this is unclear and the embankment material has not been defined. Freshly excavated earthen embankment material could contribute sediment to the Clare River causing damage to fish gills.

Negative Short-term Construction phase + Cumulative (inputs of silt to Clare River) in association with other measures.

Imperceptible to Slight, depending on materials used.

Sediment run-off control during construction and settling phase.


MGE0260RP0005 19 Rev. F01


Archaeology and cultural heritage The proposed works will impact on the banks and bed of Clare River (AAP 1), due to the deepening of the channel. This has the potential impact upon archaeological features or artefacts such as organic remains/artefacts or archaeological deposits. Riverine environments are often a focus for human activity from prehistory onwards and are areas of archaeological potential. (It should be noted that massive alterations were made to the river during the late 19th century, which may have impacted on any such remains).

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that an underwater archaeological survey be undertaken within the relevant sections of the channel to be affected by the proposed development. Subject to site investigation.

Underwater survey should be carried out by an archaeologist licenced to the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. Full provision should be made available for the resolution of any archaeological deposits, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

Nine Arches Bridge is a protected structure (BH 2). It is possible that the construction of the proposed embankment will adversely impact on the setting of the structure.

Negative Permanent Reversible Moderate It is recommended that the construction of the embankment be undertaken sympathetically to the setting of the bridge, especially with regards to views of the structure form the existing main road through Claregalway village.

Soils, geology and hydrogeology Regrading the channel may induce additional groundwater flow where the water table rises above the base of the channel. This should lead to improved drainage in the area.

Positive Permanent Residual Slight Reduction in water table levels may reduce the potential for groundwater flooding.

4.2.5 Kiniska


Socio-economic Disruption to local land users Negative Short term Cumulative Significant Provide prior warning of disruption to land

owners.


MGE0260RP0005 20 Rev. F01


Disruption to power supply: There is a 20Kv ESB line northeast of Claregalway village which follows the local road from Caraunkeelwy townland to Kiniska townland and ends at the tributary of the Clare River at Kiniska townland.

Negative Short term Cumulative Significant • Liaison with ESB is required prior to any works being undertaken


Terrestrial ecology Negative - potential for loss of or damage to EU Annex I habitat ‘Molinia meadows on calcareo us, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)(6410)’ within Lough Corrib cSAC.

Negative

Short term

Reversible Major Works should be minimised on the eastern side of the road at this location, in order to avoid the area of Annex I habitat. Works here should be supervised by an ecologist.

Aquatic ecology 5a: Culvert replacement - method for replacement is undefined, but there is potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) to the watercourse. Localised habitat disturbance.

Negative


Slight local impacts due to low value of drain habitat. Works are outside the cSAC.

A detailed method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid sediment or soil loss associated with all aspects of the construction phase and how these will be monitored for effectiveness.

5b: Drainage operations - physical habitat disturbance and/or loss over a significant linear length of watercourse. The habitat was of low value and only of local importance and there were existing discharges to the stream that probably impact on water quality. There was no suitable spawning habitat for salmonids, lamprey or crayfish habitat observed in this drain, and none of these groups are expected to be present. It is possible that species such as 3-spined stickleback may be present.

Negative

Short term Construction phase 2c: Moderate local, impacts, with Slight impact overall. Works are mostly outside the cSAC.

Carry out works in a downstream direction so that in-situ vegetation can act as a buffer to the mobilisation of silt downstream to the Clare River. Undertake this measure in different sequence to other measures to limit cumulative impacts. The Clare has a flow regime that does not favour excessive silt deposition and limited intermittent inputs should have negligible impact on the river, overall. Time works to occur in predicted low rainfall period.

The proposed works will impact on the banks and bed of a small stream included within the designation of AAP 1, due to the cleaning of the channel. This has the potential to impact upon archaeological features or artefacts such as organic remains/artefacts or archaeological deposits. (It should be noted that alterations were made to the stream during the late 19th century,

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that an underwater archaeological survey be undertaken within the relevant sections of the stream to be affected by the proposed development. Subject to site investigation.

Underwater survey should be carried out by an archaeologist licenced to the


MGE0260RP0005 21 Rev. F01


which may have impacted on any such remains). Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. Full provision should be made available for the resolution of any archaeological deposits, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

It is possible that excavation work associated with increasing the size of existing culverts, may have an adverse impact on previously unrecorded archaeological features or deposits that may exist within the area.

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that any ground disturbances associated with the proposed works that require the excavation of virgin ground, be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. Full provision should be made for the resolution of any archaeological features or deposits that are discovered, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

4.2.6 Lakeview

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements Socio-economic Disruption to local land users Negative Short term Cumulative Significant Provide prior warning of disruption to land owners. Disruption to utilities: The village of Claregalway, and Lakeview townland, are also supplied with natural gas by An Bord Gais. The distribution network follows the N18 from Carnmore Cross Roads and turns right at the N18/N17 junction in Claregalway to supply Claregalway village.

Negative Short term Residual Slight Provide prior warning of temporary disruption to Bord Gais supplies if necessary to facilitate works.

Aquatic ecology 6a: Water quality changes associated with increased run-off to Clare River from semi-

Negative

Long-term Cumulative (in association with

Moderate, perhaps

Use guidance and design of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS)1 to help reduce sediment

1 http://www.irishsuds.com/guidance_criteria.htm


MGE0260RP0005 22 Rev. F01

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements urban/industrial area as a point source. Such run-off, when drained by pipe systems, results in run-off from virtually every rainfall event with high levels of pollution, particularly in the first part of the run-off. It has been accepted that measure 6a. will not eliminate 2009 flood levels, but what it may do is increase polluted run-off for small, more frequent, events which may have significance in relation to the Clare fishery.

other urban discharges from the Claregalway settlement) + Residual (ongoing inputs of pollutants to Clare River)

Significant, depending on design and level of future urban and/or industrial development in the drained area.

and pollutant loading to Clare River for more frequent small run-off events. Hydrocarbon interception systems should be included if car-parking areas and roads are contained within the drainage catchment. A detailed method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid sediment or soil loss associated with all aspects of the construction phase and how these will be monitored for effectiveness.

6a: Construction phase - potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) which can run-off from the open sections of drain and be piped to the Clare river.

Negative Short term Construction phase + Cumulative (inputs of silt to Clare River) in association with other measures.

Moderate Construct drain and lay pipe whilst leaving a 20m, undisturbed buffer section between this and the Clare River. Only connect the lower end of the conduit once all works upstream are complete and fines and spills have been removed or settled. A detailed method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid sediment or soil loss associated with all aspects of the construction phase and how these will be monitored for effectiveness.

6a: Possible hydrological changes at discharge site to Clare River which can affect benthic flora and fauna. The channel characteristics above Claregalway Bridge will not present any issues in terms of this new input, primarily because substrates are generally embedded boulder and bedrock with limited microhabitat for fauna.

Neutral Long-term Residual Imperceptible. Provide stable boulder rip-rap reinforcement at outflow to Clare River, if necessary, to prevent erosion.

The proposed works may impact on the banks and bed of the Clare River due to the construction of a drainage outfall upstream of the Claregalway Bridge. This has the potential to impact upon archaeological features or artefacts such as organic remains/artefacts or archaeological deposits. (It should be noted that alterations were made to the stream during the late 19th century, which may have impacted on any such remains).

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that an underwater archaeological survey be undertaken within the outfall location. Subject to site investigation.



MGE0260RP0005 23 Rev. F01


Archaeology and cultural heritage It is possible that excavation work associated with the insertion of a surface water drain through Lakeview to Claregalway, may have an adverse impact on previously unrecorded archaeological features or deposits that may exist within the area.

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that any ground disturbances associated with the proposed works be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. Full provision should be made for the resolution of any archaeological features or deposits that are discovered, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

Soils, geology and hydrogeology Flooding in this area was as a result of groundwater flooding which is known to occur during winter months.

Surface water drain to be installed to drain some portion of the flood water but inundation will still occur during peak events.

This will result in a minor alteration to groundwater levels and flow Residualions in the vicinity of the flooding but there are not groundwater dependant ecosystems associated with these features.

Positive Permanent Residual Moderate Measures should provide some alleviation to groundwater flooding in the area.

4.2.7 Caherlea/Lisheenavalla


Terrestrial ecology 8a Loss of bankside vegetation (scrub, earth banks) 8b Loss of bankside vegetation (scrub, dry calcareous and neutral grassland and wet grassland), loss of badger sett. 8c Potential direct impacts to an area of Annex I habitat ‘Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or

8a Negative 8b Negative 8c Negative 8d Neutral

Short Term

Irreversible

8a: Slight 8b: Significant 8c: Major

8a: None required 8b: Badger sett should be monitored for activity, excluded (if necessary) and excavated under licence from the NPWS. Works at this location should be minimised and should be supervised by an ecologist. 8c: Works at this location should be minimised and should be supervised by an ecologist.


MGE0260RP0005 24 Rev. F01


clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)(6410)’. This field does not lie within Lough Corrib cSAC, but as it contains a significant area of an Annex I habitat, it is considered to be of International Importance. 8d Neutral Impact (loss of Improved Agricultural Grassland is not considered significant) Socio-economic Road closure during demolition of existing bridge and construction of new bridge

Negative Short-Term

Cumulative Significant • Provide prior warning of road closure to road users.

• Provide local diversion during works.

Disruption to local land users and anglers Negative Short term Cumulative Significant • Provide prior warning of disruption to land owners and angling clubs.

Disruption to electricity supply - 100kv line to the east of Claregalway village crosses the Clare River at Crusheeny Bridge.

Negative Short term Residual Slight • Liaison with ESB is required prior to any works being undertaken


Aquatic ecology 8a: The demolition of the existing bridge will result in temporary increase of water volume and therefore flow dynamics, alternately, in one or other channel beneath the bridge. This may cause localised, increased bed disturbance downstream of the bridge resulting in the removal of filamentous algae and dislodgement and increased downstream drift of macroinvertebrates. Any scouring of substrates would only affect fine sediments which do not predominate in the area downstream of the bridge.

Negative Short-term Residual Imperceptible-to-slight

None required.

8a: The demolition of the existing bridge will result in the dewatering, alternately, of one or other channel beneath the existing bridge. Of low probability is that crayfish may emerge from refuges within the de-watered stretch. Given that crayfish are widely distributed further upstream in the Clare system, the temporary loss of habitat caused by dewatering of a relatively tiny stretch at Crusheeny Bridge would not affect the overall integrity of the cSAC or conservation status of this


Given the limited length of channel affected, it would be simple to collect crayfish and return them to the channel upstream of the works. A strategy should be in place to respond in the case that white-clawed crayfish do emerge from refuges during dewatering of channels beneath the bridge during the demolishing and removal of the existing bridge structure.

All drainage operations should be carried out in


MGE0260RP0005 25 Rev. F01


Annex II species. accordance with OPW’s Environmental Management Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) (Appendix A). Particular attention should be given to SOP for white-clawed crayfish.


8a: The demolition of the existing bridge will result in the removal of plant cover and invertebrates due to mechanical damage. The impact will be very localised, confined to the immediate foot-print of the works. Given the relatively tiny stretch affected, this would not affect the overall integrity of the cSAC.


8a: Construction phase - potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) which can run-off from the open sections of drain and be piped to the Clare river.


Moderate A detailed method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid sediment or soil loss associated with all aspects of the demolition and construction phase and how these will be monitored for effectiveness.

8a: Concern has been raised by IFI in relation to the rationale for the choice of O.D. level for the base of the flood berm and how this will impact the normal summer flow regime and how it will integrate with the proposed main project for the widening and deepening of the river down to Claregalway Bridge. There are concerns that the base berm level is set too low with the result that it will be inundated at times during normal summer flows. This there leads to concerns in relation to in-combination effects of the entire scheme.

Negative Long-term Cumulative Significant Review of the O.D. level to be carried out by Designers and further consultations with IFI including a site meeting.

8b: Two step channel creation over a distance of approx. 4.5km will involve no direct physical interference with the main channel habitats of the Clare River, but there will be extensive riparian and bank-side habitat loss owing to excavations.

Negative

Long term or permanent

Residual Significant. Works are within the cSAC.

Retain and further encourage overhanging trees, scrub and bankside vegetation on unworked bank. Enhance by planting of sections of unworked bank where tree cover does not presently exist, plus replant short sections of the


MGE0260RP0005 26 Rev. F01


This may result in loss of cover by marginal and riparian vegetation and some loss of tree cover, although tree cover is minimal between Crusheeny Bridge and about 1km upstream of Claregalway.

worked bank to enhance fisheries, this will have minimal influence on peak flows. All drainage operations should be carried out in accordance with OPW’s Environmental Management Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) (Appendix A).


8b: Generation of sediment and silt, plus risk of hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) owing to bankside mechanical works, excavation and rock cutting. The large meander in the channel (north and north west of Gortatnaleva) may be susceptible to erosion of the new two step channel during flood flows) Full details of methods are unknown, but the extent of the works means that impacts could be considerable. Fish gills may be adversely affected by elevated suspended solids levels in the river and heavy silt loads might disrupt upstream migrations in the late autumn. Macroinvertebrate prey and algal food sources may also be smothered. Whilst crayfish presence is unlikely, sediment and silt could abrade and/or clog crayfish gills and smother habitat, if they do occur at low density here.

Negative

Short term Construction phase

Very Significant. Works are within the cSAC.

A detailed method statement will be required from the contractor indicating how the new bank can be excavated without causing excessive loss of sediment. Particular emphasis on sequencing the work in order to minimise the opportunity for sediment washout in order to limit cumulative impacts. Particular areas of concern will be stabilising banks which may be more vulnerable to erosion, e.g. on inside bends, and these may require some form of armouring. Stabilising newly excavated soil surfaces e.g. by re-vegetating banks with suitable seed mixes will need to be considered. Scheduling the work for the driest months of the year especially between May and September will be necessary. Work during the winter months should be confined activities with a low risk of causing runoff.

The gravel bed about 700m downstream of Crusheeny Bridge should be qualitatively electrofished to determine fisheries values as presence of young of the year salmonids leads us to suspect there may be some spawning there.

8b: The proposal to place the invert for the new 2-step bank at mean annual flow level may mean the river’s edge will be inaccessible to anglers during rising or falling floods in the river (popular

Negative Permanent Residual Significant (amenity only)

Some warning signs or other safety measures may be required at bridges and other popular angling spots within the affected reaches.


MGE0260RP0005 27 Rev. F01


times) unless they are prepared to wade toward the edge of the new (inundated) bank. This may preclude anglers on safety grounds from fishing during certain flow periods and may increase risk of drowning if anglers mis-judge the position of the submerged edge. The significance of this potential reduction in fishing time isn’t yet known as it is unknown which absolute river levels are most popular to fish and at which very high flows anglers cease fishing because the velocities stimulate fish to pass upstream. Nor is it known how that critical level compares to the new bank levels.

8b: Regional IFI personnel have voiced their concern about the steep drop (2-3m in many cases) from the excavated spoil heaps down to the new bank level, which will make access difficult. This may be compounded if the excavated material to be removed as part of the current excavations is deposited on top of or partially on top of the existing spoil heaps running along the bank. (Cross section drawings don’t show where the new spoil will be placed).

Negative Permanent Residual + Cumulative

Significant (amenity only)

Assess the true significance of this impact, perhaps presenting by a 3-d computer-generated graphic of the final configuration to IFI and anglers.

Make provision of improved access at popular angling spots (i.e. 200m upstream and downstream of the 2 bridges and 200m upstream and downstream at popular angling spots e.g. immediately north of Gortatleva. These may take the form of permanent steps from the backing spoil mounds down to the invert of the new bank, spaced at perhaps 50m intervals.

8b: Hydrological changes may affect habitat due to a potential reduction in peak velocity in-channel during events. This is owing to increased out of bank flow as a result of two step channel creation – and may be a potential beneficial to some fauna in particular (e.g., crayfish, if present, and macroinvertebrates) since the scouring effect of floods may have less impact on the stability of in-channel refuges and habitat.

Positive Long term or permanent

Residual Slight, but unknown unless changes are modelled.

The level at which out of bank flow will occur determines any change in peak velocity, so benefit should not be overstated unless there is evidence of such.

8b: A reduction in peak velocity may or may not affect silt levels in gravel beds in the main channel which are believed to be used by salmon and

Negative.

Long term or permanent

Residual + Cumulative

Moderate to Significant,

Moderate

If these issues are shown to be substantial, it may require increased marginal macrophyte removal if it interferes with angling and gravel


MGE0260RP0005 28 Rev. F01


trout for spawning. Reduced peak velocities may also increase the extent of marginal or in-stream macrophyte beds. The latter may cause a nuisance for angling in some places. Changes in velocity may be too marginal to give rise to these changes at a significant level but without some details of what the velocity change (at the bed) is likely to be we can only speculate.

(spawning gravels),

Significant (increased macrophyte bed growth - amenity)

bed cleaning if these are seen to be becoming silted over.

8c: Channel maintenance work can, potentially, remove both habitat and in-stream fauna and may involve an extensive area in the channel. Maintenance has already been carried out on the branch near Caherlea/Lisheenavalla. The lower section near the Clare River has also been cleaned quite recently. The rest of the channel has substantial aquatic macrophyte cover and is of low value with local importance only.

Negative

Short- term

Moderate, local impact and only Slight impact to Clare River. Works are within the cSAC only for a short linear length of the drain near the confluence with the Clare River

All drainage operations should be carried out in accordance with OPW’s Environmental Management Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) (Appendix A).

Carry out works in a downstream direction so that in-situ vegetation can act as a buffer to the mobilisation of silt downstream. Retain a ‘plug’ of vegetation upstream of potential fisheries habitat to filter silt during drain cleaning. Undertake this measure in different sequence to other measures to limit cumulative impacts. The Clare has a flow regime that does not favour excessive silt deposition and limited intermittent inputs will have negligible impact on the river ,overall. Time works to occur in predicted low rainfall period.

8c: The extent of works, methods and design for the “regrading” measure has not been defined for Islandmore arterial drainage network, therefore difficult to predict impacts. Steep gradients may lead to excessive silt wash-out to the Clare during construction. The lower section of the channel near to the confluence of the Clare River may support fish, including lamprey. Regrading has potential to mobilse silt to the Clare and impact on potential fisheries habitat and fish.

This drainage network is of low fisheries value because of its stagnant flow and very heavy vegetation. The level also drops very low in dry weather. The possibility of brook lamprey ammocoetes occurring in the final 50 -100m upstream of the River Clare confluence cannot be

Probably negative, but may be neutral if it’s just removing deep silt from the existing channel in low value habitat

Short term, if silt removal only involved. Long term or permanent if other.

Construction phase + Cumulative

Slight to Moderate, but largely unknown until design and methods are defined.

The outlet stretch for about the last 100m just upstream of the River Clare confluence should be qualitatively electrofished for juvenile lamprey and if these are found to be present they should be salvaged to the main channel in advance of drainage.

A sandbag weir may be appropriate to assist in sediment settlement if the re-grading works are severe.

All drainage operations should be carried out in accordance with OPW’s Environmental Management Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) (Appendix A). Particular attention should be given to SOP for lamprey.


MGE0260RP0005 29 Rev. F01


ruled out. All drainage operations should be carried out in close consultation with Inland Fisheries Ireland.

More detailed design and method statement required with channel cross sections.

8d: Raised road construction across and in proximity to watercourses and drains has the potential to contribute sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) to the watercourse. There are many drains along both sides of the existing road in this area, and whilst they have low habitat value, they are all conduits to the Clare River and could have impacts on fisheries values there.

Negative


Imperceptible to Slight, considering that the upper part of the Islandmore drainage network is dry for periods and there is considerable distance between site and Clare River / cSAC.

Undertake road construction during low rainfall periods, preferably when local, existing, drains are dry and remove all loose sediment and spills as quickly as possible.


Archaeology and cultural heritage 8a: The proposed works involve the replacement of Crusheeny Bridge. This specific measure is being dealt with by Headland Archaeology. 8b: However, widening works are also proposed along 900m of the river channel upstream of the bridge. This will impact on the banks and bed of the Clare River This has the potential to impact upon archaeological features or artefacts such as organic remains/artefacts or archaeological deposits. (It should be noted that alterations were made to the river during the late 19th century, which may have impacted on any such remains). It should also be noted that a recorded tower house in located c. 40m NE of the river and as such archaeological remains associated with that structure may be impacted upon.

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that an underwater archaeological survey be undertaken within the river prior to the commencement of widening works. Subject to site investigation.


8b: The proposed widening work will also involve the removal of existing piles of dredged material that line the path of the Clare River. These river deposits have the potential to contain archaeological artefacts that may be lost if removed.

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that should any piles of dredged material be impacted upon, full consultations take place with a suitably qualified archaeologist, and any resulting survey works carried out by an archaeologist under licence to the Department of Arts, Heritage and the


MGE0260RP0005 30 Rev. F01

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements Gaeltacht.

8c & 8d: It is proposed to raise the local road in the area as well as clean out the existing Islandmore drain. Ground disturbances associated with these proposals have the potential to impact upon previously unrecorded archaeological features or deposits that may exist beneath the current ground level.

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that any ground disturbances associated with the proposed works that require the excavation of virgin ground, be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. Full provision should be made for the resolution of any archaeological features or deposits that are discovered, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

Soils, geology and hydrogeology Regrading and widening of the channel will induce additional groundwater flow into the channel increasing baseflow

Positive Permanent Residual Slight Measures will reduce the potential for groundwater flooding in the area.

In-channel regrading works can lead to river sediment disturbance and subsequent siltation and deposition downstream of the location.

Negative Short Term

Residual Moderate Construction mitigation measures will have to be considered in detail during the planning, appropriate assessment and EIS process.

Any excavated soils or rock should be reused in the scheme where possible and any surplus material should be disposed in an appropriate local waste facility.

4.2.8 Carnmore/Cashla


Socio-economic Disruption to local land users and road users of the Regional road R339 and local roads in the area.

Negative Short term Cumulative Significant • Provide prior warning of disruption to land owners.

• Provide prior warning of road closure to road users.

• Provide local diversion during works Disruption to local services – the proposed drain will cross the Tuam Regional Water Supply

Negative Short term Residual Slight Provide prior warning of temporary disruption to water supply to facilitate works.


MGE0260RP0005 31 Rev. F01


Scheme watermain which is located in the R339. Disruption to power supply - The 100kv line to the east of Claregalway village crosses the Clare River at Crusheeny Bridge and also crosses the proposed flood alleviation drain in the townland of Carnmore East.

Negative Short term Residual Slight Provide prior warning of temporary disruption to power supply to facilitate works.

Aquatic ecology New arterial drainage - construction phase has potential to generate sediment and silt, with a risk of cement and hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) which can be flushed into and enter the existing Islandmore arterial drainage network and eventually run-off into the Clare river. This may have impacts on fisheries values of the Clare River.


Moderate, considering the extent of proposed new drain network. Works are outside the cSAC.

Construct drain whilst leaving a 20m, undisturbed buffer section between this and the existing Islandmore arterial drainage network. Only connect the lower end of the conduit once all works upstream are complete and fines and spills have been removed or settled. Construct in low rainfall period, especially when top section of existing Islandmore network is dry.


Connection of an extensive new area of drainage to the Islandmore system may cause a temporary increase in diffuse nutrient input in this system, but this is unlikely to affect background levels in the Clare confluence downstream to any great degree. Chara was found in the lower section of the Islandmore drain and indicated a level of self-cleaning which is probably a result of all the aquatic vegetation in the drainage network upstream. Once instream vegetation recolonises the Islandmore system temporary nutrient increase will diminish.

Negative Short term and Long term due to intermittent, but ongoing maintenance.

Residual Slight The deeper sections of the Islandmore drainage should be allowed to recolonise with vegetation following regrading. This won’t affect conveyance to any great degree as much of it is ponded during low flow periods. These areas, we suspect act as a wetland treatment area, which may add protection to potential fisheries habitat downstream.

Archaeology and cultural heritage It is possible that excavation work associated with the insertion of a surface water drain through Carnmore/Cashla, may have an adverse impact on previously unrecorded archaeological features or deposits that may exist within the area.

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that any ground disturbances associated with the proposed works be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. Full provision should be made for the resolution of any archaeological features


MGE0260RP0005 32 Rev. F01

Potential Impacts Quality Duration Type Significance Mitigation Measures/Environmental Enhancements or deposits that are discovered, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.

Soils, geology and hydrogeology Historically this area was a turlough; however previous drainage works have remove standing water from the turlough to the Clare river. This additional proposed drain will further improve drainage in the area and reduce the potential of groundwater flooding.

Positive Permanent Residual Slight Improved drainage has the potential to reduce the potential for groundwater flooding in this vicinity.

4.2.9 Footbridge


Socio-economic Disruption to local road users and services Negative Short term Cumulative Significant • Provide prior warning of

road closure to road users.

• Provide local diversion during works.

Aquatic Ecology and Water Quality Assuming bankside footings are in place and no intrusion into the river is necessary, then the only risks would be spills of fuel and hydraulic fluid associated with use of heavy machinery for installation of full span structure.

Neutral Short term Construction phase + Cumulative

Imperceptible A detailed design and method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid hydrocarbon contamination, associated with all aspects of the construction phase, and how these will be monitored for effectiveness

It is unclear whether the additional pillar support on the flood channel berm is in place (indicated in the drawings) – if this needs to be inserted

Negative Short term Construction phase + Cumulative

Slight, with correct mitigation.

Any concrete spillage must be rigorously avoided and concrete should must be


MGE0260RP0005 33 Rev. F01


into the berm then there would be risks associated with sediment generated by drilling for the footing, plus the risk of concrete spillage and usage for securing the pillar. Liquid concrete is highly toxic to all aquatic life if spilled to the channel and would result in fish and macroinvertebrate kills in the downstream stretch.

poured and properly cured in a dry period to avoid contamination of the river. A detailed design and method statement should be drawn up by the contractor indicating what measures will be taken to avoid, (a) sediment or soil loss and; (b) liquid concrete contamination, associated with all aspects of the construction phase, and how these will be monitored for effectiveness.

Archaeology and cultural heritage The proposed footbridge will impact on the bed of Clare River (AAP 1), due to the insertion of a bridge pier. However, this impact is proposed after the proposed widening of the river channel and as such after the recommended underwater assessment. It remains possible that there may be a potential impact upon buried archaeological features or artefacts such as organic remains/artefacts or archaeological deposits. (It should be noted that massive alterations were made to the river during the late 19th century, which may have impacted on any such remains).

Negative Permanent Irreversible Significant It is recommended that excavation work associated with the construction of the proposed footbridge be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. Full provision should be made for the resolution of any archaeological features or deposits that are discovered, should that be deemed the most appropriate way to proceed.


MGE0260RP0005 34 Rev. F01

4.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

Impacts resulting from a combination of two or more (all) flood alleviation measures and those impacts likely to occur as a result of each of the proposed measures are set out below.

Potential Cumulative Impact Quality Duration Significance Potential Mitigations Measures/Environmental Enhanc ement

Flooding of properties (20 no. in 2010) along the length of the study area, and potential risk of flooding to other premises will be alleviated.

Positive Permanent Significant No measures proposed.

Reduced future flooding of lands from upstream of Crusheeny Bridge to Claregalway Bridge reducing the impacts on local land owners.

Positive Permanent Significant No measures proposed.

Disruption to local road users, and utilities Negative Short-term Significant Prior notice of disruptions to all landowners, residents and utility companies required

The proposed works will impact the Clare River (AAP 1). This has the potential impact upon archaeological features or artefacts such as organic remains/artefacts or archaeological deposits. (It should be noted that massive alterations were made to the river during the late 19th century, which may have impacted on any such remains).

Negative Permanent Irreversible It is recommended that an underwater archaeological survey be undertaken within the relevant sections of the channel to be affected by the proposed development. Subject to site investigation.


The works will generate suspended solids and possibly hydrocarbons and bulk cement spills depending on the design and management of the construction. This could result in the disruption of upstream migrants (in the autumn), gill damage and subsequent mortalities or direct mortalities of salmonids due to cement or hydrocarbon

Negative Short-term Moderate Avoidance of instream works between the September and May window and careful management of the works to minimise sediment loss or spills.


MGE0260RP0005 35 Rev. F01

Potential Cumulative Impact Quality Duration Significance Potential Mitigations Measures/Environmental Enhanc ement

spills. Mortality to in-channel flora and fauna owing to, in-channel, mechanical, works along the Clare River from 900m upstream Crusheeny Bridge to Claregalway Bridge.

Negative

Long-term Construction phase + cumulative (in association with other measures)

All drainage operations should be carried out in accordance with OPW’s Environmental Management Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) (Appendix A).


Works in the dry give rise to the potential to rescue and relocate crayfish if they are present (unlikely) and they emerge from refuges during a draw down. However, in the event that channel works occur in-channel – this would cause direct mortality as it is unlikely that animals could be efficiently trapped/captured and removed.

All efforts should be made to minimise the loss of crayfish and methods and resulting channel characteristics should be conducive to habitat reinstatement and recolonisation. This may be very difficult, if not impossible given the depth of excavation proposed. Given the significance of this measure, further investigations may be necessary to determine the overall significance should this part of the river become uninhabitable for crayfish following measures.

A pre-construction electrofishing survey is recommended in the riffle/rapid section downstream of Claregalway Bridge.

Concern has been raised by IFI in relation to the rationale for the choice of O.D. level for the base of the flood berm and how this will impact the normal summer flow regime and how it will integrate with the proposed main project for the widening and deepening of the river down to Claregalway Bridge. There are concerns that the base berm level is set too low with the result that it will be inundated at times during normal summer flows. This there leads to concerns in relation to in-combination effects of the entire scheme.

Negative Long-term Cumulative Review of the O.D. level to be carried out by Designers and further consultations with IFI including a site meeting.


MGE0260RP0005 36 Rev. F01

5 CONCLUSIONS

A provisional environmental assessment of the viable scheme proposed for the Clare River has been completed. The proposed measures have been assessed individually and the cumulative impacts of all of these measures has also been considered. The resulting impacts are both positive and negative and vary in their duration, type and significance.

If the viable scheme is implemented the following environmental impacts will be of significance:

5.1.1 Socio-Economic

• Flooding of properties (20 no. in 2009) and risk of flooding to other properties, along the length of the study area will be alleviated resulting in a long-term positive impact for the local community,

• There will be reduced future flooding of lands from Crusheeny Bridge to Claregalway Bridge.

5.1.2 Archaeological, Architectural and Cultural He ritage

• The proposed works will impact on the banks and bed of the river at a number of locations. This environment is classified as having archaeological potential and may have significant negative impacts upon archaeological features or artefacts such as organic remains/artefacts or archaeological deposits.

• The proposed road raising may have an adverse impact on archaeological features or deposits that have the potential to be located beneath the current ground level within Area of Archaeological Potential 2 (bogland).

• The following features or features associated with same may be significantly impacted by measures proposed:. Nine Arches Bridge is a protected structure (BH 2) (It is possible that the construction of the proposed embankment will adversely impact on the setting of the structure).

5.1.3 Terrestrial Ecology

• The proposed works at Claregalway have the potential to destroy a potential otter holt and to create localised habitat disturbance.

• At Kiniska, there is potential for loss of or damage to EU Annex I habitat ‘Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)(6410)’ within Lough Corrib cSAC.

• At Caherlea/ Lisheenavalla potential direct impacts to an area of Annex I habitat ‘Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)(6410)’. This field does not lie within Lough Corrib cSAC, but as it contains a significant area of an Annex I habitat, it is considered to be of International Importance.


MGE0260RP0005 37 Rev. F01

5.1.4 Aquatic Ecology

• Raised road works, bridge demolition at Crusheeny, channel widening works, drain cleaning and culvert replacement have the potential to generate sediment and silt, plus risk of hydrocarbon spills (diesel, hydraulic fluid) owing to bankside mechanical works, excavation, rock cutting and in channel works can affect in-stream flora and fauna.

• Mortality to in-channel flora and fauna owing to, in-channel, mechanical, regrading (widening) works involving a total of approx. 4500 m of the Clare River from 900m upstream of Crusheeny Bridge to Claregalway Bridge. Two step channel creation over this distance will involve no direct physical interference with the main channel habitats of the Clare River, but there will be extensive riparian and bank-side habitat loss owing to excavations.

• Potential for disruption to crayfish at Crusheeny Bridge due to bridge demolition works.

• Changes to hydromorphology and flow dynamics, in particular, the loss of a riffle/rapid downstream of the bridge where loss of flow diversity will result in changes to the benthic fauna, perhaps a decrease in diversity and loss of more sensitive species that inhabit faster flows. Fish also utilise these areas, but the densities are unknown.

• Water quality changes associated with increased run-off to Clare River from semi-urban/industrial area as a point source from lakeview area.

• The proposal to place the invert for the new 2-step bank (channel widening measure) at mean annual flow level may mean the river’s edge will be inaccessible to anglers during rising or falling floods in the river (popular times) unless they are prepared to wade toward the edge of the new (inundated) bank. This may preclude anglers on safety grounds from fishing during certain flow periods and may increase risk of drowning if anglers mis-judge the position of the submerged edge.

• Hydrological changes may affect habitat due to a potential reduction in peak velocity in-channel during events.

• A reduction in peak velocity may or may not affect silt levels in gravel beds in the main channel which are believed to be used by salmon and trout for spawning.

5.1.5 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology

• Regrading the channel may induce additional groundwater flow where the water table rises above the base of the channel. This should lead to improved drainage in the area around Claregalway village.

• The Lakeview surface water outlet will result in a minor alteration to groundwater levels and flow residualions in the vicinity of the flooding but there are not groundwater dependant ecosystems associated with these features.

• Regrading and widening of the channel from above Crusheeny Bridge to Claregalway Bridge will induce additional groundwater flow into the channel increasing baseflow which will reduce the potential for groundwater flooding in the area


MGE0260RP0005 38 Rev. F01

6 REFERENCES

Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact Statements.

RPS. June 2011. Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme Environmental Constraints Study.

RPS. July 2011. Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme Stage 1 Report.

Ryan Hanley, June 2010. Study to identify practical measures to address flooding on the Clare river. Volume 1- Report & Volume 2 Appendices.

Ryan Hanley, August 2010. Study to identify practical measures to address flooding at Carnmore/Cashla.


MGE0260RP0005 A1 Rev. F01

APPENDIX A

THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS ARTERIAL DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE SERVICE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

PROTOCOLS & STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

The Office of Public Works

Arterial Drainage Maintenance Service

Environmental Management Protocols

&

Standard Operating Procedures

The Office of Public Works

Environment Section

West Region Drainage Maintenance

Headford

Co. Galway

Telephone: +353 (0)93 35 456

Fax: +353 (0)93 35 631

The Office of Public WorksArterial Drainage Maintenance

Environmental Management Protocols &Standard Operating Procedures

Contents: Current Version

Environmental Management Protocols April 2011

Environmental Drainage Maintenance Guidance Notes(10 Steps to Environmentally Friendly Maintenance) April 2011

Lamprey Standard Operating Procedure V2 April 2009

Crayfish Standard Operating Procedure V2 April 2009

Otter Standard Operating Procedure V2 April 2009

Mussels Standard Operating Procedure V2 April 2009

Invasive Species Standard Operating Procedure V2 March 2009

Zebra Mussel Standard Operating Procedure V2 May 2009

Blank OPW/ EREP Audit Form April 2011

NPWS Local Contact Details May 2009

Fisheries Contact Details April 2011

OPW Bridges on National Primary Roads March 2009

This document is uncontrolled in hard copy format. Hard copies should be validated against the revision level of the online version prior to use. w ww.opw.ie

http://Www.opw.ie/

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROTOCOLS

ARTERIAL DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE SERVICE

(APPLICABLE TO ENGINEERS, TECHNICIANS AND FOREMEN)

PART I – OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT

COMMUNICATIONS - STATUTORY STAKEHOLDERS By the end of September of each year, each Drainage Region to forward a draft copy if its

Annual Works Programme for the coming year to OPW’s Environment Section, and to the Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI) EREP Project Manager who will review it for appropriate sites and study locations for the Environmental River Enhancement Programme 2008 -2012.

By end of November of each year, each Drainage Region to forward the relevant sections of the Finalised Annual Maintenance Programme for the coming year with a copy of appropriate scheme maps, to the National Parks & Wildlife Services (NPWS) Regional Managers and the IFI Directors.

When compiling the programme the type of works proposed should be indicated for each channel under the headings A-F to facilitate the Screening for Appropriate Assessment (AA).

A – Silt & Vegetation ManagementB – Aquatic Vegetation CuttingC – Bank ProtectionD – Bush Cutting/Branch TrimmingE – Tree CuttingF – Bridge/ Structure Repairs

Ideally, approximate timing (season/month) and approximate duration of works should be included for each channel.

Works that fall within SACs, SPAs or NHAs are to be highlighted on the programme. As a follow up, the Drainage Regions offer the opportunity for a meeting with the

stakeholders to discuss the programme and where a meeting is requested, preferable for this to take place as early as possible in the year.

Prior to entry onto a channel contained wholly or partly within an SAC, SPA or NHA, three weeks notice in advance of entry, and for SAC & SPA an AA Screening Statement/Conclusion Statement must be completed and forwarded through the NPWS District Conservation Officer.

INTERIM STAKEHOLDERS MEETINGS

In addition to the start of the year stakeholder meeting to overview the Annual Works Programme, Regional Offices will offer and facilitate a schedule of more frequent and catchment focused meetings.

The need and the frequency of these meetings will be determined on a regional basis in partnership with the relevant stakeholders.

Typically a frequency of every 2-3 months to discuss the following 2-3 months work on the catchment, identifying any further environmental sensitivities, appropriate mitigating measures, follow up joint site visits where deemed beneficial and flagging any opportunities for added benefit in proposed River Enhancement works.

Typical attendance includes a range of OPW Management Staff, i.e. Engineer, Technician and/or Foreman, NPWS Rangers and/or DCO and IFI Officers.

OPW Engineer will compile minutes of the meeting to record attendance and a brief account

of main decisions and follow up actions. Any channel specific information resulting from these meetings, such as timing requests

should be entered into the Records Database in accordance with the National Recording Process.

Fruitful consultations with statutory stakeholders such as NPWS and IFI are of critical importance to continuously improving environmental performance. However, in the interest of maximising the efficiency of stakeholders input, Management Staff are as far as practical, to plan their consultative requirements and address a range of aspects in any one discussion forum. Interim Stakeholder Meetings or similar forums offer good opportunities to maximise consultation efficiencies.

CORRESPONDENCE

All Environment related correspondence/complaints should be logged on the Engineering Services Correspondence Database as per normal protocol. Complaints received should be forwarded to the Environment Section should assistance be required.

WALKOVER SURVEYS

As a component to the EREP Project, on a number of channels, EREP team will request for Walkover Surveys as an opportunity to discuss in detail on site the environmental options for a particular channel with a range of relevant stakeholders.

Typical attendance will be an IFI EREP representative, a range of OPW Management Staff and relevant Operational Crew if deemed beneficial, local IFI Officer and/or NPWS Ranger or DCO.

OPW Management Staff to liaise with EREP team and coordinate the site visit with local IFI and NPWS to facilitate their participation if these stakeholders wish to attend.

Environmental procedures as agreed on-site will be recorded by IFI EREP team and issued to the OPW Engineer as part of the design guidance for the particular Enhanced Maintenance works.

Regional Management Staff to ensure that Operational Staff carry out the works in accordance with the agreed procedures.

NATURA 2000 SITE ASSESSMENTS

All scheduled maintenance operations in the vicinity of a Natura 2000 Site i.e. an SAC or SPA, will require Screening for Appropriate Assessment and Stage II Appropriate Assessment where required.

By the end of September of each year, each Drainage Region to forward a draft copy if its Annual Works Programme for the coming year to OPW’s Environment Section to facilitate this process.

Environment Section will procure the Ecological Consultant, collate all the channel lists and issue completed AA Screening Statements/Conclusion Statements to the respective OPW engineers as completed.

The Ecological Consultant will consult with OPW management to define the precise extents of proposed works in each Natura 2000 Site.

In addition, the Ecological Consultant will be carrying out walkover surveys for pre and post maintenance works for a representative number of the sites and OPW Management will be required to facilitate the same.

OPW Management Staff will issue the relevant completed Assessments directly to the NPWS District Conservation Officer.In addition, Environment Section will issue all of the Assessments to the Development Applications Unit, DEHLG, Dun Sceine, Harcourt Lane,

Dublin 2. Preferably for the Assessments to be forwarded to the DCO as soon as it is completed, but in

any case with a minimum of three weeks notice before commencement of the works. Management Staff to implement all prescribed mitigating measures and ensure that

Operational Staff are made aware of all relevant site specific mitigating measures.

Current version of Designated Sites GIS Layers available on Socialtext

Environmental River Enhancement Programme (EREP) After reviewing the draft Annual Works Programme, IFI EREP team will revert to the

respective Regional Engineers Office and request follow up meetings as required to discuss aspects of the programme in relation to the EREP.

Enhancement sites require ground truthing to ensure they are technically feasible as envisaged. This is to be coordinated by the IFI EREP team with local IFI and OPW personnel as required.

Sites shortlisted by IFI EREP team for Capital Enhancement works are emanating from a screening process of technical feasibility in terms of gradient and water quality. In the future, sites selected will increasingly be resulting from other requirements such as the Water Framework Directive Programme Of Measures under Morphology.

IFI EREP team in consultation with the local IFI and OPW, will prioritise sites on a basis of best return for investment. IFI EREP team will liaise with the Regional Offices to assist in identifying channels deemed suitable for capital enhancement which should be integrated with the following years work programme. In some cases, a situation may arise where the site selected is not overlapping with the current Annual Works Programme but where feasible and subject to any third party agreement, OPW will accommodate these works.

Similarly for enhanced maintenance works, IFI EREP team in consultation with the local IFI and OPW, will select sites again that are technically feasible and offer best return for investment. These sites will normally be from channels on the current Annual Works Programme.

IFI EREP team will coordinate all the scientific monitoring works, provide the enhancement design details and guidance to OPW Management Staff and maintain a reasonable level of site supervision, proportional to the complexity of the works and the experience of the OPW Staff involved.

Consultations with local IFI through the Interim Stakeholder meetings are encouraged to identify sites suitable for Enhancement works and in some cases the local IFI may also be in a position to produce an enhancement design. All enhancement designs and works are to be coordinated through the IFI EREP team to facilitate formal recording into the national EREP project and allow for biodiversity and/or hydromorphology monitoring if required. Local IFI may coordinate with IFI EREP team or alternatively OPW Regional Staff coordinate directly with the EREP team.

A small portion of channels have more infrequent maintenance cycles and these cases can offer particularly good opportunities for enhanced maintenance type works. Channels programmed where maintenance works have not being carried out for in excess of 10 years, to be flagged to IFI EREP team for possible Walkover Surveys and guidance on appropriate EDM procedures.

Management Staff to ensure that as far as practical, all Operational crews have an opportunity to get experience on these projects.

Each Regional Engineer is to make provision in the Annual Works Programme for Plant & Labour resources in addition to provisions in the Annual Budget for materials subject to expenditure constraints. Typical resources are as follows:

Capital EnhancementRegion Target

(Km)Capital Costs

Machine Weeks

ManWeeks

East Region 20 €200,000 30 60South West Region 14 €140,000 21 42West Region 16 €160,000 24 48

50 €500,000 75 150

Enhanced Maintenance (in conjunction with routine maintenance)Region Target

(Km)Capital Costs

Machine Weeks

ManWeeks

East Region 20 15 0South West Region 14 11 0West Region 16 12 0

50 38 0

Progress targets for EREP to be shown on monthly production reports. OPW are the primary contact point for liaison with landowners including the organising of

access and egress for machinery and materials. Brochures on EREP are available in all Regional Offices. Additional copies can be obtained through OPW Environment Section.

Management Staff are encouraged to maximise the use of all available on-site materials such as stone from historical spoil heaps as opposed to importing materials at a higher cost.

In addition, Management Staff are encouraged to maximise synergies with other funding sources such as Fisheries Development grants attained by local Angling Clubs which could combine with OPW plant and labour to supply materials.

In all cases, Inland Fisheries Ireland are the statutory authority to give design guidance to OPW. Angling Clubs or other sectoral funding sources to liaise with the Fisheries authorities in respect of all design and environmental monitoring requirements.

As-Built plans are to be completed by the IFI EREP team for all enhancement works. This will entail a site visit by IFI and relevant OPW Staff where requested. These will be retained by IFI as well as any relevant design information.

IFI EREP team will forward a copy of the As-Built plans to Environment Section who will upload the same to Socialtext for access to the information by all Staff.

At the end of the year, IFI EREP team will forward Environment Section a GIS layer of that year's works for uploading to OPWs GIS records.

Current version of Enhancement GIS Layer available on Socialtext

NATIONAL RECORDING PROCESS

Weekly Record Cards can contain information on Lamprey, Crayfish, Kingfisher, Mussels, Otter and other site specific environmental information as arises.

Environmental information on Cards will be recorded onto the Records Database by each Drainage office. The latest Records Database has been revised to integrate environmental records.

On an interim basis, a copy of all Cards with environmental information to be copied and

forwarded to Environment Section by each Drainage Office. This is to allow Environment Section to review the detail of information being recorded, feedback to the Operational crews through the Management Staff and attain a national consistency in the style of information being recorded.

All relevant information to be uploaded to GIS by Environment Section. All other relevant environmental information sourced by Management Staff whether from

direct observations or through stakeholder consultations, should be entered into the Records Database.

Relevant environmental information sourced through the EREP project and related research will be forwarded by IFI EREP team to Environment Section directly for centralised GIS uploading.

On an annual basis, Environment Section will compile an update of Weekly Records Cards species records and make available to all Staff via Socialtext to assist in tracking progress.

On an ongoing basis, Environment Section will make available the various OPW compiled species records to other authorities to assist in contributing to any appropriate national conservation knowledge.

As described above, each drainage office will upload onto the Records Database all environmental information from the Weekly Record Cards and all other broader environmental information attained by Management Staff. Within a few years, it's envisaged that multiple regional Staff will be able to use the new Records Database, and then environmental information from all sources will be uploaded directly by a whole host of Staff. Typically this will include any mitigating agreements for particular channels agreed with stakeholders or any other individuals observation such as protected species presence noted during a separate site visit.

SALMONIDS

As far as practicable, the maintenance works are to be scheduled to accommodate salmonid (Salmon & Trout) spawning areas, as is in place across all regions for many years. This is a widespread measure on many catchments and is most applicable to medium gradient channels with gravel substrate.

Prior to works commencing, consult with local IFI. Ideally, consultations to be conducted through Interim Stakeholder Meetings or alternatively, direct contact in respect of the specific site.

Maintenance operations on salmonid spawning beds typically carried out between July and September but timing subject to adjustment due to local knowledge of IFI.

Raking of spawning gravels to improve spawning capacity also typically carried out between July and September.

River enhancement works to enhance both the fisheries and the broader ecology of the drainage channel are covered under the EREP project.

In the future, as the extent of completed enhancement works increases, there is a risk of damage to structures due to future maintenance. All channels scheduled for maintenance to be checked against GIS records for presence of previous enhancement works. Where a presence is indicated, carry out a site visit as appropriate and in consultation with IFI , devise on-site procedures to protect or enhance existing instream structures.

Current version of Enhancements & Spawning GIS Layers available on Socialtext.

LAMPREY (BROOK, RIVER & SEA) & CRAYFISH

All channels scheduled for maintenance to be checked against GIS records for presence of Lamprey or Crayfish.

In accordance with the SOPs, Operational Staff will closely observe the spoil three times daily and report to the Foreman any Lamprey or Crayfish located.

Mitigating procedures to apply when:◦ GIS records indicate species presence, or ◦ Operational Staff locate Lamprey or Crayfish during operations, or ◦ Where particularly suitable habitat is identified by an environmental stakeholder.

If significant populations are encountered, notify IFI EREP team and facilitate scientific studies if site deemed suitable by IFI.

If significant populations are encountered, notify NPWS Ranger and local IFI Officer and conduct site visit as necessary.

Combination of Mitigating Measures to be selected as applicable to the site while balancing the Flood Risk Management requirements and a sustainable approach to the conservation of Lamprey and/or Crayfish.

Identify extent of channel applicable and the mitigating measures to apply. Inform Operational Staff of mitigating requirements.

Suite of relevant Mitigating Measures as follows:

On site measures Skip sections to retain intact habitat either in one long reach or multiple short reaches. Maintenance in an upstream direction to avoid secondary disturbance of a species moving

downstream. Balance with the advantage of maintenance in a downstream direction where instream vegetation minimises siltation.

Confine maintenance to 2/3 of channel width leaving marginal vegetation and silt intact. Maximise use of weed cutting bucket particularly where aquatic vegetation removal is the

primary objective. This is effective for Lamprey juveniles as they are in the silt. For Crayfish, cutting of “Flaggers” type vegetation is effective but cutting of “water celery” mat type vegetation is less effective as it can result in Crayfish being removed within the weed mass.

Forward planning measures Annual maintenance of the channel in shorter segments sequentially completing the same

over a number of years. Balance with maintaining reasonably operational efficiency in terms of machinery moving, transport, access and egress.

Longer time periods between maintenance cycles e.g. move from 4-6 years to 7 to 8 years. Balance with overall river ecology as longer maintenance cycles will lead to more heavy-scale works.

Timing of maintenance to accommodate Lamprey spawning. Stakeholder consultations between OPW and local IFI for salmomid mitigating purposes, to include consideration of Lamprey spawning. This is to be applied to channels where Lamprey spawning habitat is known as informed by IFI or other stakeholder. For River & Brook Lamprey, no works on relevant spawning channel from end March to start of June subject to adjustment due to local knowledge of IFI. For Sea Lamprey, as they spawn during the summer months, restrictions from late April to early July are required. To be applied to channels where Sea Lamprey spawning is known as informed by IFI or other stakeholder and timing subject to adjustment due to local knowledge of IFI. Note that Sea Lamprey are much less widespread so envisaged that the scale of this mitigation will be very limited.

Loosening spawning bed gravels. Stakeholder consultations between OPW and IFI for salmonid gravel loosening purposes, now to include consideration of Lamprey spawning as above.

Enhance channel profile such as skewed cross section and promote deposition of silt along margins. Integrate with IFI discussions on planning the EREP to avail of enhancement

opportunities particularly for channels where Lamprey or Crayfish presence is recorded. Modification of OPW structures which impede upstream migration. Identification of weirs

as barriers to be as informed by IFI or other stakeholder. Where modification designs required, liaison with IFI EREP team to integrate the improvement works into the EREP project. Identification of a bridge apron step attained through ongoing site inspections by OPW Management Staff or other stakeholder. In consultation with IFI, steps at bridges to be modified by a rock armour type ramp or similar. Envisaged that these measures will be of a limited scale on drained channels.

GIS Records: Where Lamprey or Crayfish are discovered, Operational Staff will have recorded the same

on the Weekly Record Cards. Cards with species location information will be uploaded to the Records Database as stated in the National Recording Process.

All new Lamprey spawning location information attained through stakeholder consultation to be recorded on the Records Database in accordance with the National Recording Process.

All database records of species location will be uploaded to GIS by Environment Section. IFI EREP team conducting ongoing research on Lamprey & Crayfish as a component of the

EREP works. Scientific data calculating species density for some sites will be developed and to be supplied by IFI to OPW and uploaded to GIS by Environment Section.

Current version of relevant SOPs: V2 April 2009Current version of relevant GIS Layers available on Socialtext.

OTTER

Research to date indicates that Otters are widespread across all sizes of drainage channels nationally, hence it is prudent to assume that Otter use any particular site.

In accordance with the Otter SOP, Operational Staff will walkover the works area one week in advance in conjunction with the Health & Safety assessment noting dense cover with access directly to the water that is to be avoided where feasible.

In addition, any recognisable signs of Otter presence observed such as Spraints, Footprints or suspected Holts, will be recorded on the Weekly Record Cards. These signs were identified in Otter Awareness Training carried out across all regions in 2008.

While holts are usually well concealed, where Operational Staff observe a suspected holt such as a burrow opening, in consultation with Management Staff, subject to flood risk management functions, no works to within a 50m buffer each side.

Bridge mammal crossing enhancement As a component of ongoing consultations with NPWS and other stakeholders, evidence may

arise from time to time as to a particular spot for Otter road kill. Typically this can arise where the Otter always traverses the roadway as opposed to going through the bridge. While this scenario is not known to be a widespread issue in Ireland, the highest risk locations are on the National Primary Roads which have the heaviest traffic volumes.

There are 170 National Primary Road bridges on OPW channels as listed in the table referenced below and Management Staff are to have particular regard to these locations if evidence arises on a possible road kill “hot spot”.

Enhancement works will typically take the form of a bolt-on wildlife ledge or similar. Design and configuration is to carried out in consultation with NPWS and relevant Local Authority.

On an annual basis, Environment Section will review the national website www.biology.ie which records Otter road kill reports from the public. Any road kill location which overlaps with an OPW channel will be flagged by Environment Section to the relevant Management

http://www.biology.ie/

Staff. Current understanding is that Otter road kill is not a significant issue in Ireland. It's

envisaged that while the justification for bridge mammal crossing works may arise for some scenarios, these measures will be of a limited scale on drained channels.

Current version of Otter SOP: V2 April 2009Current version of National Primary Roads & OPW Bridges: March 2009

FRESHWATER PEARL MUSSEL

GIS records from NPWS show the locations of the 91 known FWPM populations in Ireland. The following OPW channels have been identified as containing FWPM:

Channel Scheme Location Most Recent Record

CH9 Corrib Headford Oughterard 2009

C1/21/3 Moy Approx 500yrds from outfall to into L. Cullin 2004

C1 Sect M&N Moy Ballygallagart 2004

C1/21/14 Moy Crossmolina 2008

C1 Dunmanway FRS d/s of the Long Bridge 2003

C1 Owvane Approx 1400 yrds from outfall 2002

C1 Feale d/s Listowel near Scartleigh cemetary 2006

**Owenaher Moy u/s of C1/54 1996

**Brown Flesk River Maine Trib of C1 Maine near Farranfore 1987

** Galey River Feale Approx 1400yrds u/s of C1/18 near Ahavoher Br. 1950

**River Liffey Ryewater (Lucan) Approx 3.5km d/s C1 Ryewater outfall 1894** Although not on OPW channels - these channels may or may not contain populations of FWPM. Works in the

vicinity which could impact on a possible population need to be considered in close consultation with local NPWS knowledge.

While highly unlikely to have instream works in a FWPM habitat, if a new population located by Operational Staff during operations, works to cease.

Notify NPWS and in consultation with NPWS, area to be skipped or non in-stream works carried out as agreed for the specific site.

For operations in the vicinity of known populations, mitigating procedures to apply: Consult with NPWS and local IFI and conduct site visit as necessary.

◦ Typically only selective non in-stream works adjoining the population.◦ Works such as removal of a fallen tree is to be completed by lifting clear of the channel

to minimise any channel bed disturbance due to the branches being dragged. ◦ Assess need for silt management procedures for works upstream of the population and

implement in consultation with NPWS.

Current version of relevant SOPs: V2 April 2009Current version of FWPM GIS Layer available on Socialtext.

SWAN & DUCK MUSSELS

Swan and Duck Mussels are not strictly a protected species, however they are of conservation interest.

Both species are similar in appearance and habitat requirements and distinguishing between them is not necessary unless local environmental stakeholders can identify the exact species.

As the Mussel SOP, if Operational Staff locate the same, Management Staff will be notified. Where significant populations are encountered notify NPWS Ranger and local IFI Officer,

and where they are interested in visiting the site, facilitate a site visit as necessary. Identify extent of channel applicable and the mitigating measures to apply. Typical Mitigating Measures include:

◦ Operational Staff to observe spoil and return any Mussels to the channel whom are expected to recolonise the channel bed.

◦ Maximise use of weed cutting bucket particularly where aquatic vegetation removal is the primary objective.

◦ Skip sections to retain intact habitat either in one long reach or multiple short reaches.◦ Confine maintenance to 2/3 of channel width leaving marginal vegetation and silt intact.

Record species presence on the Weekly Record Cards which will be recorded on the Records Database.

Current version of relevant SOPs: V2 April 2009

KINGFISHER

Avoid disturbing nesting sites in banks. Visual sightings of Kingfisher by Operational Staff to be recorded on the Weekly Record

Cards. Sightings by Management Staff to be recorded on the Weekly Record Cards where works in

progress or on other occasions, record by separate map or channel reference format. All sightings to be recorded on the Records Database in accordance with the National

Recording Process. All database records of species location will be uploaded to GIS by Environment Section. On an annual basis, Environment Section will issue the records to Birdwatch Ireland whom

will add to the national Kingfisher database.

Current version of Kingfisher GIS Layer available on Socialtext.

BIRDS Removal of any abnormally dense layer of vegetation is to be executed between September

and February (inclusive) to minimise impacts on nesting birds unless there are other overriding requirements such as Health & Safety.

For SPAs containing important over-wintering bird populations, in consultation with the NPWS, regard to be given to timing or phasing of the works to minimise potential disturbance.

BATS

While the removal of large mature trees is not typically a requirement of maintenance works, where the case arises, in consultation with NPWS, regard to be given to the likelihood of bat roosting habitat.

Typical mitigating measure would be to leave tree in fallen position for 24hrs to allow any bats vacate.

Masonry bridges offer niches and crevices suitable for bat roosts and where masonry bridges are scheduled for maintenance works, regard to be given to the likelihood of bat roosting habitat. Typical maintenance works at low level such as wing wall repair or underpinning foundations have limited potential to impact on bat roosts. Where the case arises that repair works are to be above the high water level such as the upper arch, in consultation with

NPWS, assess the potential for the works impacting on bat roosts. Typical mitigating measure would be to contract a bat specialist to survey for bat presence

before works commence, to avoid entombment of any bats.

WETLANDS - BOGS, FENS & TURLOUGHS

All channels scheduled for maintenance which overlap SAC designations to be checked against the list of channels that impinge on Raised Bog, Fen habitat or Turloughs and have regard to any NPWS agreements noted *.

OPW Management Staff to consult with NPWS for expert opinion as to any evidence of ongoing ecological decline of the Bog, Fen or Turlough and judgement on, if the drainage datum set by the Drainage Scheme and its maintenance is an ongoing contributing factor by affecting the hydrological regime of the same.

Where a likely impact is identified, conduct site visit as necessary and in consultation with NPWS, mitigating measures to be selected such as:

Skipping the channel in question while taking cognisance of the flood risk management requirements.

Maximise use of weed cutting bucket particularly where aquatic vegetation removal is the primary objective.

Inspection by OPW line management to assess the possibility of over digging the channel below the original design datum. Presence of an existing water level control such as a bridge floor to be established and alternative reference datum to be installed if deemed warranted.

* Environment Section currently developing a list of channels which overlap with Raised Bog, Fen habitat and Turloughs within SACs. Channels that are subject to a previous NPWS agreement /understanding of the extent of maintenance will be recorded.

Current version of Wetlands channels list available on Socialtext.

INVASIVE SPECIES – PLANTS

Multiple invasive plant species are widespread nationally as described in the SOP and prudent to assume that one or more of these plants can be present on any works site.

At present the OPW does not have any direct responsibility for the management of Invasive species. However to ensure OPW operations are not a vector for these invasives, measures are required to reduce the risk of spread.

Ensure machine washing equipment transported to site for all appropriate machinery movements as described in the Invasive Species SOP.

Ongoing EDM site audits by Environment Section will include confirmation that machine washing was executed in accordance with the SOP for the last applicable machine transfer.

In some cases, OPW will assist other authorities in the control of invasive species. In these projects, the works are typically carried out in partnership between a number of authorities such as IFI, NPWS and relevant Local Authority. As scenarios arise where OPW are requested to assist in an invasive species control project, Management Staff are encouraged to support the multi-authority partnership model which will maximise resource efficiencies for all parties while still achieving a broader environmental good.

Current version of relevant SOP: V2 March 2009

INVASIVE SPECIES – ZEBRA MUSSEL

Zebra Mussels are present in the River Shannon, Grand Canal and are in many lakes such as

L Derg, L Ree, L Garra, L Key, L Derragh, Derravaragh, L Sheelin and L Corrib. This species is spreading and it is prudent to assume that works in any large sluggish river or near a lake has potential to contain Zebra Mussel.

For any proposed works in the vicinity of potential Zebra Mussel waters, flag for Operational Staff and ensure particular attention to cleaning procedures for all equipment prior to removal from site.

Any new location of Zebra Mussel uncovered during operations, notify NPWS and IFI for their information.

Record on Weekly Record Sheet which will be uploaded on the Records Database in accordance with the National Recording Process.

On an annual basis, Environment Section will collate the records nationally and issue to any relevant authorities to assist in tracking the species spread.

Current version of relevant SOP: V2 May 2009

TREE MANAGEMENT

A small portion of channels have more infrequent maintenance cycles typically where self cleaning gradients are present. These sites can entail abnormally dense tree cover which may be required to be managed for conveyance or fisheries purposes. Removal of any abnormally dense layer of vegetation is to be executed between September and February (inclusive) to minimise impacts on nesting birds unless there are other overriding requirements.

IFI requests to reduce “tunnelling” on drainage channels to be accomodated where feasible. OPW Management Staff to facilitate a site visit with the IFI Officer as required and devise a selective approach to the tree removal so as to retain a dappling of shade along the channel length.

Excess woody vegetation to be collected and utilised by the following in order of preference:◦ Reused by adjoining landowner for domestic firewood. ◦ Subject to landowners agreement, stockpile excess to form natural cover and niche

habitat, preferably with some connection of cover to the channel e.g. along a hedge leading to the water.

◦ Shred and spread along the adjoining top of bank allowing the material to degrade rapidly and recolonisation of the underlying vegetation.

ENVIRONMENTAL DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE (EDM) GUIDELINES

A portion of operational crews will be audited annually for implementation of the EDM Guidelines and other standard environmental procedures as adopted.

Auditing will be carried out separately by both IFI and OPW Environment Section on a rotational basis to ensure all operational crews are audited at least once every three years.

Audit results will be recorded on a standard format with the following feedback:◦ All audit results will be forwarded to the relevant Engineer for that Drainage Scheme

within two working weeks.◦ In the event of an audit showing elements of unreasonable non-compliance with

procedures, the relevant Engineer will be notified within one working day. ◦ Audit results will be forwarded to OPW Systems Co-ordinator for inclusion in monthly

regional benchmarking reports.◦ IFI EREP team will compile an overall summary of their findings in their end of year

report under the EREP project. Design for Enhanced Maintenance works under EREP will include a design element for full

scale implementation of the EDM Guidelines such as Boulder Replacement and Excavating Pools.

Management Staff to ensure that as far as practical, all Operational crews have an opportunity to get experience on these projects.

Current version of EDM Guidelines: April 2011Current version EDM Audit Sheet: April 2011

PART II – DEPOT MANAGEMENT

DEPOT WASTE MANAGEMENT

12 Waste Management Plans are available on Socialtext covering the 12 Drainage Offices. Environment Section will review 2 plans per annum and audit implementation. Updated Plans together with an overview of findings will be forwarded to the relevant

Coordinator and uploaded to Socialtext.

FUTURE REVISIONS

Envisaged that this set of Protocols will be a fluid document and will be periodically updated as procedures are revised or new procedures introduced. In addition, to be used as a framework document for quality control purposes to reference the latest versions of all supporting information.

Inland Fisheries Ireland March 2011

IFI Region Director Address Telephone Region/SchemeIFI Blackrock William Walsh 15a Main Street

Blackrock Co. Dublin

01 2787022 East: Glyde & Dee, Boyne, Blackwater, Bally-Teigue

IFI Ballina John Connelly Ardnaree House Abbey Street Ballina Co. Mayo

096 22788 West: Moy, Bonet

IFI Ballyshannon Dr. Milton Matthews,

Station Road Ballyshannon Co. Donegal

071 9851435 West: Donegal schemes, Kilcoo, Duff

IFI Limerick Sean Ryan Ashbourne Business Park Dock Road Limerick

061 300238 East: Inny, BrosnaWest: Boyle, BallyglassSouth: Killimor, Carrighahorig, Nenagh, Groody, Maigue, Deel, Feale

IFI Macroom Dr. Patrick Buck Sunnyside House, Macroom Co. Cork

026 41221 South: Maine, Owvane

IFI Clonmel Suzanne Campion Anglesea Street Clonmel Co. Tipperary

052 80055 East: Brickey

IFI Galway Amanda Mooney The Weir Lodge Earl's Island Galway

091 563118 West: Corrib Headford, Mask,

IFI Dr. Ciaran Byrne Unit 4 Swords Business Campus Balheary Rd Swords Co. Dublin

01 8842600 All

EREP Project Manager

Dr. Karen Delanty

Unit 4 Swords Business Campus Balheary Rd Swords Co. Dublin

01 8842624 All

(Note: Completed flood relief schemes are not listed but proposed works should be discussed with the relevant local IFI)

OPW Bridges (numbering 170) intersecting National Primary Roads.

Scheme Channel ID Bridge No. National Route type Bridge NameGlyde and Dee C2 (7C) B80 N01Glyde and Dee C2 (7E1) B839 N01Glyde and Dee C2 (7E1) B840 N01

Broadmeadow and Ward C2/1 B230 N02Broadmeadow and Ward C2/1 B239 N02Broadmeadow and Ward C2 B204 N02 Coolatrath br.Broadmeadow and Ward C2/3 B243 N02Broadmeadow and Ward C1/6/1 B86 N02Broadmeadow and Ward C1/6/1/1 B96 N02Broadmeadow and Ward C1/6 B68 N02Broadmeadow and Ward C1 B16 N02

Boyne C1 B4 N02 Slane br.Glyde and Dee C2 (7H) B101A N02Glyde and Dee C2 (17) B179 N02Glyde and Dee C2 (14B) B118 N02Glyde and Dee C2 (14) B867 N02Glyde and Dee C2 (1) B30 N02Glyde and Dee C2 (13) B111 N02Glyde and Dee C2 (16B4) N02Glyde and Dee C1 (1) B15 N02 Aclint BrGlyde and Dee C29 (2) B441 N02Glyde and Dee C29 (3) B443 N02Glyde and Dee C25 (8) B341 N02Glyde and Dee C25 (7D1) B672 N02

Monaghan Blackwater C1/1/5 B7 N02Monaghan Blackwater C1/1/5/6/1 B1 N02Monaghan Blackwater C1/3/5/2 B8 N02Monaghan Blackwater C1/3/6/3 B1 N02 Hoaf Br

Boyne C1/8/24 BX1 N03Boyne C1/8/23 B733 N03Boyne C1/8/21 B723 N03Boyne C1/8/16 B644 N03Boyne C1/8 B126 N03 Clavens BrBoyne C1/8/8 B294 N03Boyne C1/12/1 B875 N03 Dillon's BrBoyne C1/12/7 B915 N03

Owenmore Behy Bridge BX1 N04Boyle C6/7/5 B2 N05 Ballanagare BrBoyle C6/7/1/4 B2 N05Boyle C6/7/1 B3 N05 Cloonshanville BrBoyle C1/3/2/1 B4 N05Boyle C1/9/1 B1 N05Boyle C1 B4 N05 Old Lung BridgeBoyle C1/8 B1 N05 New Lung BridgeBoyle C1/45 B8 N05Moy C1/31/2 B3 N05Moy C1/31 B4 N05Moy Not on a channel B2 N05 TrimogeMoy Not on a channel B2 N05Moy Not on a channel B1 N05Moy C1/30/3/1 B1 N05Moy C1/28/2 B3 N05Moy C1/28/1 B4 N05Moy C1/25 B6 N05Moy C1/23/3 B2 N05Moy C1/23 B9 N05Moy Not on a channel B1 N05Moy C1/21/1/5/2/2 B3 N05Moy C1/21/1/5/2/11 B2 N05Moy C1/21/1/5/1/15 B1 N05

Moy C1/21/1/5/2/18 B1 N05Moy C1/21/1/5/2/19 B2 N05Moy C1/21/2/5/2/20/4 B1 N05

Boyle C1/44/15 B2976 N06Boyle C1/44/17 B2984 N06Boyle C1/64/1/11/6 B3337 N06Boyle C1/64/1/11 B3303 N06 Miltownpass Br.Boyle C1/64/1/11/4 B3319 N06Boyle C1/64/1/11/4/2 B3331 N06Boyle C1/64/1/13/2 B3330 N06Boyle C1/64/1/13 B3372 N06 Rochfort Br.Boyle C1/64/1/13/4 B3384 N06

Brosna C27 (1) B150 N06Brosna C1 (1) B11 N06 Kilbeggan Br.Brosna C17 (1) B143 N06Brosna C17 (SE) B726 N06Brosna C17 (5) B138 N06 New BrBrosna C17 (4) B135 N06

Corrib Clare C1 B3 N06 Quincentennial Br.Nenagh C1/9 B23 N07 Ollatrim BrNenagh C1/9/24 B4 N07

Monaghan Blackwater C1/1/6/1 B11 N12 Tyholland BrBlanket Nook C1/3 B23 N13

Swilly embankments E9 B1 N14Swilly embankments C1/5 B9 N14Deele and Swillyburn C1 B6 N14Deele and Swillyburn C1/11 B19 N14Deele and Swillyburn C2 B20 N14

Abbey C1/4 B39 N15Abbey C1/4 B31 N15Abbey C1/3A B30B N15Abbey C1/2 B21 - B23 N15Abbey C1/1 B18 N15Duff C1 B1 N15

Bonet C1/12/3 B1 N16Bonet C1/12 B5 N16Bonet C1/12 B4 N16Bonet C1/12 B2 N16Bonet C1 B5 N16Bonet C1/13/2 B1 N16Bonet C1/13 B1 N16Moy C1/50/2 B3 N17Moy C1/50 B4 N17Moy C1/48/3 B2 N17Moy C1/48 B3 N17Moy C1/45/4 B2 N17Moy C1/45 B13 N17Moy C1/30/5/9 B3 N17Moy C1/30/5/9 B15 N17

Corrib Mask CM4/43/4 B2 N17Corrib Mask CM4/34 B10 N17Corrib Mask CM4/34/2 B2 N17Corrib Clare C3/30 B8 N17Corrib Clare C3/30/4 B1 N17Corrib Clare C3/26 B2 N17Corrib Clare C3/26/9 B1 N17Corrib Clare C3/26/1 B3 N17Corrib Clare C3/12/2 B1 N17Corrib Clare C3 B14 N17Corrib Clare C3 B2 N17 Claregalway bridge

Fergus D7 B3 N18Owenagarney C2 B1 N18Owenagarney C4 B3 N18

Coonagh Embankments C10 B9 N18

Coonagh Embankments D13 B113 N18Coonagh Embankments B1 N18

Maigue C1/36 B1 N20 Helena's br.Maigue C1/37/1 B3 N20Maigue C1/37 B1 N20Maigue C1 B23 N20 Creggane br.Maigue C1/33 B1 N20 Cappanafaha br.Maigue C1/30 B2 N20 Ballynabanoge brMaigue C1/26 B1 N20Maigue C1/15 B10 N20Maigue C1/10/5 B3 N20Maine C1/28 BX1 N21Maine C1/34 B117 N21Maine C1/35 BX2 N21

Deel SR C12/2/2 B125 N21Deel SR C12/2/2/2 B127 N21Deel SR C12/2/1 B123 N21Deel SR C10 B95 N21 Ballyfraley br.Deel SR C8 B76 N21 Reens br.Maigue C1/17/10 B1 N21Maigue C1/17/8 B2 N21Maigue C1/17/5 B1 N21Maigue C1 B1 N21 Adare br.Maigue C1/15 B5 N21Maine C1 B3 N22 Maine br.Maine C1/32 B110 N23 Dysert br.Maine C1/33 B114 N23 Killfinnaun br.Maine C1 B9 N23 Herbert br.

Groody C1/4 B29 N24Groody C1 B4 N24Groody C1/7 B53 N24Groody C1/9 B56 N24

Moy C1/9/1 B1 N26Moy C1/9 B2 N26Moy F/282 B N26Moy C1/14 B1 N26Moy RIVER B3 N26Moy C1/37 B1 N26Moy C1/38 B1 N26Moy RIVER B2 N26 Cloongullaun br.Moy C1/39 B3 N26Moy C1/39 B6 N26Moy C1/39 B9 N26Moy C1/39/3 B1 N26

Otter Wildlife Passes and OPW Drainage Channels

• It has been brought to the attention of the OPW that there may be a need for small mammal passes on some of the maintained channels.

• The National roads constitute less than 6 percent of roads in this country, approx. 3 National Primary and 3 percent National Secondary. In spite of this they a carry over 42 percent of the traffic. It is for this reason that the focus will be on the National Primary road crossings.

• The national road kill survey was analysed and the data from the web site “www.biology.ie” was cross-referenced against OPW channel locations and the results were inconclusive, as the web page is not widely used. It appears for now that OPW channel road crossings have no affect on the deaths of otters as per this information.

Next Steps: 1) Consult NPWS throughout all regions to review any evidence of otter road kills on National Primary roads or are they aware of any other such road deaths.

http://www.biology.ie/

1. Where there appears to be mammal deaths on National Primary roads that intersect OPW channels it will be seriously considered to install in the bridge (where possible) a small mammal pass to allow ease of access for otters.

Otter Habitat Disruption• Otters, along with their breeding and resting places, are protected under the provisions of the Wildlife

Act, 1976, as amended by the Wildlife (Amendment) Act, 2000. They are also included in Annex I and Annex IV of the Habitats Directive, which is transposed into Irish Law in the European Com-munities (Natural Habitats) Regulations (S.I. 94 of 1997), as amended.

Otter Pass Details• Mammal Ledges and underpasses should be constructed parallel to the watercourse.• Underpasses should be of a diameter of 600mm up to a length of 20m. Where lengths exceed this

the pipe should be increased to 900mm diameter• An underpass should be no more than 50m of the watercourse with channels or fencing guiding the

animals to it.

Where there is sufficient space under the bridge for a ledge the following should be provided:• Fencing: See “figure 1; Specification for Mammal Resistant Fencing” in the NRA, National Roads Au-

thority, Guidelines for the Treatment of Otters Prior to the Construction of National Road Schemes, for more detail. Also, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, DMRB Volume 10, Section 1, Part 5, Chapter 9.

• A bolt on ledge can be used under a bridge where there is no dry passage. The bolt on ledge should provide otters with a dry walkway of between 300mm and 450mm wide, constructed from 4.5mm Durbar patterned galvanised plate.

• At some sites, considerations of responsibility, cost, aesthetics or practicality might indicate the use of a solid ledge; this is most likely where an existing otter-ledge has proved to be sited too low to of-fer dry passage at spate conditions. A solid ledge can be created in 3 ways; concrete bagging, shut-tering plus new concrete and concrete blocks.

• See (OPW, 2007), (DMRB, 2001) and (NRA 2006) for further Details

References• NRA (2006) – National Roads Authority, Guidelines for the Treatment of Otters Prior to the Construc-

tion of National Road Schemes.• NRA (2005) – National Roads Authority, Guidelines for the Crossing of Watercourses During the

Construction Of National Road Schemes.• OPW (2007) – Series of Ecological Assessments on Arterial Drainage Maintenance No. 4, Ecological

Impact Assessment (EcIA) of the Effects of Statutory Arterial Drainage Maintenance Activities on the Otter (Lutra lutra).

• OPW (2006) – Screening of Natura 2000 Sites for Impacts of Arterial Drainage Maintenance Opera-tions. Environment Section, Engineering Services, Office of Public Works.

• DMRB (2001) - Design manual for roads and bridges (DMRB). Volume 10, Section 4 Environmental Design and Management Nature Conservation. Part 4 HA 81/99 Nature conservation advice in relation to otters. Section 1, Part 9 HA 81/99.

Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme...• Energy infrastructure – overhead & underground network e.g. ESB lines, Bord Gáis supply • Water mains and private wells •

Documents