This blog introduces the principles of the Fluvial Audit (FA). Broadly, these methods provide a framework to implement international policies and regulations (e.g. Water Framework Directive). However, at a localised level, these methodologies provide key stakeholders with a broad understanding of individual catchment sediment and fluvial dynamics (Sear, Newson and Thorne, 2010). With this knowledge, the most sustainable and appropriate management and restoration techniques can be deployed.

The Fluvial Audit is just one of many different approaches that can be deployed to assess and evaluate the hydro-geomorphology of a catchment. Each approach is tailored towards a set of project objectives with the shared aim of assessing the catchments geomorphological or ecological dynamics.

Since its advent in the late 1980’s, the FA has been adapted and expanded to characterise a variety of hydro-geomorphological environments. The FA also forms part of a wider geomorphological assessment procedure (GAP) (see here for more information GAP analyses) (Sear et al., 2009).

This blog introduces how and why these frameworks are used and applied to a variety of fluvial environments. The Fluvial Audit methodology will also be introduced, including some of the key components of the FA process (i.e. the Desk Based Study and the Field Survey). Examples of the application of the FA are also described, illustrating the utility of the FA in practice.

A desk-based analysis and field survey were undertaken to demonstrate the application of the FA. These steps are assumed prior to a detailed geomorphological interpretation and analysis, to help inform the best possible management and restoration practices. This example was applied to the Cuckmere River (South East England).

 

References

Sear, D., Newson, M. and Thorne, C., (2010). Guidebook of Applied Fluvial Geomorphology. London: Thomas Telford, pp.32-134.

Sear, D., Newson, M., Hill, C., Old, J. and Branson, J., (2009). A method for applying fluvial geomorphology in support of catchment‐scale river restoration planning. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 19(5), pp.506-519