Slowing the flow at Pickering
Pickering’s catchment project uses measures intended to store water and delay its passage towards the town. Forest Research provides monitoring and an assessment of the Boxing Day 2015 event.
A successful outcome in one event does not prove complete protection. The contribution of each measure needs modelling or monitored comparison.
Saved on this browser. An example’s listed role does not certify that it covers every specification dimension.
Evidence and its scope
| Claim | Period and scope | Source |
|---|---|---|
| The partnership evaluated the performance of its measures during the December 2015 flood event. | December 2015 | Open source |
Possible requirement roles
- River flooding and managementSeparate the catchment, affected settlement and intervention.; Explain rainfall, flows, exposure and response.; Assess residual risk and avoid promising complete protection.
Build a catchment explanation
Connect the catchment measures to stores and transfers: slowing a route or holding water can spread arrival at the town over time. The effect depends on available storage and how tributaries peak together.
The historical event evidence is a starting point for evaluating the combined scheme. It is not evidence of protection against every future storm.
Compare geographical explanations
Compare this catchment approach with a hard defence at the town. Which changes the timing of water, and which changes local exposure?
Evidence needed for a fuller case study
- Rainfall and initial soil wetness for the evaluated event
- Storage capacity and monitored contribution of different measures
- Maintenance, costs and effects outside the protected town