Analysing The River Processes at Dovedale and Judging whether or not the aim has been clearly met

Section 4

Conclusion

Now that I have finished carrying out my investigations both on river processes at Dovedale and the tourist pressure which occurs in a honeypot in Castleton, I have now finally reached a conclusion based on my findings of each experiment. I will give an analytical overview of what I have found out and discuss whether the aims which were stated way back in section 1 were completed but more importantly a success.

Analysing The River Processes at Dovedale and Judging whether or not the aim has been clearly met

Aim:

Look at river processes in Dovedale and how it affects the river - I will have to investigate various distinctive features of the river (8 sites) in order to complete this e.g. the wetted perimeter, the velocity, the bedload size and shape at 1m intervals, the width and depth at 1m intervals. I will then write down what I have found out and then transfer this data onto a table which looks at river processes and begin to write out the results. I will then analyse each site from 1 to 8 in as much detail as possible including doing a Spearman’s rank.

I think that I have successfully completed my river survey as I have met each and every one of the things stated above. Firstly it says that I had to specifically carry out experiments related to do with distinctive features of the river - the wetted perimeter, the velocity, the bedload size and shape at 1m intervals, the width and depth at 1m intervals. I think that this aim as been clearly met because in my hypothesis I stated that as you go downstream the velocity will increase. In my results I found out that the general trend in velocity increases significantly as you go downstream. This shows that this part of the aim has been met. In my analysis of data I also mentioned that the velocity of the river will increase subject to the river gradient, channel roughness, and the channel shape. If a river were to travel through boulders on the river bed and rocks protruding near the surface of the water then the river would have to overcome such obstacles and therefore there would be more friction and the velocity of the river is significantly reduced as a result of this. Again this shows that I have given a clear analytical overview of the data mentioned and it shows me clearly trying to attempt to answer the points as to which I had to cover. Another part of the aim which I met was that I had to produce several Spearman’s rank tests and show what they show. I did this well but it could have been better and more accurate if I showed the data on a scatter diagram. This way I can look at the relationship between the two sets of data in a more clear way. I also carried out each of the other features which I had to analyse but some of them did not go according to plan such as the bedload size and shape. On one of the radar graphs it showed that the bedload size was much bigger than what it was actually supposed to look like. This maybe because the bedload which was transported downstream did not hit as many rocks than as any other of the other rocks. Also it could have been that this anonymous result happened because the bedload was on the inside of the river stream – this is where the river velocity is at its slowest due to the larger surface area as to where the water has to travel. This means that instead of the rock being on the outside it received less erosion. Overall I think that I have shown the work which was needed to be shown in the correct places but more importantly I have analysed what my main findings of the river survey show and mean. I have also produced each and every graph and results table which I was supposed to and analyse them critically. The hypothesis stated in section 2 has now given me answers as to what I thought would happen and it proves that most of my theories came true. This is why I have said that I completed and achieved this aim successfully and in the best possible way I can.