ECOLE NATIONALE DU GENIE RURAL DES EAUX ET DES FORETS
ENGREF
TECHNICAL SYNTHESIS
FLOOD DYNAMIC RETENTION
SOME INTERNATIONAL EXAMPLES
Yvain BOUBEE
E- mail : boubee@engref.fr
January 2006
ENGREF Centre de Montpellier
B.P. 44494 – 34093 MONTPELLIER CEDEX 5
Tél. (33) 4 67 04 71 00
Fax (33) 4 67 04 71 01
ABSTRACT
The “ Dynamic Retention ” of flooding is a recent French concept, developed at the national level by the
CEMAGREF, following the invitation to tender carried out by the Ministry for Ecology and the Sustainable
Development (MEDD).
The publication by the MEDD of a Guide on the “ Dynamic Retention ” had like function to give a technical
support to water stakeholders, project designers and local communities wanting to integrate in their urbanism
plans infrastructures in relation with the “ Dynamic Retention ” of flooding.
Concretely, this results in the development of constructive and river works at the catchment area scale, in order
to slowdown as much as possible the runoff speed of water during rainy events of strong importance.
The experience feedbacks start to emerge in France, but it would be useful to know how foreign countries carry
out their water policy in their fight against the floods. Which is their guideline? In which measurements the
Dynamic flood retention is known, or perceived? Are there examples of implementations?
Key words: flood management, floodplain areas, dynamic flood retention, dry dams,
Ralentissent Dynamique, protection crues, laminage crues, bassins rétention, barrages
écrêteurs
INTRODUCTION
The national call to projects named « Plans Bachelot » or « PAPI » for « Plans d’Action de
Prévention des Inondations » gave a new dynamic in the search for alternative approaches
to flood protection. It aimed at supporting more specifically concepts that are different from
techniques used until now, which recommend first of all accelerated discharge of water.
Indeed, even if they locally improve protection, these traditional techniques only transfer the
risk towards towns located downstream.
Among these concepts, that of the Flood Dynamic Retention has been particularly
highlighted. The CEMAGREF has been working since the 90s on this concept which aims at
designing works that decrease or store flows in order to reach optimal control.
In September 2004, the French Ministry for the Environment and the Sustainable
Development published a book of guidelines for flood prevention based on RDC, in order to
support local communities, designers and owners.
On the technical side, this strategy is based on the realization of small works that are spread
across the zone concerned and this requires a wide range of techniques. The objective is to
detain water before it reaches significant speed flow and to distribute in time volumes arriving
at the rivers. Compartmental retention would be an ideal solution, but it is easy to see why
that it’s difficult to carry out. Moreover, combined utilization of “traditional” installations for
flow calibration and of storage works and river works for flow deceleration should not to be
excluded and can even be strongly considered in some cases.
In addition, this concept is also based on a concern over durability and protection of the
hydrosystems. For instance, the use of former wetlands as overflow areas can go in this
direction. The construction of Flood Dynamic Retention projects results from the motivation
to protect human lives on the one hand, and the ecosystems in the other.
Consequently The Flood Dynamic Retention appears to be the new tool for “hazard”
monitoring. But it is today advisable to combine it with legal measures aiming at reducing the
vulnerability of some areas against floods (zoning, chart of risks...), provisions of flood
management, calling upon operational measurements judiciously answering the
catastrophes, as well as compensation systems having the function to repair and/or to
compensate for damage. Today, all these criteria take part of a new policy known as « Flood
Risk Management », policy which is slowly adding to « Flood Risk Control ».
The goal of this synthesis is therefore to grasp how well Flood Dynamic Retention is
understood and perceived abroad, through some international examples.
RIVER WORKS TYPOLOGY [Cemagref, 2004]
A construction work is a realization the size of which is low compared to the size of the
watershed in which it is located. However, its association to other constructions of the same
type can lead to a visible effect on the discharge. Moreover, river works imply a certain
spatial extension and gathers several works, in the catchment area or in the river beds, as
well as soil use techniques.
These river works can be featured as following, depending on their spatial localization in the
catchment area.

IN VERSANT
Actions on existing draining networks
Draining networks and agricultural ditches can have a strong influence on a flood regime.
The installation of buzzards can allow to attenuate the flows into the ditches, taking care to
avoid the possible obstructions.
Vegetal growth
In order to limit runoff, vegetal invasion actions are undertaken on the watershed flood prone
areas. Grassed meadows are preferred to cultivated fields and their maintenance can be the
object of a contract between their owner and the community.

IN THE STREAMBED
Bank maintenance
The restoration of the overflow area requires works on the river bed banks. Effective
maintenance of the banks contributes to the restoration of flow conditions in prone areas and
supports water speed reduction. In addition, this bank maintenance minimizes the risk of
encountering sediment deposits coming from the banks into the constructive works.

IN THE FLOOD PLAIN
Overflow dams
At the same time Overflow dams are concerned with the main channel and the flood plain.
They intercept the rivers transversely. An overflow outlet at the bottom of the construction
ensures the transparency for weak floods, but allows the drainage of the retention area once
it’s full, that is to say after huge storms. A safe overflow spillway, located on the upper part
allows quick discharges of water during exceptional floods, and a freeboard (rising of the fill
equal to the difference between the crest line and the higher water level, fixed for the
selected project flood) prevents the whole immersion of the installation.
Use of existing works
The question is to know how a road construction or rail work can contribute to the Dynamic
Retention. According to the CEMAGREF, such work isn’t able to carry out this function,
unless hydraulic and mechanic stability studies of the fills are satisfactory. The installation of
a waterproof facing can be considered on the existing fill, as well as the realisation of drains
that would confer to the fill hydraulic work aptitudes.
Transversal levees (realization of new works)
This technique concerns open trench dams. Transversal fills in the flood plain force water to
discharge into the streambed, causing a rise of the upstream waterline and mobilizing the
overflow areas. In this case, the operation has to be designed for a flood exceeding the
protection objective. As far as the streambed is concerned, it must be protected by rockfill in
order to avoid possible erosion than can occur due to water acceleration at the narrowing
point.
Storage works
Basins can be positioned beside a river for temporary storages. For instance, in former
overflow areas. In other cases, beyond a determined flow in the main channel, the side basin
is filled by the river thanks to a specific channel. It will empty in the same river with drains
located at its lowest point. Basins are as much as possible natural and obtained by the
construction of girdling fills, thus avoiding the clearing operations.
Specific protections
Dike construction is not a specific tool for Dynamic Retention, contrary to their destruction,
their lowering or their attenuation. However, their use can be justified to ensure the defence
of specific sites, although it leads to the local rise of the water.
Nowadays, it is recommended that such a realization is complemented with the construction
of a spillway allowing fixing in which point the discharge of the exceeding water will be
executed [DEGOUTTE, 2005]. However, the volume occulted by the dike has to be
compensated by an equivalent volume obtained by clearing another place.
Mitigation
In Versant
In Flood Plain
In Streambed
Ditch flow limiters
Afforestation, vegetal invasion
Slopes, transversal hedges
Overflow dams
Open trench dams
Spreading field
Banks maintenance
Bridges and culverts
Buzzard passages
Storage
Detention basins
Direct intake storage basins
Diversion storage basins
polders
Transversal storage basins
THE RALENTISSEMENT DYNAMIQUE ABROAD

RIVER WORKS IN CATCHMENT AREAS
Detention Basins, Limbourg Province, Belgium [E.U, 2005]
The development of detention basins has mainly a local and specific interest, but can also
contribute to the mitigation of the water levels in the hydrographical network. This local
decrease of the watershed level is a consequence of the use of detention basins, but does
not take part of the Dynamic Retention in its first sense.
In France, Wallonia and Flanders, the number of detention basins is growing, due to the
national subventions. In the wet and dry valleys of the “Heuvelland”, in the south of
Limbourg, floods and erosion are frequent because of strong storms.
At the present time, about 200 detention basins are in step, and another 50 are planned for
2010.
Detention Basins, Chester Country, the United States [EMERSON, 2005]
Valley Creek watershed, located in suburban Philadelphia, in the United States, has
experienced more frequent and severe flooding during last decades, with a parallel growth of
the erosion. Since 1970, more than 100 storm water detention basins have been constructed
in the watershed to control runoff and to attenuate on-site peak flow rate for large storms of
2-to-100-year return periods.
Recently, models were run in order to determinate the efficiency of whole basins and their
influence on the runoff regime.
The results show that the existing system of detention basins in Valley Creek watershed
provided only a slightly attenuation to the watershed's storm water flow regime, in average a
mitigation of 0.3 %. Moreover, during the storm of 24th August 2002, the computed peak
outflow was slightly increased by the presence of detention basins. This phenomenon
occurred because the peak flow rate of the unattenuated original nine basins (those not
connected with detention basins) occurred during a receding limb of the flow from the areas
that are equipped with detention basins. The two flows can merge to produce a higher peak
flow than the one that would have been measured without detention basins.
According to the authors of the program, the efficiency of a detention basin should
systematically be evaluated at the watershed scale, and not only at the local scale.
Small sills in ditches, Flanders and Netherlands [E.U, 2005]
Thanks to ditches, runoff is accelerated during wet periods, whereas water is extracted in
summer to irrigate fields. To fight against floods and the drying-up of soils, some projects are
being executed. One of them has just finished, in the transboundary region between
Flanders and The Netherlands with the aim of better water management thanks the
development of small sills in the ditches. These sills have a double vocation: to keep water
for summer periods and mitigate the discharge speeds.

RIVER WORKS GENERALISED IN FLOOD PLAIN
As soon as catchment surface areas reach a large size, a new requirement appears, that is
to say the taking into account of multiple objectives, in various fields but which can be linked
to each other (overflow areas, erosion, river dynamics…). Thus, the same work can be multi
functional.
Unique function river works
a) Basins along the Elbe River [JRC, 2004]
The JRC (Joint Research Center) is the service of European Commission in charge of
providing customer-driven scientific and technical support to Member States for the
conception and the implementation/monitoring of EU policies.
Following the disastrous floods in the Elbe and Danube Rivers in August 2002, the European
Commission announced in the communication (COM(2002)-481) the development of a
European Flood Alert System (EFAS).
Since the beginning of 2003, the JRC has contacted Germany and Czech Republic in order
to get necessary high resolution data such as observed daily/or hourly discharge data, river
geometric data and data about reservoirs and retention polders, as well as river bed
enlargement information ( thanks to dyke movement or floodplain enlargement).
The international river conventions like the IKSO/MKOO (Oder/Odra), the IKSE/MKOL
(Elbe/Labe) and the IKSD/ICPDR/ (Danube) are the main structures that deal with
transboundary items.
One of the EFAS and JRC missions consists of an evaluation of the possibilities of using new
potential flood retention areas to calculate time delay and prolongation of the flood wave
along the Elbe River as well as how polders eventually contribute to mitigate the flood peak
in Elbe River. The Aim is to work out a decision base for planning and realization of
measures to build controlled flood polders.
It is important to underline that Czech feedback from Elbe upstream polders will be gathered
with German results in order to determine a joint and organized program.
Relating to the planned time schedule, scenario calculations should be worked out by the
end of 2005.
Fig 1 and 2: Polder localisations along the Elbe River [JRC, 2004]
Multi functional developments
a) Erstein polder, Germany [VNF, 2004]
The franco-german program aims at reinforcing the protection against flooding in the upper
Rhine plain. Its main objective is to reduce peak flows of bi- century floods of about 12%, in
order to diminish 70 cm of the water line downstream of Iffezheim.
This development program suggests the creation of 18 polders (2 in France), which could be
quickly overflowed when the Rhine flow exceeds a critical threshold.
Erstein Polder takes part in this program. Located in Erstein, Plobsheim and Nordhouse
towns, the polder is like a peninsula, it is completely surrounded by dykes and girdled by
water. Its 600 ha are principally wooded.
The program’s interest is double:
 create a water retention basin which will have an influence on flood protection.
 restore the ecological value of this natural space.
When it is filled, the Erstein polder is like a gigantic basin which can receive up to 7.8 million
cubic meters, that represents an average height of 1.20m on the 600ha of the basin. Intake
structures located in the Rhine’s dike allow its filling. Moreover, two constructive drainage
works located in the low points are used to empty it.
Although of important capacity, this basin only represents 3% of the 270 million m3 of storage
estimated by the program. The retention basin filling starts as soon as the river flow reaches
3600 m 3/s in Strasbourg.
To accustom fauna and flora to attenuation floods and to restore alluvial ecosystems close to
those that existed formerly, the polder is regularly filled.
Indeed, the successive river works realized along River Rhine, mainly to avoid floods, have
little by little modified the supplying system of the alluvial environments. The Giessen (water
harms) disappear, the ground water decreases and the forest is drained. The basin’s water
supply in water will contribute to save the Rhine alluvial environment.
The natural hydrographical red of the polder, constituted by Giessen, is supplied by the
Rhine as soon as the river flow exceeds 1500 m 3/s, that is to say about 60 days per year.
In addition, the basin is partially filled, to an average height of 75cm once a year, in order to
accustom animal and vegetable species to these overflow conditions.
The realisation of the polder highlights the will of the different actors that took part in the
project to combine effective inhabitant protection downstream against floods and restoration
of the ecosystem in the Rhine’s alluvial plain.
The polder’s equipment has required ten years of design and five years of works. It has been
realized by Voies Navigables de France and the whole cost of the realisation reached 25
billion euros.
Remark: Contrary to Dutch polders, the Erstein polder isn’t a piece of ground won on
the water to permit agriculture or breeding, first sense of the word, but a space
intended to be overflowed in crisis situation.
b) Alliance overflow areas / sedimentation, Denmark [JRBM, 2005]
The project presented here has the particularity of combining restoration in the Flood
Expansion Areas, and a restoration of the natural river dynamics.
The “Danish Watercourse act” is the national directive defining the orientations for the river
management. The Danish parliament signed this decree after having heard that only 900km
of 30 000km of rivers still have their natural bed.
Since 1982, more than 1000 projects of natural river restoration have been lead in Denmark.
During this period, the development of the action plan n°2 has included the restoration of 16
000ha of humid areas with the double objective of reducing the nitrogenize concentration
present as nitrates in the surface’s waters, and of rebuilding the flood expansion areas.
In August 2003, 16 projects representing a surface of 1 021 ha, had been defined, and a total
of 111 pre-projects have been studied. The main part of these projects is to restore the
original bed of the river and their goal is to support the natural flood of meadows. Thus,
permitting the overflow of some areas in the flood plain, the damage risk downstream has
been reduced.
As a consequence, the Dynamic Retention appears implicitly as a multi function tool, for
flood prevention on the one hand, and on the other for the restoration of ecological
environments.
c) IRMA Project on the Rhine and Meuse Rivers [EU, 2005]
In 1993 and 1995, the rivers Rhine and Meuse flooded their banks twice within a thirteenmonth period. Catchment areas having no borders, flood control became a matter of cooperation between the relevant authorities of each country (France, Flanders, Wallonia,
Germany, Luxembourg, and Netherlands) in order to define a joint flood control plan to the
European Commission within the framework of its INTERREG II-C initiative. This program
was adopted on 18th December 1997 under the name IRMA (Interreg Rhine-Meuse
Activities). It constitutes a combination of three important elements, water management,
spatial planning and damage prevention. All of which are stressed by the European
Commission:
The projects to carry out are the following:
In the Catchment Area:
 retain the water the most upstream as possible, thanks to wooded areas and thus
support infiltration. In addition, try to contain urbanized areas and reduce the runoff
rate;
 give more space to rivers, restore its natural discharging areas and reduce runoff’
speed.
In the flood plain, a lot of changes that were made over the last century must be reversed:
 for instance, relocalize dikes that used to produce immersions upstream;
 create parallel channels and broaden the river bed.
Project feedback: more than 153 projects were carried out in the flood plain of the Rhine and
Meuse rivers between 1997 and 2003.
The program has brought an important contribution to water management. Technical
approach has been replaced by a spatial approach using technology.
The results expected for a century flood and once all the projects are finished are the
following. “It is more a qualitative estimation than a quantitative estimation, resulting from
models, and the implementation has not been yet appreciated.” [WEBER, 2005]





the peak flow in some areas will be reduced by 20%
the limit watershed will be lowered to 120cm in average
the bed’s area of both rivers will be increased to 125km²
100km of brooks and affluents will have their ecosystem and environment restored
the retention areas will reach a storage capacity of 215 billion of m 3 .
d) Dyke relocalisation, Lent, Netherlands [Ecoflood, 2005]
A river widening project is in progress near the city of Nijmegen, Netherlands, at a point in
the River Waal that forms a bottleneck during periods of high water level. The winter bed of
the Waal River is narrow at Nijmegen. On the left bank is located the city centre and on the
right bank is a narrow flood plain. Behind the dike on the right bank is a relatively open rural
area, including the village of Lent. Relocating the dike at Lent would allow to reduce
considerably the risk of flooding and would conform to the objectives of the Dutch
government’s national policy on river management, “Room for River”. The effects of this
measure would be felt over dozens of kilometres.
According to Dirk Van Der Graaf, the Ministry’s project leader since 2002, “the project is
examining two alternatives”:


“the first alternative is to relocate the dike in the near future. This would result in a
major, permanent enlargement of the river”;
“the second alternative is to create a channel in the narrow flood plain and keep the
area enclosed by the dike in reserve”.
The projects for relocating the dike have caused strong emotions in Lent, because they
would involve the disappearance of some 50 houses. The final decision will be taken this
year.
e) Polders, Netherlands [Ecoflood, 2005]
In 2001, the expected flow during extreme storms was set at 16000 m3/s, but the directives
will be reviewed by 2015 and will contemplate developments for 18000 m3/s flows.
The runoff capacity of the river will be increased thanks to the combined use of several bed
enlargement measures, relocating some dikes or creating by-pass for example, as well as
cutting the river side areas in compartments.
The Ooij basin is a proposed emergency area. It’s a low lying polder with villages at one two
meters above the surroundings fields. It should provide a safe and controlled means of water
storage in order to avoid flooding in the downstream areas both sides of the Waal River.
However, because of high costs, limited benefits and risks, the government has not
implemented the plan.

OPTIMIZATION OF EXISTING WORKS
Use of hydropower plants as storage areas, Switzerland
[Jordan, 2005]
For the development of a flood prediction and management model in the upper Rhone river,
an hydrological/hydraulical modelling system for the optimization of existing hydropower
plants is in project.
Indeed, among the hundred hydropower plants located on this catchment area, only about
thirty can have a negative or positive influence on the flood flow from the Rhone. The
optimization of water storage in the dams, as well as the derivations management would
influence the peak flow rate en the Rhone River and some of its tributaries in order to
mitigate the damages during a flooding event.
Fig 3: Overview of the Rhone
River catchment area including
the major hydropower plants.
[Jordan, 2005]
The mean analysis criteria are the storage volume, the derivation capacity and the drained
areas. They allow a wide evaluation of the potential of a development for food protection,
taking into account flows resulting from snow melting.
This analyse allowed to underline the eight more effective installations a priori for the flood
rolling, as well as the more effective eight installations for their derivation potential. Il appears
for instance that the Grande Dixence dam owns more than 20% of the total capacity of all the
installations located in Valais (1203 million m3), whereas it concerns about 35% of the
drained areas of the region (1430 km²). So this installation will be considered with a specific
attention by flood protection projects.
o
SUMMARY TABLE OF THE LISTED ACTIONS
Belgium
Overflow areas
Storage Basins
Detention Basins
Diversion Channels
X
X
Dike relocalization
Sills in ditches
X
Netherlands
Germany
Czech Republic
Denmark
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
TOTAL
X
4
X
X
X
X
Ecological Interest
Existing Works Optimization
Switzerland United-States
5
3
X
2
2
X
2
1
TOTAL
4
4
2
2
1
2
2
2
This table quickly recapitulates natures of river and constructive works presented in this part.
It is significant to note that this enumeration is not exhaustive. The absence of cross in a cell
does not mean therefore the inexistence of such type of river works in the country
concerned. It just means that little information was collected during the research or that they
were not described in this study.
Moreover, the Netherlands, in accordance with their historical past in the fight against floods,
gather in their action the broadest range of topics.
The figures on the right-hand side can be indicative of the frequency of return of a topic given
in the projects of Dynamic Retention.
CONCLUSION
Flood Dynamic Retention is a recent concept, of which we only start to collect feedback of
implementation, at least in France.
It is difficult to find applications of this concept abroad, mainly owing to the fact that the
Dynamic Retention is a French approach to flood protection, and there is no exact literal
translation in other languages.
Moreover, little information is available about local initiatives, such as slopes, hedges or
farming practices. It may be due to the fact that the documents available in libraries or on the
Internet mainly deal with adjustments of big scale.
We saw that a lot of projects dealing with Dynamic Retention are being realized on the
Member States territory, thanks to the means put at the disposition of the governments by
organisations financed by the European Commission (JRC, EFAS). One of the principal
observations is that the Dynamic Retention applies more to watershed plains than to
catchment areas featured by big slopes and prone to very quick floods. This is illustrated by
the different examples of alluvial plains of big transboundary rivers mentioned previously.
What’s more, it is difficult to compare implemented projects in various countries owing to the
disparities in scale. Indeed, each realization is specific to a basin, even if it is part of a more
general plan. Thus, it is easy to understand that the installation projects of the Yangtze River,
in China, can’t be considered from the same perspective as those of small French basins.
Finally, a last notion too difficult to apprehend at the present time but that should not be
forgotten is that of the social acceptability of such projects. The realization of Flood
Expansion Zones or of overflow areas, with only a hydraulic function, an ecologic function or
an agricultural function, should be systematically accompanied by procedures of
compensation or of expropriation for the fields intended for overflowing. Compensation
systems can thus be set up, under the form of global insurance or step by step
compensation.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BERTHET L., BLARD S., GERBAUD S., 2004. Recensement des applications du
ralentissement des crues: Analyse des caractéristiques des conditions de mise en oeuvre
des opérations et synthèse. Rapport de TGE. Paris, Engref. 73p.
CEMAGREF, MEDD, 2004. Guide des aménagements associant l’épandage des crues dans
le lit majeur et leur écrêtement dans de petits ouvrages. Antony, Cemagref, 131p.
CIM (Commission Internationale de la Meuse), [mise à jour le 18.03.2005]. Inondations:
Deuxième phase Programme d’action Meuse. CIM-IMC-IMK, 4p. Disponible sur :
http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/pubs/51/2e%20Phase%20PAM_f.doc [consulté le 28/10/2005]
CIPR (Commission Internationale pour la Protection du Rhin), [mise à jour le
25.11.2005]. Conférence ministérielle sur le Rhin 2001. RHIN 2020, Programme pour le
développement durable du Rhin. Koblenz, CIPR, 27p. Disponible sur :
http://www.iksr.org/index.php?id=178 [consulté le 24/10/2005]
De BONVILLER A., LINO M., 2003. Ralentissement Dynamique des Crues, le cas du Bassin
de l’Oudon. -IN : Colloque Technique CFBR (Commission Française des Barrages et
Réservoirs) MEDD 2003 sur les Barrages et le Développement Durable en France. Paris. 18
novembre 2003. CFBR Paris, p 65-76.
DEGOUTTE G., Mai 2003. CGGREF/Cemagref. Hydraulique, dynamique et morphologie
fluviales appliquées au diagnostic, à l’aménagement et à la gestion des rivières. Montpellier.
Engref. 257p.
DEGOUTTE G., Mai 2005. CGGREF/Cemagref. Ralentissement Dynamique des Crues et
prévention des inondations. Aménagements associant l’épandage des crues dans le lit
majeur et leur écrêtement dans de petits ouvrages. Session Engref / IFORE.
EMERSON C., WELTY C., TRAVER R., 2005. Watershed-Scale Evaluation of a System of
Storm Water Detention Basins. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. p. 237-242.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2005. IRMA PROGRAMS. Disponible sur :
http://www.irma-programme.org/ [consulté le 27.10.2005]
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, [mise à jour le 21.11.2005]. EcoFlood, Towards Natural Flood
Reductions Strategies. Third International Symposium on Flood Defence, Newsletter May
2005.
http://levis.sggw.waw.pl/ecoflood/ [consulté le 28/10/2005]
FORSTER S., KNEIS D., GOCHT M., BRONSTERT A., 2005. Flood risk reduction by the
use of retentions areas at the Elbe River. Journal River Basin Management.
Vol. 6. Issue 1.
JORDAN F., 2005, Système de décision à la gestion des crues. –IN : Projet MINERVE, Lausane, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne; Laboratoire de Constructions
Hydrauliques. 2p.
JRC (Joint Research Center), 2004. Weather driven Natural Hazards, Elbe Case Study.
Disponible sur :
http://natural-hazards.jrc.it/activities_flood_elbecase.html [consulté le 15/10/2005]
MEDD (Ministère de l’Environnement et du Développement Durable), [mise à jour le
16/09/2005]. Le Ralentissement Dynamique. Disponible sur :
http://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=4206 [consulté le 29/09/2005]
MEDD, [mise à jour le 21/11/2004]. Le Ralentissement Dynamique des crues. Disponible
sur:
http://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/article.php3?id_article=9 [consulté le 29/09/2005]
NETHERLANDS WATER PARTNERSHIP, [mise à jour le 18.03.2005]. Dutch Expertise,
Water Management and Flood Protection. Delft, Netherlands Water Partnerships, 16p.
Disponible sur :
http://www.netherlands-embassy.org/files/pdf/DutchWaterExpertise_Nov05.pdf [consulté le
12/11/2005]
ROSIER B., 2005, Digues fusibles et Submersibles pour la protection contre les crues. –IN :
Projet DIFUSE, - Lausanne, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne ; Laboratoire de
Constructions Hydrauliques. 2p.
VNF (Voies Navigables de France), 2004. Réguler les crues du Rhin et restaurer la forêt
alluviale. Le Polder d’Erstein. Strasbourg. VNF. 15p.
WEBER JM., 2005. Secrétariat National IRMA. Préfecture de région Alsace. SGARE.
Strasbourg.