A solution to flooding...

[Chris Plumb]

Interesting and well argued piece in yesterday's Grauniad...

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/flooding-public-spending-britain-europe-policies-homes

 

C.

[Sportsman]

It certainly seems make a lot of sense.

[wotnobivvy]

It's common sense and well known, so what prevents it ??

[Steve Walker]

"To listen to the dismal debates of the past fortnight, you could be forgiven for believing that rivers arise in the plains"

 

Good old George, I wonder which mountains he thinks the Thames rises in?

[chesters1]

Back handers are given for permission to build on flood plains whats the hard part to see .

Theres even a clue in "flood plain" ,our ancestors took great care to build on high ground strange its forgotten.

Even when its known an area floods bucks bend wills to allow building as we see locally at a certain roundabout ,first bit of rain and those shiny new houses get their feet wet as the land has for hundreds of years

There are no floods only houses in the wrong place

Ps digging ponds does not stop flooding ,once a pond is full it holds less water than the dirt that was in it draining into the water table

Edited January 14, 2014 by chesters1

[Steve Burke]

Many thanks indeed for posting this Chris. I've bookmarked it and will pass it on to others.

 

As an aside Paterson should resign or be sacked!

[barry luxton]

ohh, what's the betting that the south chalk aquifers are full to over flowing.

 

Does the trust still support the campaign that everyone has to go on a water meter btw and everyone needs educating on using water wisely?

 

 

Trees drink an enormous amount of water, has that been taken into consideration, nope.

[gozzer]

Thanks for posting Chris.

 

The sad thing is, it's something that's been suggested for years. I can remember an old angler telling me the same thing when I was a kid, back in the 60s. Deforestation along with ploughing the peat etc, on hillsides guarantees more water heading downstream. What was the answer back then? Straighten the rivers, and make the banking into death traps with a slope of 45 degrees. It seems that those with the power haven't learned anything from the past, or is there less money to be made doing it the right way?

 

John.

[grayson]

An excellent piece; also a shorter piece in the Sunday Times by Charles Clover was very sensible, and in contrast to the hysteria which most of the redtops have indulged in about flooding . One oft repeated myth is that all main rivers were regularly dredged in some lost golden past. Nonsense - in the area where I live ( Yorkshire) the only rivers ever dredged were navigable rivers; a very small part of the total length of watercourses here . But Internal drainage boards have been responsible for some utterly appalling work on small watercourses, including a favourite trout stream of mine which was destroyed in 96. Banks planed, bed scooped out, trees pulled out and wildlife habitat lost for a decade or more - it's just coming back now. All the work did was to accelerate the flow to nearest pinch point - local market town. I shudder when I read of farmers being given power to do this sort of work again without any consent. Some farmers are environmentally sensitive - but in my experience they are in the minority. Insecticide sprayed up to stream edges ? Oh yes. Empty weedkiller containers dumped willy nilly; black plastic everywhere.

[chesters1]

You would be very surprised how your streams have changed from the past ,most going anywhere near even hamlets were heavily managed in the past and laws forced landowners to maintain them and ditches with severe consequences if they didnt .

Ofcourse fast running streams were probably exempt if they didnt have any function for transport but most had mills etc

Not talking about last century or even the one before but from at least the bronze age when water was the highways.

 

The river wey here is a fine example classed for some strange reason as unavigable but only a 1000 years ago barges used it ,the river (not much more than a stream here now) was at least 4 feet deeper and a lot wider ,compared to the past our "natural" rivers and streams are nothing of tbe sort

So uless your streams run vertical in the past tberes a huge chance they are not as natural as you think

 

If you look at a place called waverley abbey theres a great number of streams in the area most are long silted up but 90% are man made by the friars ,this ofcourse ceased when henry the 8th got annoyed ,infact most of the lakes around here are from the time as well ,just because theres no obvious reasons nor people living in an area now does not mean there was no-one there in the past

Our ancestors were not idiots as some think the land management we see today is nothing compared to the past ,as for flooding all that went on floodplains was cows who dont mind getting their feet wet and strangely waverly abbey that got flooded many times but god works etc.....

 

I can recommend a series with paul heiny? in a canoe ,he discovered some very strange things in what are now silted streams ,some even in living memory but now neglected

 

I did read somewhere a halfwhit suggesting when oil has gone it would be easy to go back to steam ,unfortunately despite it being plausible its highly unlikely as all the little ponds evey couple of miles along roads that first let cattle drink as they were herded around the country then steam wagons (all maintained by landowners) have long gone due to the missmanagement of the land today

 

The track to the pond was in the past the main route to the next village ,its now a quagmire but to this day you can see the banks and ditches that ran along its sides ,they were there for a reason generally for water management ,now they dont do their job and i get muddy boots

Edited January 15, 2014 by chesters1