Red boards!!!!
- Thread starter rosssavage
- Start date
Chris_d
Well-Known Member
I suspect it was indeed....then they stopped dredging
Yes then we built towns all around it and the climate changed
boatone
Well-Known Member
Whether or not dredging is desirable the real issue remains - who should pay for it? As Chris-D says, it is debatable as to just how beneficial dredging would be. If it is purely for the maintenance of navigation then current government thinking is that the cost should be contributed by those who navigate.
The EA do undertake to maintain certain depths in the fairway which they define as, broadly speaking, the middle third of the river. However, they do not consider themselves to have any statutory duty to maintain depths bankside so it rests with the riparian owners to undertake and pay for the work or it will not happen.
The EA do undertake to maintain certain depths in the fairway which they define as, broadly speaking, the middle third of the river. However, they do not consider themselves to have any statutory duty to maintain depths bankside so it rests with the riparian owners to undertake and pay for the work or it will not happen.
Chris_d
Well-Known Member
Its popular in the media at the moment to say "dredging" is the answer, but it means different things to different people. On the river we need to get clever, shout for dredging if you want navigate, shout for flood relief channels and new weirs if you want flood control.
teddington_lock
Well-Known Member
Yes, indeed , when the headwater rises , we pull weir tackle in an attempt to lower it.
That's not how your previous post reads though.
It's not say 6A , yellow boards go out or anything like that. Our yellow boards are triggered by 2x1.5m gates and 2x2.0 metre gates being pulled. Reds then come when we have pulled 3x3.0m gates as well as the yellow board gates.
Please don't think I was splitting hairs , there is so so much duff information bandied about how the weirs work , what we do and when that sometimes it needs to be made clear for everyone.
Last edited:
oldgit
Well-Known Member
How much extra would boaters be prepared to pay to cover the cost. ?
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
That old chestnut. We do already thanks, why not ask the millions of homeowners who benefit from the giant section of silted up guttering we float on but can't use at the moment?
Or how about asking Thames Water? If they paid for 68 million tons of dredging annually, it would make room for the 68 million tons of raw sewage they dump in the Thames every year. Sewage their customers pay them to treat.
Or how about asking Thames Water? If they paid for 68 million tons of dredging annually, it would make room for the 68 million tons of raw sewage they dump in the Thames every year. Sewage their customers pay them to treat.
Last edited:
ianc1200
Well-Known Member
http://www.sloughobserver.co.uk/new...lough-arm-of-grand-union-canel-gets-underway/
At least there are some dredgers in the area, perhaps when they've finished the Slough arm the EA could persuade them to move to the Thames if they've got nothing else to do.
At least there are some dredgers in the area, perhaps when they've finished the Slough arm the EA could persuade them to move to the Thames if they've got nothing else to do.
oldgit
Well-Known Member
Why would millions of home owners want to pay for someone elses spare time hobby ?
No other river users would be troubled over much by lack of dredging such as anglers/rowers/canoers or walkers and cyclists.
Very very much doubt that any sewage is "dumped" into the river above Teddington that has not been treated.
Only in very unusual circumstances does raw sewage get into the freshwater Thames.
Any web search will detail the fines levied.
As usual any actual attempt to do something about the sewage going into the tidal Thames is being resisted by locals,look at all the objections about the new super sewer around London.
It all OK to build a new sewer to take away ones poo..........but please do not dig the access tunnel outside my mews flat.
Mind you nothing new, Bazelgette was held up for years by NIMBYS and Brunels GWR railway suffered in the same way.
Last edited:
boatone
Well-Known Member
Oh dear, as always so much confusion and a tendency to resort to emotional arguments which take us nowhere.
Over half the direct costs of running the non-tidal Thames are paid for by the public purse - which means the taxpayer - so all those homeowners you refer to are paying towards the upkeep of the river, albeit indirectly. That is, actually, a major part of the problem as government (who, apparently, we elect) have decided that, as a general principle, "those who play should pay". Navigation on the non-tidal is, today, recreational activity so government is cutting the GiA as it believes it should not be paying for that. We, as boaters, are trapped in an outdated system of registration charges which, by its very nature, gives the EA its most effective and manageable route to collecting more income. Please don't shout "UNFAIR" because, frankly, nobody gives a damn about "fair".
Dunno where you got the 68 million tons of sewage figure from but, even if true, that goes into the tidal Thames which, as far as management and funding goes might as well be a different river as it comes under the PLA. A more useful approach might be to consider the non-tidal a major source of Thames Water's raw material - water - and a simple £1 per annum contribution for each of their 9 million plus customers would solve the river's funding issues at a stroke - except that government would then want to reduce GiA still further which I believe they intend to do anyway.
As for your comment re "the giant section of silted up guttering we float on but can't use at the moment" please go wash your mouth out with PLA river water - that is no way to describe the non-tidal
Over half the direct costs of running the non-tidal Thames are paid for by the public purse - which means the taxpayer - so all those homeowners you refer to are paying towards the upkeep of the river, albeit indirectly. That is, actually, a major part of the problem as government (who, apparently, we elect) have decided that, as a general principle, "those who play should pay". Navigation on the non-tidal is, today, recreational activity so government is cutting the GiA as it believes it should not be paying for that. We, as boaters, are trapped in an outdated system of registration charges which, by its very nature, gives the EA its most effective and manageable route to collecting more income. Please don't shout "UNFAIR" because, frankly, nobody gives a damn about "fair".
Dunno where you got the 68 million tons of sewage figure from but, even if true, that goes into the tidal Thames which, as far as management and funding goes might as well be a different river as it comes under the PLA. A more useful approach might be to consider the non-tidal a major source of Thames Water's raw material - water - and a simple £1 per annum contribution for each of their 9 million plus customers would solve the river's funding issues at a stroke - except that government would then want to reduce GiA still further which I believe they intend to do anyway.
As for your comment re "the giant section of silted up guttering we float on but can't use at the moment" please go wash your mouth out with PLA river water - that is no way to describe the non-tidal
Last edited:
prof pat pending
Well-Known Member
oldgit
Well-Known Member
"As for your comment re "the giant section of silted up guttering we float on but can't use at the moment" please go wash your mouth out with PLA river water - that is no way to describe the non-tidal"
The Thames is probably one of the cleanest major watercourses in Europe if not the world.Both tidal and freshwater .
The numbers of returning salmon confirm this.The EA has undertaken many measures to undo the things installed in the past which have prevented migrating fish from getting into the river.
The money the EA have spent on fish passes and other improvements has been the subject of much partisan criticism recently usually from those with little interest in the long term health of the river.
The river may have been filthy 50 years ago but the slow return to health has been as a result of legislation,much of it frim the EU.
Are you listening Mr Fruitcup of UKIP.
The Thames is probably one of the cleanest major watercourses in Europe if not the world.Both tidal and freshwater .
The numbers of returning salmon confirm this.The EA has undertaken many measures to undo the things installed in the past which have prevented migrating fish from getting into the river.
The money the EA have spent on fish passes and other improvements has been the subject of much partisan criticism recently usually from those with little interest in the long term health of the river.
The river may have been filthy 50 years ago but the slow return to health has been as a result of legislation,much of it frim the EU.
Are you listening Mr Fruitcup of UKIP.
Last edited:
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
It's not just the sewage plants, there are thousands of properties with toilets plumbed into the wrong drain and it goes in the Thames on the non tidal side. Thames Water can only estimate the damage done, while adding to it. But all means, have a refreshing glassful on me.
boatone
Well-Known Member
Any evidence to support this claim, please ?
Last edited:
oldgit
Well-Known Member
The best i can come up with was the EA were investigating dozen or so houses that had not been correctly connected to sewer system but had been connected to rainwater pipes..
The local council and EA were aware and were taking action to get the builder responsible for the cock up/delibrate action to fix things at his cost.
Not sure if any prosecution was taking place.Vague recollection it was mentioned of TV program about Thames flooding.When the locals chased of the EA chaps who had come to help .
The local council and EA were aware and were taking action to get the builder responsible for the cock up/delibrate action to fix things at his cost.
Not sure if any prosecution was taking place.Vague recollection it was mentioned of TV program about Thames flooding.When the locals chased of the EA chaps who had come to help .
Last edited:
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
http://www.lanesfordrains.co.uk/advice/wastewater-connections/
The page I found refers to Wales but says it's countrywide. It's not just sewage going in the storm drains but storm water connected to the sewers, the result on the river is the same. My last 2 houses had storm water connected to the sewer system and they were old, the problem is historic and comes from houses built pre 1920 and a lot of newer ones either deliberately or accidentally.
The rowers seem well informed about the cleanliness of the river
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/anatolebeams/rats/
quote: "What is known, is that the gradual return of Salmon for annual spawning in the river has been halted. Since 1995 very few Salmon have been counted in the upper reaches of the river, indicating a drastic drop in the trend that had been improving since the 1970's."
Marlow discharges treated effluent into the Thames as a normal part of its operation, even treated it's filthy stuff and you wouldn't want to swim near it. The only claims I've found denying a risk to the river and public health have been from the EA, who have their own definition of 'clean' and a 3 tier licence scheme for corporate polluters.
http://www.wte-ltd.co.uk/discharging_sewage_effluent.html
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/anatolebeams/rats/images/Updated Briefing-Little Marlow STW-8may13.pdf
As an essential part of the sewage network and the infrastructure of the south east, the Thames IS a working river and non tidal leisure users should not be looked upon as the financial solution to its problems. Thames Water receives millions is subsidys and paid £92m in dividends to its shareholders according to its last annual report.
Last edited:
No Regrets
Well-Known Member
The Thames is generally clean for Fish, but the Rats piss all over the banks, and that washes into the river when it rains, and can give Humans the dreaded Weils...
On occasion, the drains overflow, and you'll see human effluent (No, not the long stay mooring sort) meandering downstream.
A sound river unless it's been raining a lot!!
On occasion, the drains overflow, and you'll see human effluent (No, not the long stay mooring sort) meandering downstream.
A sound river unless it's been raining a lot!!
teddington_lock
Well-Known Member
Let's not forget , if you want it as clean as it seems that you do , to remove all those nasty fibreglass tubs pumping diesel residue etc into the water ...
Actionmat
Well-Known Member
I'm not expecting Evian, just recognition that it really is a working river and not just for the benefit of us fibreglass tub skippers. Thames Water gets more use out of it than we do, so perhaps the EA could ask them? They're not concerned about red boards as long as they can fill it with effluent, treated or otherwise.
David Walliams was taken ill on the upper reaches and it wasn't from diesel:
David, who became ill after swallowing the river water which harbours a cocktail of bacteria such as e-coli, salmonella and hepatitis, said: "This is one of the darkest times on the swim so far...which is getting in feeling incredibly sick
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebri...lliams-speaks-of-darkest-186395#ixzz30OWOP0jB
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
David Walliams was taken ill on the upper reaches and it wasn't from diesel:
David, who became ill after swallowing the river water which harbours a cocktail of bacteria such as e-coli, salmonella and hepatitis, said: "This is one of the darkest times on the swim so far...which is getting in feeling incredibly sick
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebri...lliams-speaks-of-darkest-186395#ixzz30OWOP0jB
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Last edited:
No Regrets
Well-Known Member
Walliams was swimming after floods, so that figures...
