The recent flooding.A point of view.

[Alan ashore]

EA are active in Twitter, frequently tweeting clips about specific field work. @EnvAgency and e.g. Ops director @DavidJordanEA. It may be worth tweeting a link to this thread @them. ?

 

[TT_WO]

In the two threads, has anybody mentioned dredging? (I think I've read most of the posts). In previous floods over the years, the lack of dredging & the resultant assumed change in profile of the river has been suggested a further contributory factor in the extent of the floods. Has this been discounted as issue now?

It was not discounted by the 'independent' review in 2004, the following statement implies that dredging should be considered alongside the other very expensive options.

"Dredging of the River Thames must theoretically make a difference. The question is how much, and
can the large amounts of money involved be justified from the public purse. At present I do not
believe the Environment Agency has the information to answer these questions."

 

[Chris_d]

How can dredging help if the same level is maintained? perhaps a small increase in flow but that would only help flood areas downstream like Ham Island sooner!
As B1's photo shows a couple of feet in the little ditch ain't going to help is it... if dredging gives you 1% it ain't much help if you have 100% more water.

 

[oldgit]

One picture is worth at housand posts.QED.
Doubt even if all the "keypushers" on this forum were given a shovel and set of wellies,the flood level would be single a bucketful less in the surrounding dwellings.

 

[TT_WO]

I think the benefits of the continuous dredging program since 1948 have now virtually been undone since capitol dredging was stopped when the EA took over in 1996.

I think B1's rainfall increase over the last 30 years indicate that stopping the dredging program was a mistake but the JR does afford protection to Maidenhead,Eton and Windsor and we need to get the EA solution to further downriver flooding up and running as quickly as possible these 3 further alleviation channels do perhaps now provide the the quickest and most cost effective method of protection for 15,000 businesses and properties down stream to Teddington.

 

[oldgit]

I think the benefits of the continuous dredging program since 1948 have now virtually been undone since capitol dredging was stopped when the EA took over in 1996.

I think B1's rainfall increase over the last 30 years indicate that stopping the dredging program was a mistake but the JR does afford protection to Maidenhead,Eaton and Windsor and we need to get the EA solution to further downriver flooding up and running as quickly as possible these 3 further alleviation channels do perhaps now provide the the quickest and most cost effective method of protection for 15,000 businesses and properties down stream to Teddington.

Any spending required should be borne by the whole community.We do not single out an area when it needs a new road or hospital.
Should be paid for out of general taxation.
Locally all our dredging equipment was disposed off after laying unused for several years after privatisation.
Seem to remember we were relying on an adjacent waterway hiring us their dredger

 

[boatone]

I am aware of flood risks. I am concerned about flooding on the Thames. I am involved in the level of licence fees.

Not sure why, but I felt I needed to say that!

 

[TT_WO]

Any spending required should be borne by the whole community.We do not single out an area when it needs a new road or hospital.
Should be paid for out of general taxation.
Locally all our dredging equipment was disposed off after laying unused for several years after privatisation.
Seem to remember we were relying on an adjacent waterway hiring us their dredger

Have you left out some 'nots'?

 

[apollo]

I am sure that lack of dredging will have had some effect but how can we know to what extent? Common sense suggests that if solid matter is removed from the river there will be more room for the water and it may move differently but I seriously doubt that even the most extensive dredging would be capable of making a major difference to the overall capacity of the river itself to absorb all the water at times of extreme flooding.

Then why did they build the jubilee river? in essence its a trickle as you say but someone must have believed it was worth a go to spend all that money on?
The backwaters around maidenhead behind the islands are totally silted up, I know I moored there for 20years
All the jubilee river is doing is replacing the lost volume in the main river.
What it "IS" is politics...the JR was paid for by the councils after a couple of scary winters flooding, the dredging would have to be paid by EA.
However all this conjecture is still pointless, nobody is listening - they are too busy playing with model boats.

 

[CJL]

Disposal costs of dredging -

Landfill tax £65/tonne
Landfill gate fee £20/tonne approx

Landfill Directive bans liquids and sludges being accepted (Europe wide directive) so pretreatment of sludges (aka dredgings) now required for all loads.

So £65+£20=£85/tonne PLUS pre-treatment costs plus transports cost £2-3/mile.

This assumes the level of pollution caused by boaters and discharges into the river is not too high and does not require still further treatment to reduce contamination levels - again this is another cost.

Nobody will pay extra licence fees or property taxation so no further dredging. You can't have it all your own way.

CJL

 

[david_bagshaw]

Hey, I want an EA job if I get to place with radio controlled boats!

Any idea what they were actually doing?

W.

Take a look on this blog, explains in detail the use of remote boats etc

http://davethroupea.wordpress.com/

 

[chief1]

I am sure that lack of dredging will have had some effect but how can we know to what extent? Common sense suggests that if solid matter is removed from the river there will be more room for the water and it may move differently but I seriously doubt that even the most extensive dredging would be capable of making a major difference to the overall capacity of the river itself to absorb all the water at times of extreme flooding.
The EA supplied me with this pic a couple of years ago, Don't know where or when it was taken - up Oxford way I think - but it does demonstrate the problem quite clearly.

Boat Ones picture is fundamentally wrong isn't it? We are not trying to get all that into there, we are trying to get all that THROUGH there, there in this case being the choke point which water cannot get through quickly enough to prevent flooding upstream. If we could see downstream in the picture and see where the choke point is, then attention could be directed at that to allow water to drain away more quickly. Obviously this has to be done in a controlled way to ensure that problems are not caused downstream (a la JR) but that is what all the EA wallahs are paid for isn't it. As it is, the flood plain/meadows are doing their job and allowing the water to dissipate in a controlled way, albeit, it seems to be taking an awful long time.

I haven't had a chance to look this time round, but a few years ago during a flood event it was obvious that the Dorchester bypass was acting as a dam with the two available channels not being sufficient to carry all the water trying to get through, so an obvious place for a bit of dredging or other work to increase the throughput which would alleviate flooding upstream. I do though find it interesting that the Thame at Dorchester, below the bypass, dropped 10 cms in the 24 hours (I think) to 4.30 this morning, whilst the Thame at Stadhampton, above it, dropped just 4 cms.

On another thread Teddington Lock said someone was trying to put words into his mouth re flood control, which I didn't quite understand, but once all the weir gates on the Thames are open, there isn't a lot more control that can be applied is there, or am I missing something?

And as far as the levys on dumping the waste, isn't this just recycling the cash round the merry go round? More income gives them more to spend, and lots of lovely jobs processing the stuff!!

 

[Flynnbarr]

Then why did they build the jubilee river? in essence its a trickle as you say but someone must have believed it was worth a go to spend all that money on?
The backwaters around maidenhead behind the islands are totally silted up, I know I moored there for 20years
All the jubilee river is doing is replacing the lost volume in the main river.
What it "IS" is politics...the JR was paid for by the councils after a couple of scary winters flooding, the dredging would have to be paid by EA.
However all this conjecture is still pointless, nobody is listening - they are too busy playing with model boats.

Don't be silly,we have no silting in the maidenhead backwaters,no trees down,just like we have no problem with liveaboards,sewage or boats moored below boulters lock 24/7/365.
The EA do a wonderful job,don't you know their money pot keeps getting smaller,poor lambs,the dredging stopped before anyone had heard of financial crisis,ahh but that was management thinking outside the box

 

[apollo]

Ha ha ha

 

[oldgit]

Boat Ones picture is fundamentally wrong isn't it? .

Weather bods have been predicating our climate will get more extreme for some time.
Simply not possible to prevent future flooding of this nature and future deluges could be worse.







[

 

[chief1]

Weather bods have been predicating our climate will get more extreme for some time.
Simply not possible to prevent future flooding of this nature and future deluges could be worse.[

Precisely!

So do we do nothing, and have an EA which just says 'Sorry, you are going to be flooded tomorrow, or the next day'

Or do we try to do something, and have an EA which gets out on the ground, and not just to play with their boats or take photographs!!

 

[Flynnbarr]

Weather bods have been predicating our climate will get more extreme for some time.
Simply not possible to prevent future flooding of this nature and future deluges could be worse.


Dig a ditch that comes out just short of Westminster,it'll get sorted PDQ.
They always find money for vanity projects or to save their own necks.








[

 

[oldgit]

Precisely!

So do we do nothing, and have an EA which just says 'Sorry, you are going to be flooded tomorrow, or the next day'

Or do we try to do something, and have an EA which gets out on the ground, and not just to play with their boats or take photographs!!

You are going to need more cash to carry out this work.
The EA is losing about 500K-1M from its budget this year alone.
A levy on all riverside dwellers and a raising of boat licence fees would be a good indication of how the people who will benefit most from the work feel about funding it.

 

[534l4rk]

I posted in another thread that I was trying to get the Thames valley rainfall figures for this year and those for 2003. I have now compared the rainfall for December 2002 and the first 2 weeks of January 2003 with that of December 2013 and the first 2 weeks of January 2014. The data used was from monitor stations in Oxford and Reading. It is interesting that the December rainfalls for both years were very similar. However, the rainfalls for the first 2 weeks of this year were over 3 times those of 2003. Irrespective of the benefits or otherwise of the Jubilee river the levels reached at Wraysbury, Penton Hook and Shepperton were slightly less than in 2003. In view of the greater rainfall it is my opinion that the E.A. lock keepers/weir controllers have managed the levels below the Jubilee well.

 

[Gavi]

You are going to need more cash to carry out this work.
The EA is losing about 500K-1M from its budget this year alone.
A levy on all riverside dwellers and a raising of boat licence fees would be a good indication of how the people who will benefit most from the work feel about funding it.

I pay them £1k per year already....