Off Topic Floods

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
balkan tiger said:
Ah cleaning drains that's a memory from the past. It used to be a regular sight, the tanker thing going round hoovering all the rubbish out of the drains not seen one for years.

It seems (according to the farming community) that a change in policy has meant that flood plains (flooding farm land) rather than clearing waterways is the thing to do. We had the NRA National Rivers Authority who cleaned out rivers, ditches and drains to keep the water flowing, now we have the EA environment agency who don't.
Click to expand...

That’s a point. Not seen one either. A load of trees down our road and it used to be a fairly regular sight.
Went by Burton Agnes pond the other day and have never seen the water level so low which seemed strange as fields along the road were full of water.
 
balkan tiger said:
Ah cleaning drains that's a memory from the past. It used to be a regular sight, the tanker thing going round hoovering all the rubbish out of the drains not seen one for years.

It seems (according to the farming community) that a change in policy has meant that flood plains (flooding farm land) rather than clearing waterways is the thing to do. We had the NRA National Rivers Authority who cleaned out rivers, ditches and drains to keep the water flowing, now we have the EA environment agency who don't.
Click to expand...

We live opposite a park and the football/cricket club and water use to flow off there and flood the road, so they started regularly doing the street drains and we've not had an issue recently. The ditches round the fields are regular cleaned out as well, the farmers do their own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kempton
balkan tiger said:
Ah cleaning drains that's a memory from the past. It used to be a regular sight, the tanker thing going round hoovering all the rubbish out of the drains not seen one for years.

It seems (according to the farming community) that a change in policy has meant that flood plains (flooding farm land) rather than clearing waterways is the thing to do. We had the NRA National Rivers Authority who cleaned out rivers, ditches and drains to keep the water flowing, now we have the EA environment agency who don't.
Click to expand...
It's very complicated I think. Dredging rivers simply puts more water down them more quickly so when the river reaches a pinch point, usually in urban areas, they overflow. It's just moving the problem downstream. Keeping water in the ground higher up is a better way of preventing flooding imo. I've read somewhere that the ground can store upto 30 times more water than a river can safely take away. Problem now though is that in the past farmers were subsidised to clear land upstream to graze cattle or grow crop. This means that soil gets compacted with animals/tractors/ploughs etc and so becomes less able to absorb water. Planting trees renders land much more able to absorb water but there is no assistance to farmers to revert land to forestry, they'd have to pay for the trees themselves, which of couse they won't.
I think people know how to manage flooding in the best way but short term interests and long term ones rarely coincide, usually for political reasons, so it'll likely never get done.

Now as for the impact of climate change on all this...:emoticon-0105-wink:
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
Plum said:
It's very complicated I think. Dredging rivers simply puts more water down them more quickly so when the river reaches a pinch point, usually in urban areas, they overflow. It's just moving the problem downstream. Keeping water in the ground higher up is a better way of preventing flooding imo. I've read somewhere that the ground can store upto 30 times more water than a river can safely take away. Problem now though is that in the past farmers were subsidised to clear land upstream to graze cattle or grow crop. This means that soil gets compacted with animals/tractors/ploughs etc and so becomes less able to absorb water. Planting trees renders land much more able to absorb water but there is no assistance to farmers to revert land to forestry, they'd have to pay for the trees themselves, which of couse they won't.
I think people know how to manage flooding in the best way but short term interests and long term ones rarely coincide, usually for political reasons, so it'll likely never get done.

Now as for the impact of climate change on all this...:emoticon-0105-wink:
Click to expand...

Other places suffer worse from flooding and have done since time immemorial. Not everything is down to climate change. Climate has always changed in fact.
 
Barchullona said:
Other places suffer worse from flooding and have done since time immemorial. Not everything is down to climate change. Climate has always changed in fact.
Click to expand...

And other places that you would think have a problem don't suffer from flooding, maybe they manage the water better.

The river Hull used to be used by boats so much so that the new bridge near Kingswood had to be made so it could open. At that time you could see the water in the river, now it's just over grown with weeds. Barmy drain is the same.

I heard that after the 2007 floods some experts from Holland visited the city, almost laughed when they saw the mud in the river Hull behind the museums, there's your problem right there they said, why don't you clean it? The answer was if we clean away the mud the walls will collapse.
 
balkan tiger said:
And other places that you would think have a problem don't suffer from flooding, maybe they manage the water better.

The river Hull used to be used by boats so much so that the new bridge near Kingswood had to be made so it could open. At that time you could see the water in the river, now it's just over grown with weeds. Barmy drain is the same.

I heard that after the 2007 floods some experts from Holland visited the city, almost laughed when they saw the mud in the river Hull behind the museums, there's your problem right there they said, why don't you clean it? The answer was if we clean away the mud the walls will collapse.
Click to expand...

Holland knows how to manage these things better than just about anywhere,

Just as an aside, Remembrance Sunday reminded me, I was hitchhiking with a mate in 1972 and we ended up in the middle of nowhere. There was an immaculately kept grave there and some school kids were tidying it up. Got talking to someone in a cafe and mentioned it. Apparently each school was given a grave or graveyard with the war dead in to look after and it was a matter of pride to keep them immaculate. This particular one was a lone soldier who had prevented the Germans detonating a charge in a dyke which would have caused major flooding. Made me feel humble then, and still does, to see the greater respect shown by them to our soldiers than by some in our own country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edelman
balkan tiger said:
I heard that after the 2007 floods some experts from Holland visited the city, almost laughed when they saw the mud in the river Hull behind the museums, there's your problem right there they said, why don't you clean it? The answer was if we clean away the mud the walls will collapse.
Click to expand...

It's not true, the reality is that it's simply not practical. The Council looked at dredging just from the mouth of the river and through the city centre part, it was going to cost £400k and they were told that it was completely pointless, as it would immediately start silting up again. To stop it silting-up, it needs to be heavily used, as it was in the past, but that's obviously not going to happen (the state of the walls is fairly irrelevant, they're currently spending £42m installing new ones).

The other way to deal with it, is the new lagoon proposal, but that's fairly pie-in-the sky as things stand.
 
Plum said:
It's very complicated I think. Dredging rivers simply puts more water down them more quickly so when the river reaches a pinch point, usually in urban areas, they overflow. It's just moving the problem downstream. Keeping water in the ground higher up is a better way of preventing flooding imo. I've read somewhere that the ground can store upto 30 times more water than a river can safely take away. Problem now though is that in the past farmers were subsidised to clear land upstream to graze cattle or grow crop. This means that soil gets compacted with animals/tractors/ploughs etc and so becomes less able to absorb water. Planting trees renders land much more able to absorb water but there is no assistance to farmers to revert land to forestry, they'd have to pay for the trees themselves, which of couse they won't.
I think people know how to manage flooding in the best way but short term interests and long term ones rarely coincide, usually for political reasons, so it'll likely never get done.

Now as for the impact of climate change on all this...:emoticon-0105-wink:
Click to expand...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...-plants-350-million-trees-intl-hnk/index.html

One of the poorest countries can manage massive tree planting !
Where theres a will !
 
The Avenues are lined with lovely big trees. Trees are great when there's been a lot of rain, because they drink a huge amount of water.

But then in the autumn, they shed their leaves and the leaves fill the gullies and the drains.
 
originallambrettaman said:
It's not true, the reality is that it's simply not practical. The Council looked at dredging just from the mouth of the river and through the city centre part, it was going to cost £400k and they were told that it was completely pointless, as it would immediately start silting up again. To stop it silting-up, it needs to be heavily used, as it was in the past, but that's obviously not going to happen (the state of the walls is fairly irrelevant, they're currently spending £42m installing new ones).

The other way to deal with it, is the new lagoon proposal, but that's fairly pie-in-the sky as things stand.
Click to expand...

The lagoon would create other issues elsewhere, including silting. Currently, the silt dredged is used to top up areas upstream to protect wildlife.
 
Kempton said:
The Avenues are lined lovely trees. Trees are great when there's been a lot of rain, because they drink a huge amount of water.

But then in the autumn, they shed their leaves and the leaves fill the gullies and the drains.
Click to expand...
True !
I remember as a kid growing up in Bransholme, regular clearing of the drains .
I haven't seen any where I live for a long long time
 
Plans to upgrade flood defences at Hull’s Victoria Pier have been given the go-ahead.

The Victoria Pier Frontages flood defence plans include higher flood walls constructed along a section of the Humber frontage.

The new walls will also feature glazed sections to allow views of the Humber Estuary and a raised promenade allowing views over the wall.

New steel sheet piles will be installed about 3m in front of the existing piles.

The plans have now been approved by Hull City Council’s planning following referral to the Secretary of State for Local Government, Robert Jenrick.

It is part of a £42m Humber: Hull Frontage flood defence scheme, led by the Environment Agency along with Natural England, which will improve tidal flood defences at eight locations along the Humber estuary foreshore.

The works will reduce the risk of flooding from the Humber Estuary to 113,000 properties and are due to be completed by December 2020.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back