the marooned village where Prince Charles went the other day to boost morale (erm, what?) is about 10 miles from where I grew up. my folks still live there but they're fine apparently...
Yep. Similar story here in Surrey. Our house is nominally 800 yards from the Thames. Currently nearer 700 yards and getting closer all the time. Might be able to have a mooring set up in the back garden soon if I'm lucky. I always fancied a riverside place... :)
Yep. Similar story here in Surrey. Our house is nominally 800 yards from the Thames. Currently nearer 700 yards and getting closer all the time. Might be able to have a mooring set up in the back garden soon if I'm lucky. I always fancied a riverside place... :)
In South Yorkshire, the weather has been remarkably..... odd. Normally between December and March (still to come, I know) it's not uncommon to be scraping ice of the car first thing in t'morning. To date, had to do that twice. Very unusual. We've had some below average rainfall.
I can only sympathise with all those that has been greatly affected in the South/Southwest. Doesn't seem to be an end in sight to the atrocious weather. Hope things improve soon. My brother lives in Devon and last I heard, he has so far been unaffected by floods.
new pad is close to a few little rivers and according to the surveys was a moderate risk of flooding....but thankfully sweet fa so far and the rivers are looking tame enough that I'm not too concerned
Funny thing though is them people down in Devon want the environment Secretary to quit. Initially the BBC reported the residents were furious that he took so long to visit them, and that even the prime-minister had managed to get there first. I thought well yes I feel bad for you and that, but what is the environment secretary supposed to do, a f*cking dance to stop the rain coming.
Later on the BBC changed their story saying, the residents were furious because wanted provisions to prevent flooding. Much better reporting.
Interestingly that's probably exactly what was expected.
If you remember the last two major droughts we have had the gov of the time appointed a minister of droughts. In both cases it had started rining within a few days of the appointment and didn't stop until the reservoirs were full again. So obviously putting the right person in charge does make a difference :)
This sort of weather is just par for the course where I live. We're used to the horizontal rain beginning some time in October and not easing off until late April...
We've also not had one single frost this year. While we don't get many (perhaps a couple of dozen slightly frosty days per winter) it's unusual for us to still not have had a frost by almost mid-Feb.
Funny thing though is them people down in Devon want the environment Secretary to quit. Initially the BBC reported the residents were furious that he took so long to visit them, and that even the prime-minister had managed to get there first. I thought well yes I feel bad for you and that, but what is the environment secretary supposed to do, a f*cking dance to stop the rain coming.
Eric Pickles? Well, you could stuff him in a sack and use him to block up at least one doorway.
I mean to 'apologise', then blame the agency whose budget he's slashed and is working flat out to help, whilst claiming it's proof why ministers should ignore the advice of their experts? Surely even Cameron can see the fat **** is a liability to the party after that, never mind the whole country?
Ah, no, he's communities. It's Paterson and his goalpost-moving-badgers who's environment, but he's in hospital at the moment. I say let them fight it out. Nice and public, no-holds-barred.
Eric Pickles? Well, you could stuff him in a sack and use him to block up at least one doorway.
I mean to 'apologise', then blame the agency whose budget he's slashed and is working flat out to help, whilst claiming it's proof why ministers should ignore the advice of their experts? Surely even Cameron can see the fat **** is a liability to the party after that, never mind the whole country?
Ah, no, he's communities. It's Paterson and his goalpost-moving-badgers who's environment, but he's in hospital at the moment. I say let them fight it out. Nice and public, no-holds-barred.
In fairness - the guy in charge of the Environment Agency just said ( on the radio ) that NONE of the money that was cut from their budget would have been used to dredge rivers as they beleive this is not the best way to prevent flooding.
What I find intersting is that when you see arial shots of the flooding, most railway lines are still above the flooding yet many of the surrounding houses aren't - so i'd be looking at how planning approval for those houses was granted and why wasn't it a requirment to raise those houses to the sam level as the railway.
Course, that doesn't help the poor b*****s who are in need of some urgent assistance. - Not the UK's finest hour i'm afraid.
It's about cost vs. risk, and dredging is very expensive. It also means at other times rivers can run dangerously low and the banks fall in. But the govenment cut the budget and capped what could be spent in any area, making it impossible to do any dredging anywhere. So for Pickles to criticise the agency for not doing it is the height of hypocrisy.
But the Envoronment Agency are adamant that dredging will not solve the issue and they wouldn't do it if they'd had the money.
I'd be interested at this point in knowing just how deep rivers would have to be dredged to ensure that the current water flooding would be avoided - my guess is they couldnt be dredged deep enough.
The facts however are that the somserset levels are lower than the surounding countryside and water will always run to the lowest point. And the surrounding area can only absorb so much water before it becomes waterlogged.
With most of the levels being under water for a few weeks now how will this damage the earth living beasties?.
For example will the earthworms have drowned?
I know it sounds silly but they do a massive job in clearing debris from the surface and aerating the soil which means if there are no worms the quality of the farming land could be damaged for decades after the water recedes.
This sort of weather is just par for the course where I live.
lots of flooding for years in Ireland also, well the west coast for many years. I guess there is the thing where there is less land/earth to soak up the water , as opposed to london where loads of grass gardens are now cemented over to avoid paying for parking permits
it's funny how now it's hitting where all the toff's are living FAR more now by the thames (kingston / henley etc) .. they are taking more of an interest. real vote winner, on something that's been neglected by both of the 2 major parties for years.
With most of the levels being under water for a few weeks now how will this damage the earth living beasties?.
For example will the earthworms have drowned?
I know it sounds silly but they do a massive job in clearing debris from the surface and aerating the soil which means if there are no worms the quality of the farming land could be damaged for decades after the water recedes.
Yes the worms will drown. they come to the surface when the soil is water logged so they can breathe.
It's going to cause major problems for them farmers. Maybe they'd be better off leaving the water and growing rice this year.
Yes the worms will drown. they come to the surface when the soil is water logged so they can breathe.
It's going to cause major problems for them farmers. Maybe they'd be better off leaving the water and growing rice this year.
They should build a 30 foot high wall around somerset to stop it all draining away until july when the south of England is dry as a Jacobs cracker ;-)
"Last year, after the 2012 floods, we recognised the local view that taking silt out of the two main rivers would help to carry water away faster after a flood.
The Environment Agency put ?400,000 on the table to help with that work ? the maximum amount the Treasury rules allowed us to do. The additional funds from other sources that would be needed didn't come in."
it's funny how now it's hitting where all the toff's are living FAR more now by the thames (kingston / henley etc) .. they are taking more of an interest.
:lol: I don't think I've ever been called a toff before. I guess compared to some people, everyone's a toff.
Read this as well. You probably thought it was only third-world countries where uncontrolled and inadvisable logging operations were stripping landscapes of trees, ruining the soil and leading to floods and mudslides.
Turns out the EU heavily subsidise farmers to keep animals on hillsides against the preferences of the farmers, but then insist the land is stripped of trees. And of those that would like to replant, recently the government cut all its grants for doing just that.
And a quote from one of the research papers referenced: "...median soil infiltration rates were 67 times greater in plots planted with trees compared to grazed pasture." That means the land under trees takes up water 67 times faster than animal-trampled grass.
Still, now all that farmland is underwater it's probably the responsibility of the fisheries policy; I wonder if they make any more sense..? (Surprisingly, yes, after a fashion.)
We could re-introduce beavers. They hold water back in upland areas, creating ponds and improving soil irrigation, they'd give the press no end of innuendos, and if they really took off, it would give Owen Paterson and his toff farming chums something else to shoot at.
Comments
Our thoughts are with you
I can only sympathise with all those that has been greatly affected in the South/Southwest. Doesn't seem to be an end in sight to the atrocious weather. Hope things improve soon. My brother lives in Devon and last I heard, he has so far been unaffected by floods.
We've had quite a few landslides here, some big chunks off cliff fell off, and Hanover points thimble got washed away.
Tesco's in Oxford are having a sail.
Funny thing though is them people down in Devon want the environment Secretary to quit. Initially the BBC reported the residents were furious that he took so long to visit them, and that even the prime-minister had managed to get there first. I thought well yes I feel bad for you and that, but what is the environment secretary supposed to do, a f*cking dance to stop the rain coming.
Later on the BBC changed their story saying, the residents were furious because wanted provisions to prevent flooding. Much better reporting.
Interestingly that's probably exactly what was expected.
If you remember the last two major droughts we have had the gov of the time appointed a minister of droughts. In both cases it had started rining within a few days of the appointment and didn't stop until the reservoirs were full again. So obviously putting the right person in charge does make a difference :)
We've also not had one single frost this year. While we don't get many (perhaps a couple of dozen slightly frosty days per winter) it's unusual for us to still not have had a frost by almost mid-Feb.
pretty bad scenes, whole villages flooded....
I mean to 'apologise', then blame the agency whose budget he's slashed and is working flat out to help, whilst claiming it's proof why ministers should ignore the advice of their experts? Surely even Cameron can see the fat **** is a liability to the party after that, never mind the whole country?
Ah, no, he's communities. It's Paterson and his goalpost-moving-badgers who's environment, but he's in hospital at the moment. I say let them fight it out. Nice and public, no-holds-barred.
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
In fairness - the guy in charge of the Environment Agency just said ( on the radio ) that NONE of the money that was cut from their budget would have been used to dredge rivers as they beleive this is not the best way to prevent flooding.
What I find intersting is that when you see arial shots of the flooding, most railway lines are still above the flooding yet many of the surrounding houses aren't - so i'd be looking at how planning approval for those houses was granted and why wasn't it a requirment to raise those houses to the sam level as the railway.
Course, that doesn't help the poor b*****s who are in need of some urgent assistance. - Not the UK's finest hour i'm afraid.
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
I'd be interested at this point in knowing just how deep rivers would have to be dredged to ensure that the current water flooding would be avoided - my guess is they couldnt be dredged deep enough.
The facts however are that the somserset levels are lower than the surounding countryside and water will always run to the lowest point. And the surrounding area can only absorb so much water before it becomes waterlogged.
With most of the levels being under water for a few weeks now how will this damage the earth living beasties?.
For example will the earthworms have drowned?
I know it sounds silly but they do a massive job in clearing debris from the surface and aerating the soil which means if there are no worms the quality of the farming land could be damaged for decades after the water recedes.
lots of flooding for years in Ireland also, well the west coast for many years. I guess there is the thing where there is less land/earth to soak up the water , as opposed to london where loads of grass gardens are now cemented over to avoid paying for parking permits
it's funny how now it's hitting where all the toff's are living FAR more now by the thames (kingston / henley etc) .. they are taking more of an interest. real vote winner, on something that's been neglected by both of the 2 major parties for years.
Yes the worms will drown. they come to the surface when the soil is water logged so they can breathe.
It's going to cause major problems for them farmers. Maybe they'd be better off leaving the water and growing rice this year.
They should build a 30 foot high wall around somerset to stop it all draining away until july when the south of England is dry as a Jacobs cracker ;-)
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/09/flooding-chris-smith-speaks-out
"Last year, after the 2012 floods, we recognised the local view that taking silt out of the two main rivers would help to carry water away faster after a flood.
The Environment Agency put ?400,000 on the table to help with that work ? the maximum amount the Treasury rules allowed us to do. The additional funds from other sources that would be needed didn't come in."
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
much like skippy would find people down a mine shaft. or lassie would make a lot of noise (that covers porky's as well)
Turns out the EU heavily subsidise farmers to keep animals on hillsides against the preferences of the farmers, but then insist the land is stripped of trees. And of those that would like to replant, recently the government cut all its grants for doing just that.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/flooding-public-spending-britain-europe-policies-homes
And a quote from one of the research papers referenced: "...median soil infiltration rates were 67 times greater in plots planted with trees compared to grazed pasture." That means the land under trees takes up water 67 times faster than animal-trampled grass.
Still, now all that farmland is underwater it's probably the responsibility of the fisheries policy; I wonder if they make any more sense..? (Surprisingly, yes, after a fashion.)
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
Linky
Cue 'finger in the dyke' hilarity :razz:
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -