• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Coming to a river near you soon ? Dredging

J

Joe Fletcher

No Longer a Member
If any one who has been watching the news lately , They will have seen the floods on the Somerset Levels and the locals have been calling on the EA to dredge the rivers .

David Cameron has made the annoucement , That as soon as the levels drop.
They will start dredging the rivers .

I assume that this could be done all over the country and wonder what impact it will have on fish stocks ?

I fish the Lower Severn and I imagine this could be on the hit list of rivers ?
I suppose the only good thing to come out of it would be the removal of all the snags and in turn would lead to less tackle being lost :rolleyes:
 
Joe,..
A stretch of my local river Wey is dredged periodically by the National Trust because it forms part of the Wey Navigation.
Ten guys fished a recent match on there and never got a bite between them.
This is par for the course ,and is why it has been known for years as ''cyanide straight!''
Theres been suggestions of late that local farmers dredge the Hamp. Avon to prevent the flooding of adjacent meadows.
I feel for those that have been flooded out and understand their anger, but dredging the rivers is ecological vandalism. I guess each case has to be judged on it's own merits, but it sets a dangerous presedent.
They want to stop concreting over the flood plains, that might help.
There's a 90 acre plot of land set between a river and a flood channel where I fish, and at the moment it is a 90 acre lake covered with water fowl.
It is in fact what we would call a water meadow,...believe it or not, part of it has been divided up into investment plots for future development,...madness!
 
Last edited:
just another nail in a coffin, Otters, crayfish, cormorants, water abstraction, Fracking??? mass weed cutting, hydro scheme screws, poaching and now this?????
Maybe a time to find a nice lake, Now i know what the EA meant when they said about river angling, Anglers must look elsewhere if they want to catch fish.
 
Obviously, needlessly dredging a piece of a natural river will amount to ecological vandalism, and the Environment agency are past masters in the art.
However, over the centuries man has manipulated the rivers to his own ends with mills, weirs, carrier streams, canals, leats. drains and so on. There are very few if any completely untouched rivers at all.
One major achievement was the draining of the area, now known as the Somerset levels, by Dutch engineers over 200 years ago. Prior to this people only lived in the area in the summer, hence the name.
It would appear that the EA decided to inflict one of their re wilding policies on the area, which basically means they do nothing. If a tree falls in, it's left, very much zero maintenance. At the same time they have removed some sea defenses to create a wetland area for wading birds at a cost in excess of 20 million pounds.
The engineers obviously intended the rivers to be dredged on a regular basis, which was done for years. They're sure to silt up with all the sediment dropping out of the water after all, it's maintenance, the rivers are built into the design to carry all the drained away water to the sea and they can't if they're silted up.
How the EA ever took the decision to return the area to a wetland without telling the people who lived there, I don't know, why they ignored the concerns of locals, I don't know, but something stinks and someone should be in for the chop.
We should be grateful for man's 'interference' with our rivers, without it very few would be fishable at all, except by boat or with waders.
I've seen a tree lined stretch become totally inaccessible and unfishable through lack of maintenance, it took about 10 years.
I think as anglers we don't need to fear a mass dredging program anytime soon, given that the free, do nothing, bird friendly option is much preferred by the EA.
First post since re joining, sorry for the rant.
Cheers
Paul
 
British Waterways dredge as well to allow boat access to the locks.
Trent at Collingham was done this summer...

Dredging is not the answer to flooding in most cases as all it does it move the flood risk further downstream - management of wetlands and uplands (eg Tree planting) has been found to be more effective, as it holds the water in the water table (and also means slow release of water in drier times). But that option is too sensible!
 
If they dredged my local river it would have to have a new name. It would be somewhere between gravel extraction and underwater quarrying. From a water management point of view, it would be pointless.
 
There seems to be a bit of thought on here that dredging is a complete no no, lets sit back a second and remember that nobody on this earth now was around when the Somerset levels and similar areas were created, and that some of the fishing we have now is probably due in a small part to that and other water engineering in previous centuries.
The EA are renowned for completley ignoring any sensible or logical suggestions, as are Local councils, the Government, Urban developement planners etc.

So, given what we have, lets put a large flood barrier completely around Muchelny, and ot her floded areas, and create a very big lake, stock it with every concievable variety of fish and have an anglers paradise.

Sounds stupid ? well, its no more stupid than ....

A) Demanding that rivers stay as they are, not dredged, and eventually silt up, resulting in more flooding every year, and incidentally, not fishable, or containing any sustainable fish stocks.

B ) Demanding that rivers are completely dredged, leaving them barren.

c) Passing plans for creating more urban sprawl on the already pressured flood plains, and then when those houses flood, shouting loud that something should be done, when it already had been, i.e, building those houses in the first place.

There is no easy answer to this, to shout " No Dredging " is in my mind a selfish no no, spare a thought for those people who live in those areas, when they had been for years safe from water and now find themselves in this situation .

The case for the protection of the river environment is strong, but the case for the protection of thousands of domestic houses, farmland, businesses, railways, roads, and other infrastructure is far stronger..

There has to ne a happy medium where everybody is, if not happy, at least seen to be catered for..I am afraid I dont have the answer, but to shout " Save the rivers I need my fishing fix" is imo selfish in the extreme.

Dave.
 
I think what many are pointing out is that dredging is not necessarily the answer for those people who are being flooded. I even heard an EA person stating this on the news a few days ago. I was flooded twice when I lived in London due to the sewers backing up during heavy rainfall, and so know how depressing it is. I feel for the people, but can't help but think that if we continue to have rainfalls like we have in recent years, we will have to move people away from some areas and re-house them elsewhere. Time will tell but I've a feeling building on flood plains is going to prove to be a very expensive mistake.

Nick C
 
I live on a flood plain in Tewkesbury, for a lot of the time Tewkesbury is an island between the Severn and the Avon, however there was considerable thought gone into making sure we don't get flooded, as yet!!! with run off's and pools that even contain some good Roach,Tench and Carp,:) but of course the extra run off just impacts more on the Town.

For most of the winter the flood plains have lived up to their names with the 'Ham' full that runs by the Severn, the weir is huge here but would be undefinable at the moment.

The real trouble with the Somerset levels is that they are a sort of a small Holland, but without the defences, I really cannot see dredging will help at all, the area I feel will be reclaimed by nature.

As for the rest of us the answer I believe lies in the hills with the 're-wilding' theory I believe has more credence than most others.
 
It seems a bit odd but there is a book published in 1988 which outlines the changes which might just be meeting with some approval now - Taming the Flood: History and Natural History of Rivers and Wetlands by Jeremy Purseglove. I first read it a few years ago & found it very interesting - it`s written at the time when plenty of concrete was the way forward & it offers an alternative to the Los Angeles storm drain solution with some historical analysis of the methods used since Vermuyden. Worth a read if you have an interest - you can get a second hand copy cheaply. It`s an ecologists perspective at a time when they were considered even weirder than today.
Hopefully the river near you won`t end up like this:
 

Attachments

  • _54963648_l1040100.jpg
    _54963648_l1040100.jpg
    13.4 KB · Views: 360
It was also a short TV series - i used the book and this in teaching A level geography and considering 'soft' approaches to river management, it was excellent. Probabilities are used when considering flooding and here on the middle Thames the water seems high but in the 19th century flood records show it reached on one occasion at least a meter higher. So are we experiencing the flood that occurs say once every 200 years and what about the one that occurs only once every 500 years - dredging won't stop it. There is a reason why rivers develop floodplains and of course we build on them because they are attractive in many ways but let's not be surprised when we get a winter like this and reach for a short-term, knee-jerk response. And no one has even mentioned sea level rise....
 
Sea level rise - not mentioned yet Paul but plenty of us have considered that thought no doubt. I listen to 5 Live every day on the way to work and they've given a lot of coverage to the situation on the levels. Over the last few weeks momentum has gathered amongst the locals that it's entirely the EA's fault for not dredging the two local rivers. They've been given plenty of air time on the subject and despite numerous attempts by the EA and others to convince them it's not the answer they believe it is - public opinion has swayed the government and so it will happen. Having had my cage rattled far too many times listening to their ill informed rants I now hope they do dredge their local rivers while at the same time hoping those reporters go back the next time it floods and asks if they feel any regret about demanding x amount of tax payers money was spent for nothing.

It beggars belief that developments on flood plains are still allowed to continue - but they will, and we'll all be asked for more and more money to protect them. How many billions do we spend on protecting the Levels when sea levels rise? There needs to be a time soon when we can say to people - if you want to live there - you need to accept there is a risk of flooding. No insurance, no government help - your risk. That will drive the prices down, make flood plains less attractive to developers and cost us a lot less in flood defence in the future.
 
Andrew Boyne said:
Sea level rise - not mentioned yet Paul but plenty of us have considered that thought no doubt. I listen to 5 Live every day on the way to work and they've given a lot of coverage to the situation on the levels. Over the last few weeks momentum has gathered amongst the locals that it's entirely the EA's fault for not dredging the two local rivers. They've been given plenty of air time on the subject and despite numerous attempts by the EA and others to convince them it's not the answer they believe it is - public opinion has swayed the government and so it will happen. Having had my cage rattled far too many times listening to their ill informed rants I now hope they do dredge their local rivers while at the same time hoping those reporters go back the next time it floods and asks if they feel any regret about demanding x amount of tax payers money was spent for nothing.

It beggars belief that developments on flood plains are still allowed to continue - but they will, and we'll all be asked for more and more money to protect them. How many billions do we spend on protecting the Levels when sea levels rise? There needs to be a time soon when we can say to people - if you want to live there - you need to accept there is a risk of flooding. No insurance, no government help - your risk. That will drive the prices down, make flood plains less attractive to developers and cost us a lot less in flood defence in the future.
Click to expand...

Bit harsh Andrew, especially from where I am living, you just cannot cut off thousands and thousands of home owners and effectively ruining them as for some sort of harsh lesson. A lot of the flood plains are established communities that in living memory have never flooded previously, although I understand that buying a house now on the Somerset levels would be foolhardy, and a chap did just that seven weeks ago, and is now flooded.
So where are we to build? On prime sheep country,that has exasperated the problem downstream ? Or do we approach the problem in a manner that has a longer term affect, as we seem to have these in high office that decide on such matters not knowing diddly squat about nature and it's consequence.

So we need to understand about flood relief and River management before we get in a worst mess, of course this has to come from the very top, and not the likes of the EA who seem to cock up everything they touch at the moment. However until the waters start lapping around your doorsteps I doubt if the incentive will be there, so let the 'plains' people rot eh?:)
 
A lot of the flood plains are established communities that in living memory have never flooded previously

But that is the point they may not have in living memory but they will. I lived near Tonbridge when they built the barrier, if i recall it would not keep out the Q500 flood ie one the flood that occurs every 500 years - guess what Tonbridge has flooded this year. So the planners, EA etc all know this - it may be that developer greed is at fault - money talks loudest. Of course we have been modifying rivers for centuries and if we hadn't many would be inaccessible for fishing other than by boat. On a smaller level the local farmer to me dredged a lovely small stream across his land two summers ago that had some small fish in it and removed a lot of bushes because it flooded - with no cover it is even worse this year and of course there have been no fish since.

With regard to the Somerset levels they are a natural wetland about 20 feet above seal level andhave been flooded numerous times by the sea so this is not new- humans have been there for centuries but in the past chose to live on the higher areas eg Glastonbury and they are high ecological importance and probably minimal political clout - i somehow do not see money being spent on dredging.
 
The Somerset levels, like the Fens, are only suitable for habitation and farming because of the drainage schemes of centuries past. The rivers are the final part of the systems taking the drained water to the sea. As the rivers are draining a far larger area than their natural catchment, they silt up and require regular dredging to perform their intended function. It's part of the maintenance needed to keep the system working, a bit like servicing a car.
It would appear that the EA didn't think keeping the land drained was part of their remit, re wilding and bird sanctuaries seem to be their priorities. It was reported today that they delayed repairing the sea defences, where the train line collapsed in Dawlish, because they needed to carry out an 'impact assessment' on the local bird population. Now it may be necessary to re route the railway, there goes the fishing license income. This bird bias seems to have skewed their priorities away from their intended function and needs to be addressed.
Interestingly there have been no reports of flooding in the Fens, can anyone say how things are done differently there?
During my time I have experienced some very special fishing in this country, on more occasions than I care to remember it has been completely destroyed, by the EA, by habitat destruction, non maintenance, and poisoning. Hopefully their blatant incompetence is now in the spotlight and changes will be made, I won't be holding my breath waiting though.
Cheers
Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top