Thanks to Captain K for this report …
This week on behalf of the Environment Agency, an independent company has been dredging the river just up from the swimming pool and being a boater I couldn’t resist the opportunity to ask about the operation.
“Are you going to remove the huge tree and silt near the entrance to the lock”
“No, we’ve only been tasked to dredge this bit!
“But this stretch doesn’t need dredging?”
“We know that, what’s more yesterday we had to pull a boat off that ran aground in the middle of the river at the stretch by the lock you refer too!”
“Clearly then you’re dredging the wrong part?”
“Quite possibly! but this is where the E.A want us to dredge, not up there!”
“So where are you taking the spoils? I see you taking it by barge downstream.”
“We’re dumping back in the river just past Culham Cut !”
“But that will silt up the weir and new Culham Hydro Project?”
“Quite possibly.”
I’m completely baffled. What “experts” have come up with this plan?
I actually suspect that the maintenance of a navigable channel owes more to Salters Steamers, than this sort of farce.
The silting up of the weir pools directly limits the ability to manage water levels and prevent flooding.
Any GSCSE student can tell you where sedimentation will concentrate and advise that there is no harm done by spreading it back on the adjacent fields from whence it came.
This is interesting. The E U put a ban on dredging, although most E U countries took no notice and dredge their rivers. It is the Environment Agency who are supervising the flood bypass scheme around Oxford. They said that it would make no difference to the possible flooding of Abingdon. I just hope they are right.
I don’t know about the river but what’s happened to the traffic ! It took me an hour to drive through Bagley Wood to Oxford this morning and I gave up trying to drive into Abingdon this evening, the place is gridlocked how on earth will we cope with another 2000 houses?
Regrettably we missed an opportunity to convey some of the more factual aspects to the scope of works that we are undertaking on behalf of the Environment Agency (EA) along the Thames from Oxford down to Sunbury. As the author suggests we are independent from the EA and as such we can rest assure that great planning has gone into the shoal relocation works balancing aspects of flow conveyance, biodiversity, navigation and cost benefit. If you require further information please contact Magnus Williams (EA Asset Performance) on 0203 025 9844. Tom Cartmel, Operations Manager – Land & Water Services Ltd
The EU banning dredging is just another EU bashing falsehood perpetrated by those who choose not to check the facts spoon fed them by vested interests.
Tom – Many thanks for the contact details. I’ll be sure to ring next time I run aground or bend my propellers again! The only shoal relocation which really works is relocating them out of the river. Please don’t try to blind me with (earth) science, I’m well qualified in this field.
Reductio – I would hazard a guess that Janet is referring to the European Water Framework Directive 2000, (implemented by the EA) which prioritised ecology over the duty to prevent flooding.
I’m pretty sure Janet is more likely to be referring to a sesationalised article in one of our great newspapers. While the EWF does indeed look to prioritise ecology in river basins etc. it has specific exclusions allowing for flood management activity that override the ecological requirement insisting only that a member state considers the ecological impact and selects the option that has the least ecological impact without being excessively costly.
Well, that is the problem. Even the Drayton Road allotments were flooded and people put it down to the fact that landowners are not dredging ditches any more.
Since 2000 and the passing of the European Water Framework Directive dredging has been deemed to be an offence against the environment. For centuries this is how we have managed our rivers and avoided the flooding that we are now experiencing. Previously water boards would dig out silt and pile it up on the riverbanks. No longer. The rivers are now silted up.It is not as if heavy rain is unusual. What has changed is the ban on dredging watercourses to carry the rainfall away. It used to be that landowners would dredge their own area. In the last century that duty was given to river boards made up of farmers, landowners and other locals. Then in 2000 the demand of the European Water Framework Directive that rivers are kept in undisturbed natural conditions transferred responsibility again to landowners. But – and here is the rub – no one is allowed to dredge without permission from the Environment Agency. And because the Environment Agency is signed up to the EU’s green agenda it rarely allows dredging. Worse, on the rare occasions the Environment Agency bureaucrats do allow dredging the silt, sand and gravel dug up must be labelled as “controlled waste” so it can no longer be left on the riverbanks. And that makes it hugely expensive. If you think the Government might offer some help given how useful dredging is to surrounding areas, dream on. Try to get someone to pay for dredging and you would be looked at as some kind of lunatic. What a contrast with the fortunes now made available to pay for conservation schemes or projects for “river restoration” designed to implement the European Water Framework Directive.
One day soon we’ll not have Europe to blame any longer – so try and focus ahead and think how many other people there are to criticise. Or not….
Actually, ppjs, I’ve always blamed our own politicians who’ve allowed the EEC./EU to totally outmanoeuvre and outfox them. So, no change.