Is the EA about to be broken up?

It would appear with the disarray in the Tory party over flooding this winter and the latching on to Local Drainage Boards as being a better entity from time past in dealing with these issues. Therefore it might just be in the offing to take away the responsibility for flooding from them.
So is this a step forward or a backwards one?

Before a reveal my hand on it, a little history of how we arrived at having the EA as we do now.

Back when I was a kid and first stared fishing late 1950s we had what were called River Boards who’s main remit was to manage rivers for flooding, angling and fisheries was a distant secondary consideration. Then about 1973 the responsibilities were handed over to what were publicly owned and funded water companies. In my region it was Northwest Water Authority. Their function/remit was the same with bits added, treatment of sewage, etc. And angling/fisheries move slightly up the pecking order.
In 1989 the National River Authority was formed to give a more coherent nation plan to water.
Though out this history various Acts were brought in to improve on what had gone before, allegedly!
Then in 1996 the EA came into being with a remit of a holistic approach to land, water and air, as it was recognised the connectivity of each to the other. Ironically it was a Tory Govt that created the EA and driven by John Gummer. Him of feeding hamburgers to his kids during the BSE crisis. But lets not hold that against him!

So that is a potted history of how we got to where we are now.

However, through out all of the bodies up and until today and the EA there was open warfare between the competing bodies eg - sewage dischargers, flood defence, fisheries and the emerging environmental movements all arguing against each others proposals and usually flood defence winning out, with the attitude we need to build straighter, wider and higher rivers with all obstacles removed from the channel including the dredging of the channels. Much of this was based on the Dutch model at the time, as they were the experts it was thought of taming the rivers to man’s will.

Ironically again the Dutch have moved on from the above attitude and are spending billions on remodelling their rivers to put back the menders and twists and turns they engineered out for well over a 100 years.

With the creation of the EA a more enlightened and scientific approach came into being, a holistic approach if you like, where all aspects are considered fully before any action is taken. Flood defence is no longer King and has to argue its case scientifically with evidence to get its way. A position I reckon many of the Engineers don’t like.
Now if we go down the road of handing back to the local drainage boards the flood defence aspect of rivers, we will in my view be back to a point of the old river boards and all the competing angst that went on in those days. One things for sure angling, fisheries and the aquatic life and realm will be the losers with a big L in any move back to this position.
Discuss

Totally agree Bad One.

My first hand experience of dealing with the Drainage Boards was that they were a Law unto themselves, responsible to no-one and totally in control of what and where they operated.
If they wanted to work on a river you could have the site engineer along for a full inspection prior to the work commencing, all present could agree and mark sensitive areas not to be touched, trees not to be removed but only pollarded, and fish and bird breeding sites all clearly defined.

Then along would come the work gang with their diggers and draglines and without a single reference to anyone, the site engineers notes or the clearly marked off protected areas, they would rip up the whole place from end to end and a bare banked canal would be all that remained.
They weren't bad, the bl++dy awful!

I would support the EA to the hilt.
Its our environment were talking about and all work should be science led first and foremost.
If we go back to allowing some moron of a dragline operator do what he thinks is right you and I know exactly what we will end up with.

Many rivers took more than twenty years to recover from the 'work' of the Drainage Boards, something none of us should ever forget.

mg:

Pressure is on, not to solve the problem, but just to be seen to be doing something , lot of Tory voters in those flood plains I assume and property is always a Torry issue. Not that I would wish floods on anyone.

The river engineers of old have mostly retired now, and i would like to think that their modern replacements have been educated to a broader level to take into account catchment-wide factors etc.

I remember one of the last truly awful flood defence channels in Thames region was the Mole/Ember channel finished in the mid 1980s. If you look back at old maps or aerial photos of the valley what was lost is truly heartbreaking - acute meanders, riffle-pool sequences, the lot ..replaced with a uniform channel with 45 degree banks that would be impossible to fish safely from (if you could get through the 8ft security fencing which now lines it). The whole lot also features occasional impassable weirs which ensure the river is also like a series of lakes in the summer. Hopefully the blinkered river engineers that built schemes like that have had their day never to return.

Ultimately though, any new thinking/creative solutions such as catchment storage to slow down flood peaks will come up against the brick wall that is private land ownership in the UK and will need the support of powerful political groups such as the CLA or NFU. After all, these groups see the nation's land as theirs and to be managed in their interests.

Planning and environmental regulations barely touch upon private land management issues - things such as protecting river corridors, increasing woodland cover in upper catchment areas or hilltops, conserving hedgerows etc. Landowner interests - usually dressed up as the nations need to produce food - is king. Strange that other national needs for self sufficiency such as energy, manufactured goods, scientists, doctors or nurses etc etc are not pursued so strongly as farming which is an activity that left unregulated can create many environmental problems and conflict with many other land uses on our overcrowded island.

Money Rules, it will be whatever the highest bidder says it will be, and damned to all others.

It obviously has the potential to be either good or bad, it comes down to engagement. If the residents/land owners of flooded properties have their way we'll have our rivers dredged to death.
But when you look at the bigger picture; pointout to the residents of Bridgwater that if relentless dredging is implemented, they're much more likely to be flooded to save small villages such as Moorland and Muchelney.

In my area a few vocal farmers keep demanding dredging of the Cherwell and its tributaries, like the Ray, under the current set up, those farmers would've been heeded to appease them but under a more community based scheme they would not!

Power to the people! Majority rules!

---------- Post added at 19:28 ---------- Previous post was at 19:04 ----------

mick b said:

Totally agree Bad One.

My first hand experience of dealing with the Drainage Boards was that they were a Law unto themselves, responsible to no-one and totally in control of what and where they operated.
If they wanted to work on a river you could have the site engineer along for a full inspection prior to the work commencing, all present could agree and mark sensitive areas not to be touched, trees not to be removed but only pollarded, and fish and bird breeding sites all clearly defined.

Then along would come the work gang with their diggers and draglines and without a single reference to anyone, the site engineers notes or the clearly marked off protected areas, they would rip up the whole place from end to end and a bare banked canal would be all that remained.
They weren't bad, the bl++dy awful!

I would support the EA to the hilt.
Its our environment were talking about and all work should be science led first and foremost.
If we go back to allowing some moron of a dragline operator do what he thinks is right you and I know exactly what we will end up with.

Many rivers took more than twenty years to recover from the 'work' of the Drainage Boards, something none of us should ever forget.

mg:

Click to expand...

I would hope in this day an age any such group/board would be a lot more accountable for their actions. I'd also expect smaller more localised catchments would be covered by an umbrella set up.

It's not like the EA were especially good at getting things right!