The EA, is it fit for purpose?

Very rare I have a rant (well, maybe a few for entertainmnet) but a few things have come to mind lately. One is the mention of the Royal Military canal in Kent. In the winter they drain it to about 2ft of water, 6 inches in some areas for the reason of winter floods. The land is completely flat all around it, the rain falls and goes straight into the ground, no reason for it and the fish suffer. I have found pockets of fish holed up in one of the very few deep pockets around a culvert for example and they are stuck there all winter.
Just walked around a river where a new sluice gate was put in a few years ago with no fish run, no mullet to be seen, at least I couldn't see any, used to be full of them.
Walked around the bit where they put a fence along a bit of river to stop people falling in by gad, it was once a nice kept bit of ground for picnics and fishing, now it is fenced off and full of weeds 6 ft high.
I have seen them sloughing through bank side vegetation right in the nesting season and trees chopped down willy nilly. A few years ago they forgot one tree on one stretch but they went back and got it a few years later, the one alder tree left.
No reason for any of this. I would supply pictures but you all know what I mean I am sure.

My feeling this organization is run by university graduate types, good at theory and doing the scientific stuff but when it comes to the practicality of running the environment they are just useless, not a clue. They are like vandals; really have had enough of them. I have not bought a fishing licence this year, they don't deserve one.

The thing to remember with the EA is that it is a directly funded arm of Department for Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and as such it is run at the behest of the government of the day . . . .

DEFRA's responsibilities are wide and varied and encompass a spectrum from Agriculture to Water Management . . . . .
and as the major funding stream for the EA it is understandable that they are required to dance to the DEFRA tune.

Until and unless we have a fully funded and thereby totally independent EA then we, as anglers, will be firmly sat in the rumble seat of the EA's automobile . . . . . . . maybe we should get used to it.

I think of the EA a bit like weather forecasters. Just about every forecast on beautiful sunny days ends with "just the chance of an isolated shower" put in to cover themselves so no chance of blame or criticism.

I feel the same way how the EA have treated parts of the Stour not far from the RMC. Chopping down trees and backside vegetation with total disregard for wildlife.. But it has to be done they tell us to prevent flooding. Much of the work they do which includes river weed cutting is sub contracted out to guys that plainly are not trained adequately to maintain a balance between prevention and conservation.

It's also worth considering whether the things being blamed on the EA are actually their responsibility. I've known quite a few things that people blame on the EA that they actually have little or no involvement in.

The biggest problems I see with the EA is that their responsibilities are far too varied, they aren't truly independent and the stakeholders that are affected by their activities are too varied. Anglers generally get upset when their best interests are overlooked by the EA. The simple truth is that angling is a minor concern for them.

Question: EA, is it fit for purpose? Answer: NO!!!

s63 said:

Chopping down trees and backside vegetation with total disregard for wildlife.. But it has to be done they tell us to prevent flooding.

Click to expand...

. . . and therein lies the huge dilemma the EA has to face on a daily basis.

Earlier this year it was being mooted by the government to remove the Flood Defence responsibility from the EA. To my mind that would have been an even more negative result for us anglers.

Once removed from the auspices of the EA then there would be the typical intra-government department **** measuring contests and given anglers concerns over homes being flooded . . . . well, you can guess who's **** would win that one . . . .

Peter Jacobs said:

it is understandable that they are required to dance to the DEFRA tune.

Click to expand...

While DEFRA dance to ministers tunes which change depending on what will keep them in a job, one that sticks out like a sore thumb was the flooding of the Somerset Levels when ministers and the EA said dredging was the answer, absolute rubbish and I suspect they knew it was but as it was what flooded residents were saying............. The levels have always flooded and historically only had grazing sheep on them during the summer but now houses have been allowed to be built on them flooding becomes a problem.

The problem isn't that the EA isn't fit for purpose (it isn't imo) its that the EA is a multi armed monster and none of those arms know or even care what the others are doing only being interested in whatever bit they represent and keeping their own arse on the very comfortable seat they occupy.

The EA are liars, they are mostly only interested in money, they insist that the removal of Powick weir on the Teme is to allow Shad to spawn further upstream, all very good you may think until you look deeper and find that the removal is being funded from the flood relief budget and that the Shad is just a red herring to allow them access to £20 million from the EU set aside for the protection of rare species, Shad which were so numerous they were once used as fertiliser have spawned just below the weir for many many years.

Fit for purpose? not in my book just liars and charlatans that I am forced to support and while I am at it the Wangling Truss have become very much the same despite their initial good intentions.

Flooding precautions in one location merely pass the problems elsewhere usually downstream . If gulleys, drains and sewers were kept free flowing a lot of surface water runoff would have somewhere to go. However that is not the EA's fault or remit. Coordination is the answer and we are run by fools

I think the country would be worse off without an EA and I have no doubt they do good things, collecting data, scientific research etc but it so often seems to me that when it comes down to doing practical on the ground stuff they just get it wrong so often. That's my goat, the examples I stated maybe small things but none of it is necessary and I just think why can't they be sensible.
That Royal Military canal thing has been going on for years and they have been told for years it is unnecessary but no, common sense just won't prevail. I suspect they would have to have about 200 meetings just to schedule another 200 meetings before they changed any policy; strewth, just thought, that's Brexit.
In my imagination there are plenty of blokes wandering around offices with big qualifications coming up with stuff that might look good on paper but when it comes down to it, it does not transgress into the reality, they must have never dug a hole or seen a fish in their life; I bit if you asked them what a roach was, it was something they smoked at Uni..
I have no idea of course but I have seen this often enough in big organizations and been on the end of it that I imagine this is how it works. They need a common sense branch with a sensible unit in it somewhere in my humble opinion.
There you go, rant over...feel better now. Just grieves me to have seen so much ruined by these people over the years.

Well the EA were entirely responsible when they electro-fished the R.Ivel,in May ,when the now long gone barbel were spawning,killing several to I believe 16lbs outright,maybe others died later,these guys were supposed biologists and I pay for an EA rod licence,so yours and my money pays for such acts of vandalism,they allow sewage to be released into our rivers in times of flood,I cannot hear them screaming from the hilltops slating the rules that make this legal,that is in spite of the fact many stretches have lost all invertebrate life because of it.Me I don't trust them to look after our legacy,the rivers,we have to rely on them,yes,but trust them,definitely not...

The EA are damned if they don't and damned if they do. The Work the EA do on water areas is only a very small part of their duties. It is just way too costly to have one department just for the waterways.
I have never heard any other groups or ideas come forward to look after the running of waterways within the UK. The only other group is the Canal trust. Who only look after the canals but saying that perhaps the EA should take some notes from them on up keep of the bank and vegetation.
I think the EA was badly advised on the felling of the trees and other vegetation in areas around the UK. Or are the contractors they use got it all wrong and got carried away.

iain t said:

I think the EA was badly advised on the felling of the trees and other vegetation in areas around the UK. Or are the contractors they use got it all wrong and got carried away.

Click to expand...

They were paid per tree, no wonder the were so destructive

The worst part is you cannot complain. Buy a bad car, and you can take it back, same with a new suit, or a bad curry. Nothing you or I can don't about the EA.

I'm sorry but there is no excuse for incompetance,especially when the environment suffer,after all that is why they exist,it's in the name...

The sentence below is part of an FOI request from the EA (the same one that showed just 6.1% of illegal fishing reports were attended)

Reports of fish theft are routinely passed to the relevant Police Area for action,

I find it interesting that the EA who fail to attend reported incidents expect the police to do what they do not.......... I have found out today that in the police area where I live (South Coleshill) there are a total of 1 sergeant, 1 constable and 5 PCSOs how the hell are they to attend what the EA do not???

Its for reasons like this that I have a beef with the Wangling Truss and their PR rubbish concerning contacting the police for illegal fishing, they should either do their homework and find out if police have the manpower and the will required to respond or stop the bullshine and get the EA to do what we pay them to do instead of cosying up to them to keep warm with the money they get from them.

thecrow said:

They were paid per tree, no wonder the were so destructive

Click to expand...

I now know why they went back and got that tree Crow. Its true this, they cleared and grubbed everything out when there was all those floods but for some reason they left this one alder tree. It happened to be in my favorite spot along the stretch, right on a point where the river bent; it was a good chub spot. Then for some reason a couple of years later they went back and chopped it down. The workings of the EA-bizarre. I remember standing there and screaming, "you Ba*****s, you took the last tree, you just couldn't leave it alone"; just as well no one was around, I must have looked like a case for the men in white coats Perhaps that's their plan, drive us all nuts and get us all locked away in an asylum.