Dismay at Environment Agency

S

Stewart Moss

Guest
I arrived at a favourite swim on the Windrush to find it destroyed by the EA.

An enormous, ancient and beautiful old willow had been totally removed. This tree was a mini-ecosystem in its own right - providing a home to countless animals and insects. Barbel lived beneath its branches, ducklings used it as cover, pigeons roosted in its branches, water voles foraged in the debris beneath it etc.

No doubt it has been removed to "improve channel efficency". But is there no consultation process? The tree had been there for years and years, until some EA chap decides it should go, and out comes the chain saw.
The same thing left me distraught a few miles upstream when all the willows in a whole field were removed.

What is left is a near featureless, faster flowing channel, with little or no wildlife.

Distraught.
 
R

Ron Clay

Guest
I couldn't agree more with you Stuart. Such things are heartbreaking.

I remember seeing what the vandalistic British Waterways did to the River Leam and Upper Ouse in the 70s.
 

GrahamM

Managing Editor
Joined
Feb 23, 1999
Messages
9,773
Reaction score
1
I truly sympathise. The decision of one man has cost the lives of countless creatures, the comfort of many others and the pleasure of many anglers. It's happened to me on several occasions and it's a terrible feeling when you arrive at a favourite stretch to find that it's been raped. It's one of the few times I regret paying my licence fee.
 
R

Richard Drayson

Guest
This sort of thing really does annoy me.
I used to fish a delightful swim at the confluence of two rivers. On the opposite bank was a large tree overhanging the river with branches trailing in the current.

What was once home to chub, carp, roach etc disappeared in a matter of hours, as did the fish.

Trees make up so much of the river's character and to remove these from the bankside under the dubious heading of river management is ridiculous.

As Stewart says, why oh why is there no consultation?
 
D

Dave Kennedy

Guest
Must admit this has happened on our stretch of water as well.

the work is usally done by the flood defence teams and NOT the fisheries team.

We had a lot of very mature willows cut down in the last 2 years, though thankfully the fish are still around in their old holding areas.

our problem was the fact that we lost about 15 trees in the past years due to the flooding and corosion of the root systems.so they went along and cut all those that were dangerously overhanging and almost in the water

all the trees that they cut down were in danger of falling into the river and blocking it completely anyway, it was just a shame they had to remove so many.

a replanting has taken place but will take several years to provide the cover of the old trees.

we have had so much flooding in the last 2 years they dont want to take any chances now with all the flooding in urban areas.
 
R

Rob Stubbs

Guest
Stewart,
I would complain to the EA fisheries department. It's not unheard of for say the fisheries department to seek recompense from the flood defence people.

Rob.
 

DAVE COOPER

New member
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Removing trees in the name of flood defence is so short sighted too. The removal of trees just speeds up the errosion of the banks which in itself causes even bigger problems.

It also just transfers the flooding problem to someone else, because all it ultimately means is that water gets to another place faster and floods there instead.
 
C

Carp Angler

Guest
I thought that this practice went out with the old NRA.

Dave,
you're right, it just pushes the problem further down river.
if they allow people to build on, or turn into pasture land, the flood plains that have kept the river levels stable for hundreds of years, then what do you expect.
 

ron lander

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
116
Reaction score
0
I had a similar problem on the Severn last year, the swim use to be home to some monster barbel. Only had one fish from it since it was vandalised.

Although as somebody on FM pointed out then, it could have been boaters.

I have since found a new swim that looks like its hardly ever fished and is not pegged on matches. Have not evem fished it myself yet. Took a picture so that I can show the EA/BAA the 'before and after' evidence if it happens again.
 
L

Laurie Harper

Guest
Plus ca change, eh? I remember the EA ripping a load of willows from the banks of the Lea where I used to fish some years back. I wrote to them and received the usual arguments about flood prevention, etc. in reply. I suggested that, rather than wholesale destruction, they might practice a bit of sensitive pruning and maintenance but they didn't get back to me. It seems they go for the cheap option. If you tear it all down, you can forget about it for twenty years. If you prune, you have to come back in five.
 
S

Stewart Moss

Guest
I would complain if I thought it might do some good!

Rob, Have you any experience of compensation being paid before?
 
C

Chris Bishop

Guest
The landowner could try and do them. If you're concerned about trees get your local council to make a tree preservation order.

It's a bit brown rice and open-toed sandals, but once an order's in place the EAwould have to leave the tree there or replace it if they did an accidentally on purpose, oops me chainsaw slipped yer worship job on it.
 
R

Ray Walton

Guest
I think you will find that if the E.A flood defence dept don't do some work on your river, by keeping it free running, they don't get paid any money by the council which is a major source of income to them, and which 'you' pay for via your 'poll' tax paid to the council. They sometimes employ sub-contractors as well, possibly to avoid liability if something goes wrong or if someone complains!
They chop the overhanging trees so that water companies raw sewage discharges, ie: toilet paper, contraceptives, tampax, etc, don't get caught in the branches and thus expose them.
The flood relief section do not necessarily communicate with the fisheries dept.
 
Top