Lower Thames Flood Risk Management Strategy

[Graham Marsden]

This is a dedicated thread for discussing article: Lower Thames Flood Risk Management Strategy

 

[geoffmaynard]

So... reading between the lines, it sounds like we who live in the area will have more waters to fish, but with even less fish in them!

 

[Jeff Woodhouse]

About right there Geoff. I thought of you when I got this one.

Get along to one of the presentations and let them know how you feel.

I can tell you that EA fisheries are really worried about this as it's not been thought out fully. Scares of imported fish in ponds getting into the river system and the amount of compensation to be paid to lake owners for loss of amenity and stocks of fish.

 

[njb51]

The way the Thames is looking at the moment, I'd say there was very little risk of flooding.

It always amazes me when people are suprised when their house, which is built on a FLOOD plain, is suddenly flooded!

 

[Waveney One]

Once again the planners are assuming that the best way to deal with flood water is to get it into the sea asap. If that means that our rivers become uninteresting drains with a flash flood replacing shallow and stagnant pools for 95% of the time then I for one do not want anything to do with it. During times of flood these drains offer no protection to fish fry which will get washed downstream.

The flood plains were there naturally for a very good reason. To take flood water that then seeped back into the river and into the underground natural reservoirs over days if not weeks. The flow levels were kept up all year round and water abstraction didn't have as much effect. Now at a time of drought in the south east they want to get as much good clean drinking water into the sea asap!

Surely we know enough now for someone in authority to say "stop! that has been tried before and failed, what we need are flood lagoons to take the extra water and release it back into the system over weeks.

Also, make the people who have their houses on the flood plain pay for it. I don't see why I should.

 

[preston96]

Once again the planners are assuming that the best way to deal with flood water is to get it into the sea asap. If that means that our rivers become uninteresting drains with a flash flood replacing shallow and stagnant pools for 95% of the time then I for one do not want anything to do with it. During times of flood these drains offer no protection to fish fry which will get washed downstream.

The flood plains were there naturally for a very good reason. To take flood water that then seeped back into the river and into the underground natural reservoirs over days if not weeks. The flow levels were kept up all year round and water abstraction didn't have as much effect. Now at a time of drought in the south east they want to get as much good clean drinking water into the sea asap!

Surely we know enough now for someone in authority to say "stop! that has been tried before and failed, what we need are flood lagoons to take the extra water and release it back into the system over weeks.

Also, make the people who have their houses on the flood plain pay for it. I don't see why I should.

A damn good post!!...............houses on flood plains are usually for the "better off"............let them pay!!

 

[geoffmaynard]

Don't worry mate, if you want to buy a Thameside property you'll pay all right! Both in hard cash when you first buy the place and again when the water levels come up every winter.