River Lugg

Reg Wyatt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
1,217
So water should be held back,when questioning the EA about the floods we had had and mentioning the non maintenance of sluices and weirs the response was basically not our problem
The best and most natural thing to control water are meanders and fallen trees, vegetation etc - the very thing that this possibly well meaning man has removed. I don't know the river in question very well at all but the flooding in question might be because the water is not held up sufficiently miles upstream of you. Consequently by removing trees and straightening means your downstream neighbours are now in trouble. People's homes are the most important thing but the buck must stop with whoever allows building them on floodplains. If you buy a house on a floodplain, no matter how historically infrequently flooding occurs, you have put yourself in the firing line and it's only going to get worse.

Reg Wyatt
 

aenoon

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Messages
13,339
Location
Linlithgow, Scotland and anywhere i can wet a line
Anyone got before and after pictures of the upstream side of the bridge?
Interesting the way that so many on here immediately play the man and not the ball as soon as anyone disagrees with them.
Indeed, before and after pictures taken in same month works commenced.
Every "before" picture shown on web is high summer, when everything is in full bloom, and river is showing its bones, lovely idyllic nature photos.
Absolutely none of the "before" pictures of area are taken in november/december, which would be nearer the "after" scenario of a treeless, plantless barren scenario.
Just a thought.
Bert
 

PaulD

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Messages
2,614
Location
South Northants
Indeed, before and after pictures taken in same month works commenced.
Every "before" picture shown on web is high summer, when everything is in full bloom, and river is showing its bones, lovely idyllic nature photos.
Absolutely none of the "before" pictures of area are taken in november/december, which would be nearer the "after" scenario of a treeless, plantless barren scenario.
Just a thought.
Bert

I have absolutely no concept of why, as an angler, someone who at least should have some concept of how rivers 'work', you are going out of your way to seek justification for an act of gross vandalism. Presumably, you'd be equally benevolent if someone chose to drain the Lake of Menteith to knock off the corner of the road between Arnprior and Aberfoyle.

Personally, I would applaud if the farmer received a prison sentence.
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,478
Location
West Oxfordshire
Indeed, before and after pictures taken in same month works commenced.
Every "before" picture shown on web is high summer, when everything is in full bloom, and river is showing its bones, lovely idyllic nature photos.
Absolutely none of the "before" pictures of area are taken in november/december, which would be nearer the "after" scenario of a treeless, plantless barren scenario.
Just a thought.
Bert
I think that we can safely assume that come next summer, the river won't resemble the 'before' pictures you are referencing...
I also don't buy into any of the altruistic BS statements from the farmer about protecting the locals from flooding.
 

JayP

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
3,715
Location
St Neots, Cambs
F
You can see how 'sympathetic' the works carried out were to the flora and fauna . . .

View attachment 33266

Mind-the-Redd-PNG.png
 

Hardrar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,150
Location
North Yorkshire
I have absolutely no concept of why, as an angler, someone who at least should have some concept of how rivers 'work', you are going out of your way to seek justification for an act of gross vandalism. Presumably, you'd be equally benevolent if someone chose to drain the Lake of Menteith to knock off the corner of the road between Arnprior and Aberfoyle.

Personally, I would applaud if the farmer received a prison sentence.
Sadly blame game mentality again- all lowland rivers are man made, no one here is right, selective dredging has to carried out, or the river will simply silt up over time and the flood plain become a marsh again. It’s a series of failures by consecutive governments, over decades. The river boards and IDBs used to average 2 full time men per 1000 acres in the 70’s, on lowland catchments, this was to keep ditches and dykes cleaned out drains and cloughs maintained and Banks tidy and repaired all year round. There are basically none now just the odd contractor employed. We are reversing what the Victorians created and allowing the Sea to claim back the flood plains and deltas.
Deforestation is also an issue, the forestry commission are clear felling extensive forest in the uplands for so called renewable energy generation, but they are not replanting at the same pace, so there isn’t the osmotic pressure from the roots to retain water in the uplands, which tend to be high rainfall areas, hence the water flow come downstream too fast and floods the lowlands.
This wasn’t vandalism at all, rivers recover far faster than you think from dredging.m and it actually benefits the catchments, It’s Diffuse pollution which is the killer, as when once chemical residues build up in the mainly calcareous clays of our flood plains they take decades to oermestyswsy to a safe level.
Our local streams have very little aquatic growth in them now, as both PGRs and Dicurane based herbicides were over used and are still leaching into our watercourses and will be for many decades. Sheep and cattle have ivomectin based pour on and IGRs used on them to basically prevent them being literally eaten alive by Lucilla spp in Summer and internally from Fluke and roundworm parasites, to provide us with meat and milk. If you didn’t treat them the majority of the cattle and sheep would die in a season. The problem is they pass out the chemicals onto the pasture and it gets into the watercourses and affects the invertebrate populations. Molluscicides (slug pellets) are used to protect arable crops from being destroyed to feed us, but this also gets into the water course and negatively affects the invertebrates, It’s being controlled more now, but then we still need to eat, no crop lefty no food on the table!
In no way was this gross vandalism, there are far more damaging processes that are legal 100% but this is visible, so folks kick off.
If we don’t soon start a guaged approach to dredging and water course management, there won’t be any lowland rivers left to fish in. As I’ve said earlier no lowland river is natural, they are all man made gutters and have to be dredged. Thanks for reading but it’s not a black and white issue!
 

bobmiddlepoint

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2017
Messages
3,287
Location
Where I want to be
Sadly blame game mentality again- all lowland rivers are man made, no one here is right, selective dredging has to carried out, or the river will simply silt up over time and the flood plain become a marsh again. It’s a series of failures by consecutive governments, over decades. The river boards and IDBs used to average 2 full time men per 1000 acres in the 70’s, on lowland catchments, this was to keep ditches and dykes cleaned out drains and cloughs maintained and Banks tidy and repaired all year round. There are basically none now just the odd contractor employed. We are reversing what the Victorians created and allowing the Sea to claim back the flood plains and deltas.
Deforestation is also an issue, the forestry commission are clear felling extensive forest in the uplands for so called renewable energy generation, but they are not replanting at the same pace, so there isn’t the osmotic pressure from the roots to retain water in the uplands, which tend to be high rainfall areas, hence the water flow come downstream too fast and floods the lowlands.
This wasn’t vandalism at all, rivers recover far faster than you think from dredging.m and it actually benefits the catchments, It’s Diffuse pollution which is the killer, as when once chemical residues build up in the mainly calcareous clays of our flood plains they take decades to oermestyswsy to a safe level.
Our local streams have very little aquatic growth in them now, as both PGRs and Dicurane based herbicides were over used and are still leaching into our watercourses and will be for many decades. Sheep and cattle have ivomectin based pour on and IGRs used on them to basically prevent them being literally eaten alive by Lucilla spp in Summer and internally from Fluke and roundworm parasites, to provide us with meat and milk. If you didn’t treat them the majority of the cattle and sheep would die in a season. The problem is they pass out the chemicals onto the pasture and it gets into the watercourses and affects the invertebrate populations. Molluscicides (slug pellets) are used to protect arable crops from being destroyed to feed us, but this also gets into the water course and negatively affects the invertebrates, It’s being controlled more now, but then we still need to eat, no crop lefty no food on the table!
In no way was this gross vandalism, there are far more damaging processes that are legal 100% but this is visible, so folks kick off.
If we don’t soon start a guaged approach to dredging and water course management, there won’t be any lowland rivers left to fish in. As I’ve said earlier no lowland river is natural, they are all man made gutters and have to be dredged. Thanks for reading but it’s not a black and white issue!

My good fellow someone will be along soon to give you a considered and lengthy reply covering these points. In the meantime I'd just like to point out you haven't a clue what you are blethering on about.


Andy
 

bobmiddlepoint

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2017
Messages
3,287
Location
Where I want to be
Indeed, before and after pictures taken in same month works commenced.
Every "before" picture shown on web is high summer, when everything is in full bloom, and river is showing its bones, lovely idyllic nature photos.
Absolutely none of the "before" pictures of area are taken in november/december, which would be nearer the "after" scenario of a treeless, plantless barren scenario.
Just a thought.
Bert

Aye because deciduous trees do die back completely to bare soil every winter...
 

Hardrar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,150
Location
North Yorkshire
My good fellow someone will be along soon to give you a considered and lengthy reply covering these points. In the meantime I'd just like to point out you haven't a clue what you are blethering on about.


Andy
I know far more than you Sir being regularly consulted and paid for my expertise. Here we go with the aggressive responses again.
 

Reg Wyatt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
1,217
This wasn’t vandalism at all, rivers recover far faster than you think from dredging.
Why do it in the first place then? As stupid as punching yourself in the face knowing that in time the swelling will go down! Dredging a lowland river on a flood plain is the quickest way to silt it up. The physics of moving water, man made or not, are fairly easy to understand if fully thought through. This farmer has engaged his bulldozer and bit quicker than his brain and has scored a very sad own goal.
Hardrar, it's worth having a look at The Wild Trout Trust videos with regard this topic - they are very well explained by people who know what they're talking about.
There are some great books on the ancient art of 'drowning' water meadows in my area of the chalkstreams. Explanations on moving silt and keeping water 'dynamic.'
The question in this case is whether or not the farmer is thinking development and house building, in which case he should be thrown in jail, or whether he was mistakenly trying to help his neighbours by vandalising a beautiful stream.
Unfortunately, with regard the heart breaking flooding of property, sue whoever built there in the first place.

Reg Wyatt
 

PaulD

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Messages
2,614
Location
South Northants
If we don’t soon start a guaged approach to dredging and water course management, there won’t be any lowland rivers left to fish in. As I’ve said earlier no lowland river is natural, they are all man made gutters and have to be dredged. Thanks for reading but it’s not a black and white issue!

The River Lugg is some 45 miles long and where this happened is around 15 miles from its source in Radmoor Forest, this cannot be described as a 'lowland river', the name 'Lugg' means 'bright stream'.

Here is your 'man made gutter', . .

Dredged Drain.jpg


. . .one assumes yourself and the farmer would assume this is the ideal outcome for the Lugg, one nice straight line, Radmoor Forest to Mordiford where it joins the Wye.
 

glueman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
4,648
Location
on the banks of the A5
Why do it in the first place then? As stupid as punching yourself in the face knowing that in time the swelling will go down! Dredging a lowland river on a flood plain is the quickest way to silt it up. The physics of moving water, man made or not, are fairly easy to understand if fully thought through. This farmer has engaged his bulldozer and bit quicker than his brain and has scored a very sad own goal.
Hardrar, it's worth having a look at The Wild Trout Trust videos with regard this topic - they are very well explained by people who know what they're talking about.
There are some great books on the ancient art of 'drowning' water meadows in my area of the chalkstreams. Explanations on moving silt and keeping water 'dynamic.'
The question in this case is whether or not the farmer is thinking development and house building, in which case he should be thrown in jail, or whether he was mistakenly trying to help his neighbours by vandalising a beautiful stream.
Unfortunately, with regard the heart breaking flooding of property, sue whoever built there in the first place.

Reg Wyatt
The local authority have the last day in what is built where or has that passed you by
 

Laxdale

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
615
Location
Western Isles, Scotland
Why do it in the first place then? As stupid as punching yourself in the face knowing that in time the swelling will go down! Dredging a lowland river on a flood plain is the quickest way to silt it up. The physics of moving water, man made or not, are fairly easy to understand if fully thought through. This farmer has engaged his bulldozer and bit quicker than his brain and has scored a very sad own goal.
Hardrar, it's worth having a look at The Wild Trout Trust videos with regard this topic - they are very well explained by people who know what they're talking about.
There are some great books on the ancient art of 'drowning' water meadows in my area of the chalkstreams. Explanations on moving silt and keeping water 'dynamic.'
The question in this case is whether or not the farmer is thinking development and house building, in which case he should be thrown in jail, or whether he was mistakenly trying to help his neighbours by vandalising a beautiful stream.
Unfortunately, with regard the heart breaking flooding of property, sue whoever built there in the first place.

Reg Wyatt
You can dig the builders up if you want. Try suing a skeleton.
It would maybe be an idea to dig out the bridge as it is obviously an unnatural silt and gravel trap.
 

glueman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
4,648
Location
on the banks of the A5
Reg would have had trouble during the people that built our house after it was flooded 3 times and for the first time ever as it had been built 300 years earlier
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,478
Location
West Oxfordshire
There is little argument against the need for flood management. However the knee-jerk reaction of 'dredge the river' which just simply sends the problem further downstream isn't a good solution for a variety of reasons, ecology being one.
The water needs slowing down, not speeding up. A lot of ways of doing this are initially a bit counterintuitive but offer a real answer.
An interesting and somewhat enlightening project is the Oxford flood relief channel plans. This is a shallow channel running broadly parallel to the Thames which directs water during times of high flow into a 'new' floodplain.
Our farmer friend has created a short-term solution for his area, created more problems for those downstream and ultimately well and truly screwed a stretch of river in the process.
What he has done is indefensible and I'm quite frankly amazed that anyone on here is showing event the slightest support for his actions.
 

arrow

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
145
Location
Herefordshire
An email from our local association, it looks like the EA were unable to attend without police presence.

Dear Member,



LAFA have been horrified to see the work undertaken on the River Lugg above Lugg Green Bridge, Kingsland for which no liaison appears to have taken place with the authorities. Basically about a mile of river has been

Bulldosed to provide a straight bank. The result will be an impoverishment to the river both downstream and to the area of bank itself where its wildlife has been destroyed.



We were made aware of it over a week ago and reported it several times to the Environment Agency, but for one reason or another they have been unable to act until recently and then only with the presence of the police

And unfortunately considerable damage has been done at a critical time of year when both salmon and brown trout are spawning.



I am writing to you as a member of LAFA simply to keep you abreast of this distressing situation.



Yours sincerely,
(Chairman LAFA)
 

Paul_B

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
5,705
Location
West Riding of Yorkshire
There is little argument against the need for flood management. However the knee-jerk reaction of 'dredge the river' which just simply sends the problem further downstream isn't a good solution for a variety of reasons, ecology being one.
The water needs slowing down, not speeding up. A lot of ways of doing this are initially a bit counterintuitive but offer a real answer.
An interesting and somewhat enlightening project is the Oxford flood relief channel plans. This is a shallow channel running broadly parallel to the Thames which directs water during times of high flow into a 'new' floodplain.
Our farmer friend has created a short-term solution for his area, created more problems for those downstream and ultimately well and truly screwed a stretch of river in the process.
What he has done is indefensible and I'm quite frankly amazed that anyone on here is showing event the slightest support for his actions.

Andy around 50 years ago they straightened our local river and dredged it as well as building flood banks to stop the floodplains flooding and its worked well.
Upstream to this it floods and downstream to this it floods but its saved our floodplain :unsure:

I should add the river was void of fish at the time due to pollution


,
 

boisker

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
3,118
Location
Devon
Andy around 50 years ago they straightened our local river and dredged it as well as building flood banks to stop the floodplains flooding and its worked well.
Upstream to this it floods and downstream to this it floods but its saved our floodplain :unsure:

I should add the river was void of fish at the time due to pollution


,
Interesting understanding of a flood plain!
 
Top