Flooding of the railway on the Somerset Levels

[ess1uk]

is it slowly getting back to something like normal now?

seems to have not been on tv recently

[raymw]

Plenty on local tv wrt floods, farms/homes, but not about railway

[Captain Kernow]

Normal working will be resumed on both lines from 12/4/14.

[The Stationmaster]

 

"The Environment Agency spent more than £800,000 hiring equipment to dredge swollen rivers after it sold off its own machines for just £230,000."

 

So what?   What the EA got for selling off (possibly old) machinery and the hire costs for equipment to be used in place bear no real relationship to each other.  What should have been compared was the costs of running the EA equipment,  and its maintenance and replacement, and I suspect that these costs may have been closer to £800,000 per annum.  And there is always the possibility that the EA's original equipment was only provisioned to cope with a regular workload and that the hire of additional equipment was required in any case to cover anything else.  It would be extremely unlikely that the EA would staff and equip to cope with a hundred year event every year.

 

"A letter seen by the Telegraph from an Environment Agency employee......

The letter says: “As with every decision our directors make there was no back-up plan or contingency plan so it was chaos for many months and this was a contributing factor to the recent flooding I am sure.”"

 

No note of who that employee might be and his/her credentials for commenting on the management and making the statement about a "contributing factor" - it could have been someone in the mail room who saw the letter.   I used to work in a large public organisation many years ago and we used to call this kind of story "canteen table comment".

 

It's pretty poor journalism.

 

Jim.

Actually what should be compared is the cost of thye original continuing dredging programme as it once was with the costs now being incurred as a result of the EA's ludicrous decision to end the normal dredging programme. The Somerset Levels operated with a long established managed drainage system part of which was the use of dredging to prevent silt build-up. Stop the management of a drained area and flog off the equipment means no managed maintenance and results, eventually, in flooding - and severe flooding in the event of exceptional weather. Plus of course it then costs a heck of a lot more to catch up on the backlog resulting from neglect of a managed drainage programme.

 

Still poor journalism as it fails to explain all that.

[flubrush]

 

 

Actually what should be compared is the cost of thye original continuing dredging programme as it once was with the costs now being incurred as a result of the EA's ludicrous decision to end the normal dredging programme. The Somerset Levels operated with a long established managed drainage system part of which was the use of dredging to prevent silt build-up. Stop the management of a drained area and flog off the equipment means no managed maintenance and results, eventually, in flooding - and severe flooding in the event of exceptional weather. Plus of course it then costs a heck of a lot more to catch up on the backlog resulting from neglect of a managed drainage programme.

 

One of these days we might hear all the details of what was, and is, going on in the Somerset Levels.   There have been enough experts quoted over the past two or three months who have said that all dredging does is move the problem a bit further downstream.  So there may have been a decision to stop dredging to provide better flood protection towards the coast end of the Levels.  One of these days we might find out.    I note that the PM didn't really give an answer when questioned today as to whether the dredging just started again would continue for years.

 

Jim.

[lmsforever]

Saw some photos of a bridge on the levels where they are dredging, the ground where the digger was standing had built up since the stopping of the previous dredging .it was at least ten feet above the water.Shows how silt can build up if not removed ,the EA should be ashamed of themselves allowing it to happen notice that the chairman has not been seen anymore.Will the main lines have to be reballasted at some point as it must have been contaminated?

[Dunsignalling]

One of these days we might hear all the details of what was, and is, going on in the Somerset Levels.   There have been enough experts quoted over the past two or three months who have said that all dredging does is move the problem a bit further downstream.  So there may have been a decision to stop dredging to provide better flood protection towards the coast end of the Levels.  One of these days we might find out.    I note that the PM didn't really give an answer when questioned today as to whether the dredging just started again would continue for years.

 

Jim.

Or, to put it another way, all that stopping dredging does, is move the problem further upstream!

 

John

[The Stationmaster]

Or, to put it another way, all that stopping dredging does, is move the problem further upstream!

 

John

Which is why there has to be (and was) a proper programme of dredging and maintenance along all of the waterways which drain the Levels.

[Captain Kernow]

Will the main lines have to be reballasted at some point as it must have been contaminated?

Not as far as I am aware, as contamination was minimal, as it turned out.

[Fenman]

Or, to put it another way, all that stopping dredging does, is move the problem further upstream!

 

John

 

There was an interview earlier this year with a woman whose farm was threatened with deliberate flooding in order to save the flood water from inundating Winchester. The journalist seemed to be expecting outrage but, instead, the woman rather calmly stated that even though it was obviously regrettable, the most important thing was saving Winchester.

 

I admired her fortitude and willingness to sacrifice her interests for what she perceived as the greater good. Those sort of sentiments are not often reported in the media.

 

As you'd expect from my user name I have some experience of flooding in areas that are at or below sea level. It's noticeable that, even though the tidal surge earlier this year was significantly higher than that in 1953 which killed hundreds, the flood defences of The Wash and the Fens held. The heavy rainfall was managed in the way intended by the designers of the flood systems - drainage channels are dug in parallel a short distance apart from each other. The inner bank of each channel is lower than the outer bank. When the channels overflow, the waters fill the "wash" between the two channels, not the land to either side. The washes are, in fact, good pastureland when they're not flooded. So far as I'm aware, no East Anglian farmers are complaining about the flooding of these washes.

 

It's the same EA being vilified in Somerset that is responsible for all this East Anglian flood management (which appears to have been successful). I'm curious about what is different about the Somerset Levels and why it went so wrong. While it may be part of the answer, "not doing enough dredging" strikes me as potentially too simplistic an explanation.

 

Paul

[The Stationmaster]

There was an interview earlier this year with a woman whose farm was threatened with deliberate flooding in order to save the flood water from inundating Winchester. The journalist seemed to be expecting outrage but, instead, the woman rather calmly stated that even though it was obviously regrettable, the most important thing was saving Winchester.

 

I admired her fortitude and willingness to sacrifice her interests for what she perceived as the greater good. Those sort of sentiments are not often reported in the media.

 

As you'd expect from my user name I have some experience of flooding in areas that are at or below sea level. It's noticeable that, even though the tidal surge earlier this year was significantly higher than that in 1953 which killed hundreds, the flood defences of The Wash and the Fens held. The heavy rainfall was managed in the way intended by the designers of the flood systems - drainage channels are dug in parallel a short distance apart from each other. The inner bank of each channel is lower than the outer bank. When the channels overflow, the waters fill the "wash" between the two channels, not the land to either side. The washes are, in fact, good pastureland when they're not flooded. So far as I'm aware, no East Anglian farmers are complaining about the flooding of these washes.

 

It's the same EA being vilified in Somerset that is responsible for all this East Anglian flood management (which appears to have been successful). I'm curious about what is different about the Somerset Levels and why it went so wrong. While it may be part of the answer, "not doing enough dredging" strikes me as potentially too simplistic an explanation.

 

Paul

I don't have the references here but they have been in the public domain in the past and it appears to have been a deliberate decision by the higher echelons of the EA as part of some sort of mystical EU Directive about areas of marsh and wetland (although I suspect - as is often the case the EU Directive says something rather different from what the EA/UK Govt is claiming it says).  But all in all a deliberate decision made in teh early part of this century and heavily involving Chris thingummybob's predecessor at the EA  (who was also a superannuated MP).

[raymw]

I can understand saving Winchester, but no way is Bridgwater worth saving.

[ZiderHead]

You are now doomed to be haunted by the ghost of Adge Cutler for that comment

[Coombe Barton]

I can understand saving Winchester, but no way is Bridgwater worth saving.

Could we start with Bridgwater Services, please.

[raymw]

Don't judge me on the tv I watch, but a few years  back there was a series called, iirc 'Rich girl, poor girl', where a couple of teens from different background, swapped lives for a week or so. A lass from bw, living in a squat, and busking for a 'living?' swapped with a wealthy lass from Kent or some such foreign part. The rich lass's friends took the bw lass out to a nightclub one evening, and  she said the price of a round of drinks was more than she could spend on food for a month. They asked her what Bridgwater was like - she said 'It's like Sh.t' . I think I have a recording of it still, if you want the exact words.*

 

Bridgwater is a dump, due to the oxymoron of 'Sedgemoor Planning', but the Bridgwater folk are fine - every year in November they try and burn the place down.

 

Best wishes,

 

Ray

 

* now I expect I'll be rummaging through 10TB of hdd, looking for that

[talisman56]

Bridgwater is nowhere near the (ob)noxious place it once was - they closed the Cellophane factory years ago...

[Re6/6]

Bridgwater is nowhere near the (ob)noxious place it once was - they closed the Cellophane factory years ago...

 

I recall that the cellophane was the profitable factory as opposed to the parent company's one in the US which was running at a loss but Pres.J.W. Bush put federal money into it to keep the jobs. Something that the then British govt refused to do....as the local TV reported at the time.

[Captain Kernow]

but no way is Bridgwater worth saving.

Well, if it was good enough for the Somerset & Dorset railway, it's good enough for me ! (well, just about!) 

[raymw]

iirc, both USA and UK factory produced the same product. UK product was better quality, cheaper, etc. It was closed down to keep the USA one working. Same thing happened recently with Fry's at Keynsham. It removes competition, and asset strip selling building land, etc. Leaves the UK to foot the unemployment bill. We seem to let anyone buy anything from us.

[Foulounoux]

iirc, both USA and UK factory produced the same product. UK product was better quality, cheaper, etc. It was closed down to keep the USA one working. Same thing happened recently with Fry's at Keynsham. It removes competition, and asset strip selling building land, etc. Leaves the UK to foot the unemployment bill. We seem to let anyone buy anything from us.

As an ex employee in the 80's I can shed some light

 

At that time there were two cellophane plants in the UK. Bridgwater and barrow

Barrow was more efficient because it had the std products only

So they started to transfer the non std products and planned the closure of Bridgwater

As soon as they did this they realised that actually Bridgwater was more efficient than barrow

So no doubt it was also more efficient than the USA plant under their ownership

 

Also at that time on site were as part of the then courtaulds operation

BCL cellophane

Bonded fibre fabrics

Development and technical centre DTC

And the polythene factories

 

 

The DTC was first to close as the idea of a central r and d lost favour. I left in 89 and writing was on the wall then

 

But it was a great place to work. And I lived opposite on the new estate couldn't smell the sulphur from their as we became immune

 

More on topic is that at that time they were still stripping the sedge peat off the levels despite the warnings of the impact on water mansgement.

 

Foul

[Captain Kernow]

More good news, it looks like the signalling repairs have gone so well, that we will be restoring full normal signalling and line speeds on the Up line from 0500 hrs tomorrow morning (Wednesday 9th) and on the Down line 24 hours later.

[Captain Kernow]

As it turns out, we restored signalling on both lines, and removed all speed restrictions, from 0500 today, so we are now back to full, normal working at this location.

 

There will be further works later in the year to raise all location cabinets on metal frames above flood water level.

[TheSignalEngineer]

There will be further works later in the year to raise all location cabinets on metal frames above flood water level.

We did the same thing at Walsall under the old station bridge. The water regularly came up to platform level and flooded the small relay room under there. I redesignaed it into cupboards which were prepared and tested off site then put on a platform next the the old RR.

 

Before Walsall PSB came in there was a signal box under the bridge. It used to get surrounded very quickly when the water came over towards Ryecroft and this was the boat kept tied to the box to for the signalman to escape.

 

 

 

 

[EHertsGER]

I think that we may need to  be creative in looking at a solution for the Levels rather  than attempt to keep them as they have been in recent decades. Elsewhere in England, Dutch engineers came up with a different solution for such a situation. They created the Norfolk Broads. Langport would make a great tourism centre for the Somerset Broads.

I went out with a Somerset broad once...strange girl...

[TheQ]

I think that we may need to  be creative in looking at a solution for the Levels rather  than attempt to keep them as they have been in recent decades. Elsewhere in England, Dutch engineers came up with a different solution for such a situation. They created the Norfolk Broads. Langport would make a great tourism centre for the Somerset Broads.

Technically incorrect, the Dutch engineers built the Fens drainage which is closer in style to the Somerset levels, The Norfolk Broads are a natural flooding  spreading from mostly natural rivers (rising sea levels) of man made Peat diggings, if you want to make the somerset levels a navigible waterways for tourists, you'll need to flood the area to create broads but dredge the waterways to allow for boats.

The Q