People before animals

We did the same thatbags and the National Trust as well.

It's a good job Noah wasn't told to forget about the animals!
Flickety, I read in the paper yesterday that there is to be a barrage across Cardiff Bay which they hope will produce 10% of our electricity needs.

I feel like doing the same!

DH and I had been long-term and enthusiastic members of the RSPB but we began to see how they were going wrong with their political ideology a few years ago and, with great sadness, withdrew our support. Like a few other overweening charities, they have become too big for their boots.

And no, it is not privatised.

Scottish water is lovely, thank you, anno, and always has been.

Jess m

I have said on the other two threads and it looks like I am saying it again.

The neglect by the Environment Agency has been going on since the back end of the 1990's as my posts keep stating.

THERE WAS SUFFICIENT MONEY over this long period of time for dredging and maintainence , it was nothing to do with government cuts, it was a decision made by the likes of Lady Scone who we keep saying was avidly against dredging for the promotion of wildlife over the farming industry and the local people who know how to manage the Moors and rhynes.

I am from that community and I can tell you the Environment Agency has been no friend of local people when it comes to the subject of dredging, not just over the last few years this government you seem besotted with have been in office, but since they stopped dredging almost 2 decades ago. They got rid of the equipment to carry out necessary dredging work on the Moors and rhynes and they have been warned since about 2000 they were wrong but basically they couldn't give a stuff, they knew better and refused to listen to the warnings.

Now it will cost a fortune to correct. their pig headed attitude and their desire for the protection of the birds and wildlife . Again as I have said on another thread, the birds and the wildlife they wanted to protect have been anhialated, WHAT AN OWN GOAL.

It is about balance. And about thinking (duck) 'outside the box'. There are ways to flood manage and still keep viable habitats for wildlife.

As far as I know, Bags, Scottish water is not privatised and there is nothing wrong with your drinking water, is there?

Agreed Bags

In complete agreement with you FlicketyB. This link shows there is a need for people with some basic common sense.
www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/10623109/UK-floods-Environment-Agency-accused-of-putting-birds-before-humans.html

I think it's good that the Somerset Levels are getting so much publicity. They illustrate the problem of lack of balance in government thinking very well.

And having just read flick's post, it looks as if EA leadership wanted the levels to flood, so the OP is bang on.

Was drinking water bad before privatisation? I don't remember problem drinking water.

EA sold off its river dredging equipment as soon as they took over from Somerset local authorities– clearly because of a different ideology from what had gone before. If what the Somerset people are saying is correct, then this was not a good idea with regard to current flooding. Extra flood defences are not needed if flooding is prevented in the first place because runoff has somewhere to go.

The EA has been headed by people who quite consciously and explicitly placed the reinstatement of biodiversity above human use of land.

Lady Young, Chris Smith's predecessor said that she would like to put a limpet mine on every pump. That means by choice letting the Somerset Levels, the Fens and other areas of reclaimed land return to being salt marshes. If that is not a clear indication that has been EA policy to put biodiversity ahead of agriculture, what is?

The EA is a government Agency that by definition works at arms length from the government, although it is dependent on it for funding. Therefore it takes direction from and has policy decided for it by its executive, headed by successive chief officers whose first loyalty was to wildlife not agriculture.

If someone who had a long association with the National Farmers Union was made a chairman of the EA, the wildlife supporters would be up in arms and get the appointment quashed. Someone who has a long association with the RSPB is appointed chairman and no-one makes any comment, yet it is just as inappropriate appointment.

Well the electorate voted the government in didn't they/we - its politics not the EA per se. They do what their political masters tell them to do and spend what they get given having agreed their budget with their political masters.
Prioritisation of flood defence money has probably focussed on areas of higher population. But they have not been spending the money they are given for flood defence on water vole habitats.
All I am saying is that they may have made a wrong decision in relation to the drainage of the somerset levels but if you want to get cross, get cross with the people who are cutting EA budgets not the people who were running the EA in the past. Because that is utterly pointless.
Also seems to me that the somerset levels are getting all the publicity in the press.

YES, BADGER THEM!

There could be an upside to this for farmers. If enough badgers get..... Oh, never mind.

Thank you for clarification JessM

And I think it has been successive governments who knew but did not act

Jess m
'And who voted the government in'

I will say again.

People are blaming The Environmental Agency because it was they who elected to stop dredging. It has been going on for almost 2 decades and whilst I accept that this government could have done more, making it a political issue for this government only is ridiculous and if we are applying blame then Labour must take their fair share of responsibility.

Sometimes you cannot defend the indefensible.

Lots of blaming EA. What about DEFRA and the treasury who set policy and budgets? DEFRA is the government. And who voted the government in?
The EA is not a quango because the ministry sits above it. It is more like the operational wing of DEFRA and has wide responsibilities: coastal erosion, the possible environmental impact of fracking and nuclear power, bathing water quality, pollution by salmon farms, business dumping toxic waste, air pollution, preventing drought as well as flooding. Protecting wildlife habitats one small bit of their work on which little money is spent.
This year DEFRA are giving them 569 million for flood defences and £88 million for all the rest of their environmental protection duties.
So it does not really look as if the EA are spending all their money on voles and otters and putting them first, really, does it?
Governments quite rightly need to follow EU directives. if there was no EU directive on issues like bathing waters our seas would still be seriously polluted by sewage.
bags I have to say that local authorities did not make a good job of managing water services before the private water companies took over. The local politicians did not want to increase local rates to raise revenue for improvements. Post privatisation when the water companies were formed and the NRA set up the quality of drinking water, bathing water and river water all improved rapidly.
If you don't like the situation then write to your MP objecting to the cuts being made to DEFRA funding and the fact that these mean that EA is having to make 500 redundancies of their flood management staff.
FlicketyB the uplands of Britain have been grazed by the stock of farmers for thousands of years. Even the mountains would get covered in trees again if this ceased. But it would take decades for the bracken and gorse to be succeeded by birch, oak, scots pine etc. Even if there were a massive tree planting programme it would take several decades before the woodland was established enough to make a difference to water catchments.

Those pesky Normans...!

They're imports, came over with Normans!

The rabbits here are on the sides of the railway embankment and on the down behind us. They are home and dry!

When the financial crisis came the Queen said "how come no-one saw this coming?"

Well they all saw this coming, but didn't take the necessary steps in some areas. Perhaps it was not anticipated that other areas would flood so drastically.