Flood defences were deemed low priority

[Workingman]

Kate, we cannot blame the government for the weather. It is at least offering some immediate first-aid money to kick-start people's lives.

Where it can be blamed is for setting up agencies full of book learned "professionals" to manage the environment. Between them these people do not have an ounce of practical knowledge of Old Farmer Giles. They might well be able to computer model in 3D a particular defence without understanding the conditions that now make it necessary. It, apparently, never crosses their minds to look at whether altering the conditions causing the problem in the first place might help.

Suff, the pictures from Cumbria were not of 80s flood plain builds, they were of places in existence since the town/village started some hundreds of years ago. The floods they are now suffering have only been happening since WWII and the need for more arable land for food combined with industrial farming methods. The links are there, the removal of woodlands and meadowlands, the unchecked growth of vegetation in rivers, if the "managers" wanted to look for them.

Throwing huge amounts of money at defending a few chosen places is not the answer.

[cromwell]

Where it can be blamed is for setting up agencies full of book learned "professionals" to manage the environment. Between them these people do not have an ounce of practical knowledge

There is a lot of truth in this. Remember the floods on the Somerset levels? The rivers there hadn't been properly dredged since Adam was a lad. Result, floods. It came out that one of the first things that the Environment Agency had done when it inherited the dredging machinery was to sell most of it!

Now that village in Cumbria has flooded again for the second time in 48 hours. The villagers have now got a local firm in with massive JCB's, dredging out rock and soil from the local beck, increasing it's depth so it can carry more water and not jam up with debris at bridges.

A very strong spotlight should be shone on the Environment Agency and Natural England; their name came up again today as being against measures to prevent flooding.

[Aggers]

One of the problems is that certain measures which would alleviate flooding, such as dredging, etc.,
are not undertaken because "the work might inconvenience wildlife". I wonder what people affected
by these floods think of that?

[Workingman]

Now that village in Cumbria has flooded again for the second time in 48 hours. The villagers have now got a local firm in with massive JCB's, dredging out rock and soil from the local beck, increasing it's depth so it can carry more water and not jam up with debris at bridges.

I saw a bit of that on the lunch time news. Some of the gunk being dug out of the beck was anything but "natural" and a lot of it was rubble from collapsed banks over the years.

Aggers, the wildlife slant is interesting and you might be right.

[Aggers]

Being a bit of obsessed with using correct words, I have often wondered why so many people say that a river has burst it's banks. Surely, in most cases overflowed would be a more appropriate word to use?

[Suff]

I guess it's pretty much just a phrase we use nowadays. I'm sure it comes from when we started shoring up and building up banks to the rivers.

Usually the process of overtopping erodes the banking and then the water creates a route to go through. Eventually there is not much bank left there when it is finished. If the banking has been reinforced (the Witham banks I was talking about are raised about 10 feet) and the water overtops, it will actually destabilise and break down the banking. Hence bursting it's banks.

It's not often that the reinforced banks actually burst but not impossible either.

[Workingman]

Oh, I don't know. Is it the evolution of language, poetic licence or idiomatic use for effect?

'The river Wharfe overflowed at Grassington' does not carry the same message as 'The river Wharfe burst its banks at Grassington' regarding the suddenness and violence of the event causing floods and damage to property.

It does not have to mean a catastrophic failure, as would haqve happened had Hans removed his finger from the Dijk or the collapse of the levees as we saw with the Mississippi a few yars ago.

'Overflowed' sounds gentle whereas 'burst' conveys the speed with which the event occurred.

[Aggers]

Oh, I don't know. Is it the evolution of language, poetic licence or idiomatic use for effect?
'Overflowed' sounds gentle whereas 'burst' conveys the speed with which the event occurred.

Yes, I guess that sums it up.
I've been rather pedantic, about what is right and what is wrong, all my life.
I put this down to my training as an engineering draughtsman, where everything
had to be right, without any doubt.