Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Anyone sunk under?

My old house has been flooded but my new one hasn't. People were saying I was an idiot for moving.

I live in the south; Henley-on-Thames, in fact.

The town riverside and the surrounding countryside was flooded quite badly two years ago and the year before but we have got away with it this year. It's all happening in the north. The TV news reports look absolutely shocking.

It all looks quite bad. Terrible to be in that situation.

Lancashire looks totally washed out.

North has not had time to clear much of the previous waters flooding and soaked ground.

More rain, nowhere to go, plus building on flood plains. Bad combo. Lots flooded out at a very bad time of year.

Floodings seem to be very common in Britain, yet they can be easily prevented. The Netherlands is very good at it despite being below sea level, very rainy, and covered in major rivers and lakes. Maybe Britain should take some lessons?

Lancashirite here, everywhere around me is flooded.

Good thing I live on a hill

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Floodings seem to be very common in Britain, yet they can be easily prevented. The Netherlands is very good at it despite being below sea level, very rainy, and covered in major rivers and lakes. Maybe Britain should take some lessons?

Everyone knows that, the problem is political; Labour are too afraid of the right-wing print media to propose big national infrastructure projects, and the Tories who are in government presently don't believe in big national infrastructure projects(unless they line the pockets of their party donors, or involve nuclear missile-shaped extenders for their international willy-waving contests). It doesn't help that often even when money can be found to do flood defence improvements, the cretinous NIBMYs come boiling out of the woodwork to whinge about the additional wall height ruining their view or the necessary cutting down of some trees affecting their property value.

Every year now this happens, and you really feel for those affected because in almost every case it's not even remotely their fault. The folk getting flooded didn't ask the media to be so vile or politicians to be so craven/greedy, nor did they ask for whingy neighbours who hold up the planning process or choose where the relatively-affordable houses they bought would be built. Certainly puts the usual griping folk around here(myself included) usually get up to; seeing images of what's going on in Northern England right now certainly makes you glad to live in a place made almost entirely of hills.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Floodings seem to be very common in Britain, yet they can be easily prevented. The Netherlands is very good at it despite being below sea level, very rainy, and covered in major rivers and lakes. Maybe Britain should take some lessons?

Everyone knows that, the problem is political; Labour are too afraid of the right-wing print media to propose big national infrastructure projects, and the Tories who are in government presently don't believe in big national infrastructure projects(unless they line the pockets of their party donors, or involve nuclear missile-shaped extenders for their international willy-waving contests). It doesn't help that often even when money can be found to do flood defence improvements, the cretinous NIBMYs come boiling out of the woodwork to whinge about the additional wall height ruining their view or the necessary cutting down of some trees affecting their property value.

Every year now this happens, and you really feel for those affected because in almost every case it's not even remotely their fault. The folk getting flooded didn't ask the media to be so vile or politicians to be so craven/greedy, nor did they ask for whingy neighbours who hold up the planning process or choose where the relatively-affordable houses they bought would be built. Certainly puts the usual griping folk around here(myself included) usually get up to; seeing images of what's going on in Northern England right now certainly makes you glad to live in a place made almost entirely of hills.

Building on flood plains does not help or land known as local run off areas.

People have built in places are ancestors knew not to build on...
We are paying the price.

 jhe90 wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Floodings seem to be very common in Britain, yet they can be easily prevented. The Netherlands is very good at it despite being below sea level, very rainy, and covered in major rivers and lakes. Maybe Britain should take some lessons?

Everyone knows that, the problem is political; Labour are too afraid of the right-wing print media to propose big national infrastructure projects, and the Tories who are in government presently don't believe in big national infrastructure projects(unless they line the pockets of their party donors, or involve nuclear missile-shaped extenders for their international willy-waving contests). It doesn't help that often even when money can be found to do flood defence improvements, the cretinous NIBMYs come boiling out of the woodwork to whinge about the additional wall height ruining their view or the necessary cutting down of some trees affecting their property value.

Every year now this happens, and you really feel for those affected because in almost every case it's not even remotely their fault. The folk getting flooded didn't ask the media to be so vile or politicians to be so craven/greedy, nor did they ask for whingy neighbours who hold up the planning process or choose where the relatively-affordable houses they bought would be built. Certainly puts the usual griping folk around here(myself included) usually get up to; seeing images of what's going on in Northern England right now certainly makes you glad to live in a place made almost entirely of hills.

Building on flood plains does not help or land known as local run off areas.

People have built in places are ancestors knew not to build on...
We are paying the price.

And again, none of that is the fault of Joe Blogs who had X amount of money to spend on a house for him and his family that had to be within Y distance of their workplaces - they either buy a house a developer built on a flood plain or they don't buy a house. Regardless, it's been done now, hundreds of thousands of people live on flood plains, so we have only two real choices: spend billions on flood-proofing, or spend billions building new houses not on flood plains. Or I suppose we could just keep doing nothing and see more and more working folk slip into destitution, at the mercy of either predatory rentiers or soulless insurance companies, it's not as if our economy has been teetering on the brink of another serious recession and can ill afford the big hits to spending that usually follow natural disasters...

I suppose you could always vote for a government that gives a monkey's.

I hope the insurance companies pay out.

I read something recently about Osborne (odious souless vampire that he is) pushing for more building on the flood plains.

Questions should be asked in the council planning departments and consequences should follow.

Hope it gets resolved quick enough anyhow. Horrible thing to have happen.

Before Osborne, John Prescott was pushing a plan to build on the Thames flood plane in Essex and Kent.

Building on flood plains isn't a problem as long as you put in the right kind of infrastructure. For example, some Dutch towns are built with all the houses on floating platforms, and the roads and utility services on raised causeways.

The problem in the UK is actually that our old towns and cities liable to flooding, such as York on the Ouse, and Datchet on the Thames, were put there when these freak weather effects were one in 100 year events. Due to the non-existent climate change, they are becoming a lot more frequent.

However, it also is possible to fit flood defences to older homes in vulnerable areas. Since there is no possibility of abandoning places like York and Datchet, this is what should be done.

True, a mix of banning all flood plane building of new estates, there ugly souless things anyway. Upgrading flood protection across the country and clearing rivers and waterways that are silted up to increase capacity. If we cannot protect them or build them right best not build the homes at all until they can be done properly and protected from flooding.

Also yes, some estates or villages may need to be moved if they cannot be protected from flooding, water needs to go somewhere and nothing I changing that fact.

I don't live in England, but I'm in New England, and I remember a few years back at the place I lived back then the roof started leaking because of how much rain there was. I moved my bed like five times that night and each time the new wet spot would just appear right in the center of where I slept. I swear I'm cursed ;_;

Well funding wise, we have a giant foreign aid budget and people going hungry, homeless, flooded..

Spend it at home, it seems we need it right now, charity begins at home. There's alot that needs to be done in uk, that money would help, alot

The foreign aid budget is a tiny speck in the overall UK funding pot.

Far better to stop sending our soldiers on foreign exchange trips and use the vast amount of money saved to invest in the UK.

Given the huge housing shortages, massive rental costs, massive house prices and lack of private sector concern with how these impact on people when they are raking in the cash, we need a massive government led building project similar to those seen after the war. Include in these proper flood defences, and a nationally planned flood defence network, as well as a proper transport network, and it will begin a new golden age

 SilverMK2 wrote:
The foreign aid budget is a tiny speck in the overall UK funding pot.

Far better to stop sending our soldiers on foreign exchange trips and use the vast amount of money saved to invest in the UK.

Given the huge housing shortages, massive rental costs, massive house prices and lack of private sector concern with how these impact on people when they are raking in the cash, we need a massive government led building project similar to those seen after the war. Include in these proper flood defences, and a nationally planned flood defence network, as well as a proper transport network, and it will begin a new golden age

Yep, a rational government not being led by neoliberal gakhawks or mewling, quivering pseudoleftists could turn this utterly necessary project into a British New Deal, putting huge numbers of unemployed and precariously-employed people into solid jobs and give our economy a serious shot in the arm. Sadly the Tories seem to think their highest priority right now is stripping local councils of the ability to choose where their pensions funds are invested because they were making choices the Tories don't like such as refusing to support Israeli settlements or British arms traders, and Labour vacillate between factional infighting and blaming the woes resulting from their own incompetence on the SNP. Or the Greens. Or the voters in general for being to stupid to do the right thing, which is obviously vote for them regardless of circumstances. Depends how heavily they've been hitting the cheap sauce in the Commons' bar.

But that won't happen, afterall, there are corporations with pockets that need lining and we've got to pay for replacing our nuclear weapons somehow; what's a few thousand ruined homes and lives compared to that?

 eskimo wrote:
I suppose you could always vote for a government that gives a monkey's.

What happens when none of them do?

 jhe90 wrote:
Well funding wise, we have a giant foreign aid budget and people going hungry, homeless, flooded..

Spend it at home, it seems we need it right now, charity begins at home. There's alot that needs to be done in uk, that money would help, alot

The foreign aid budget is not charity, at least thats not its purpose which is to project British influence across the world. The military budget and the foreign aid budget are 2 sides of the same coin.

 Palindrome wrote:

 eskimo wrote:
I suppose you could always vote for a government that gives a monkey's.

What happens when none of them do?

 jhe90 wrote:
Well funding wise, we have a giant foreign aid budget and people going hungry, homeless, flooded..

Spend it at home, it seems we need it right now, charity begins at home. There's alot that needs to be done in uk, that money would help, alot

The foreign aid budget is not charity, at least thats not its purpose which is to project British influence across the world. The military budget and the foreign aid budget are 2 sides of the same coin.

There are more than 3 parties bud

 eskimo wrote:

 Palindrome wrote:

 eskimo wrote:
I suppose you could always vote for a government that gives a monkey's.

What happens when none of them do?

 jhe90 wrote:
Well funding wise, we have a giant foreign aid budget and people going hungry, homeless, flooded..

Spend it at home, it seems we need it right now, charity begins at home. There's alot that needs to be done in uk, that money would help, alot

The foreign aid budget is not charity, at least thats not its purpose which is to project British influence across the world. The military budget and the foreign aid budget are 2 sides of the same coin.

There are more than 3 parties bud

3 with any hope of gaining a big slice of parliament, the others could coalition but there message with under 10 MP's is going to be diluted badly by the greater whole.

One green/ukip MP cannot do much

A Lancasharian clocking in here, the rain has been awful but thankfully lifted today. For now anyway.

Yesterday the river Lostock which runs behind my house flooded for the first time in nearly three decades, overflowing its 8-10 feet banks. The park behind my house was under water in minutes and the alleyway behind us was about 6 inches deep in water because of a blocked drain (unblocking that was fun) but luckily we where okay, although there was a worry that the bridges might not hold. My end of my village is raised slightly but those poor folks living on Cinnamon hill had a nightmare. There was a literal river running down the road and the houses and businesses at the bottom of it had to be evacuated. The emergency services where out in force and from what I have seen the Ribble burst its banks too, though the flood defences prevented too much damage.

People on the street have been looking at getting sandbags and my family has several bags of compost at the ready. Hopefully the river will not flood again and it is almost back to normal now although the ground is waterlogged and if we have any heavy rain before it can drain away then we may be in trouble (we are on clay). I have been thinking of taking a quick look at the river and maybe moving some of the debris that has become lodged in the critical locations.

Take great care if you go and fiddle with stuff in the river, it's easy to fall in and drown.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Take great care if you go and fiddle with stuff in the river, it's easy to fall in and drown.

Once your in a powerful flood, getting out very hard. Plus debres
Be very careful

Dry as a bone down in the south. Well, it is raining, but not so much as up north and anyway, we live on a gentle slope near the sea, so the water will always have somewhere better to go.

Hope anyone caught up in it stays safe.

It's pretty wet in Henley. At least, I was out on the river yesterday and today, while there wasn't a stream warning I can tell you it was a lot easier going downhill than up. The river is about six inches higher than its usual level. No danger of flooding, though.

Any nation that's got 50 billion pounds to spend on invading Iraq or Afghanistan, has 50 billion to spend on flood defences.

It's a question of priorities.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Any nation that's got 50 billion pounds to spend on invading Iraq or Afghanistan, has 50 billion to spend on flood defences.

It's a question of priorities.

Aye but in some places they got a months rain in 24 hours, they where never expected to take that much water in such a short time when built.. We need in areas new defences built even higher and stronger.

Any new defences will need to be built to higher standards. There's billions that needs to be spent on building and designing new ones.

Did these people realize they were in a flood area when they built or moved in, or is that something the agents kept quiet about?
What is now in motion to help the victims?

Many areas might not have been "flood areas" traditionally. However, development of land that traditionally absorbs rain, especially draining and developing wetlands, leads to the water flowing into areas it never went into previously, creating new flood zones where none were before. Of course, development on floodplains and poor planning is also a big part of it.

The government has allocated emergency funding and deployed the army to help to deal with the problem AFAIK.

 Da Boss wrote:
Many areas might not have been "flood areas" traditionally. However, development of land that traditionally absorbs rain, especially draining and developing wetlands, leads to the water flowing into areas it never went into previously, creating new flood zones where none were before. Of course, development on floodplains and poor planning is also a big part of it.

The government has allocated emergency funding and deployed the army to help to deal with the problem AFAIK.

Where I live, people build pricey homes on hills full of scrub oak, where fires happen every few years. Why they want to do that is beyond me, but flood areas can be trickier to know about if someone isn't educated about that kind of thing.