The real reason for flooding in Somerset Levels? Not global warming – river management

5758659-large[1]
A sign on a bridge over the River Parrett at Burrowbridge, Somerset. Martin Hesp says it is vital that rivers in the area are dredged after years of neglect that has seen capacity tumble Picture: SWNS
UPDATE: Satellite images added.

UPDATE2: Upon further inspection of satellite images and flood maps I’ve concluded that while what this commenter had to say about the history is indeed true, the impact in this situation is not particularly relevant. I was going on the idea that all of the flood control channels in Somerset levels were interconnected, so that there would be multiple paths of egress (directable by small dams). It turns out they are not, and the Huntspill sluice, even if full open, wouldn’t have drained any water where it was most needed. The real issue has to do with the lack of flow capacity in the Kings Sedgemoor Drain, (gravity drain, not pumped) due to silting and vegetation encroachment, as well as similar issues in the River Parrett where a campaign was launched in 2013 to get it dredged, to no avail. Thus I’ve changed the top photo and the title to reflect this new information about lack of management, putting wildlife over people.  – Anthony

UPDATE3/4: This before and after photo shows the problem of silting restricting the flow on the River Parrett (originally only two photos, now 3 together which tells the story better.

somerset-bridge_2825383b
Composite image of the River Parrett in Burrowbridge in the early 1960’s (top left) when dredging was carried out on a regular basis, a recent picture before the current flooding event showing the encroaching river banks (bottom left) and during the recent flooding Photo: SWNS

h/t to Richard North at EU Referendum for the original two on the left, with thanks to WUWT commenters ‘Peter’ and ‘Jones’ and ‘Jabba the Cat’

This article at The Telegraph is the source: How Somerset Levels river flooded after it was not dredged for decades

===============================================================

We’ve previously covered the absurd claims that “global warming” was the cause of flooding in Somerset, UK here and here, with yesterday, even a senior scientist at the Met Office disagreeing with the spinmistress in charge, Julio Slingo’s claim about an AGW connection. Now we learn the real reason. Lack of management.  The ROF pumping station was turned off in 2008 and nothing was done to replace it, while at the same time the Huntspill sluice gates to drain water to the sea seemed to be improperly managed by the EA.

I’m repeating the comment here to give wide distribution.

Bishop Hill writes: Commenter “Corporal Jones’ Ghost’ left this comment on one of the flooding threads. It looks to be quite important. (see my notes above in update 2, this claim while historically true, is no longer credible as a reason for flooding – Anthony)

============================================================

I want to tell you what really has happened on the Somerset Levels.

I am remaining anonymous for good reason, I think you’ll understand why.

You have to go back to 1939, when the MOD decided that they needed a new Munitions factory for HDX explosives, HDX uses a lot of water, all munitions manufacture does, but HDX is greedy. 

The levels had too much water and so we built one on the Levels, ROF37 or ROF Bridgewater or ROF Woolavington, it’s all the same place.

To ensure that there was enough water even on the waterlogged Levels, we built the Huntspill River, we then connected it to the River Brue to the North and the Kings Sedgemoor Drain via a pipe to the South, we also widened the River Sowy to get water to our factory.

We would use >5 thousand million litres every year, rain or shine.

We then disposed of it into the sea, we had to do this regardless of the tidal conditions and we had steam pumps that did this remarkable task, they pumped out at the Huntspill sluice 3 thousand million ltrs a year, the rest was either evaporated, too contaminated and shipped off-site or left the factory in the product!

Part of the legacy f the fall of Communism was that we didn’t need quite so much ordnance to practice killing the deadly foe.

In the mid 1990s the decision was made and we ran down the ROFs.

By 2000 ROF37 was given an execution date of 2008 and like all state executions, it was carried out on time.

We all knew that the ‘run-on’ from our departure would be that the EA/Levels Boards needed to take over pumping, they couldn’t afford our old system as it was very old and on restricted land.

I should explain at this point that the ONLY pumping done was ours, we could and did pump no matter the tides, we’d taken over the responsibility/control in 1940 for all high volume pumping on the Levels.

We advised that the Huntspill be automated and the Kings Sedgemoor Drain be pumped and made strong representation to that effect.

But every meeting with the EA ended in frustration as they never sent a single seriously knowledgeable Drainage Engineer to any meeting. The Levels Boards understood the issues and tried to get the pumps installed.

It didn’t happen.

One of the problems with draining the Levels is silting, we used to pump in such a way as to utilise ‘scour’ of all the rhynes and ditches and pipelines to keep them clear, when we shut down in the 50s due to a slight mishap and explosion on site in just 15 days of reduced use we found the lines lost about 1% of their ‘flow sympathy’ meaning we had to suck about 1% harder to get the same amount of water through the top metering point.

We all hoped that the 2007 flood would wake the EA up and get them to re-think their stance on the KSD pumps, they would not even agree to a meeting! We were pumping furiously on a limited facility in that year or that flood would have been horrific.

Today, looking at the flood charts and pictures it is obvious that the connection to the Huntspill is blocked, silted up.

So the water can’t be ‘smeared’ over all the levels as in the past, that is why ‘record’ levels are being recorded in certain areas whilst others are barely affected.

The poor chap who has built an Island out of his home has my sympathies, he the KSD pumps been in place for the last 6 years he’d not be in the predicament he is in, nor for that matter would most of the others on the levels, the water won’t be going anywhere soon.

This is the reality of the situation, if you wish to check for yourself, you can go to even the Wiki pages and read about it (until they get edited no doubt!) but all that I’ve written is a matter of public record and can be verified elsewhere.

I enclose a single link to the fact that we did our best to convince the EA that the matter was serious.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Sedgemoor_Drain

Quote from above…

Floodwater is removed from many of the moors of the Somerset Levels by pumping stations, which were originally steam-powered. These were superseded by diesel engines, and more recently by electric pumps. The King’s Sedgemoor Drain is unusual in that it operates entirely by gravity. Consideration was given to replacing Dunball clyse with a pumping station in 2002, which would have allowed water to be discharged into the estuary at all states of the tide, but this course of action was not followed. Management of the Drain is the responsibility of the Environment Agency, whereas the numerous rhynes or drainage ditches which feed into the Drain are the responsibility of several Internal Drainage Boards, who work together as the Parrett Consortium of Drainage Boards.[19]

The reference point… ^ The Parrett Catchment Water Management Strategy Action Plan. Environment Agency. 2002. ISBN 1-85705-788-0. Retrieved 16 November 2010.

I thought someone ought to know the real truth behind this fiasco.

=============================================================

Also in the reference in Wikipedia is this story which backs up the commenter’s claim:

As part of the war effort, an explosives factory, ROF Bridgwater, was built at Puriton. The Catchment Board needed to be able to guarantee that 4.5 million gallons (20.5 Megalitres) of process water would be available to the factory every day. To this end, the Huntspill River was constructed, a little further to the north, which was essentially a revival of a plan by J. Aubrey Clark in 1853, to provide better drainage for the Brue valley. King’s Sedgemoor drain was deemed to be a backup source for water, should the Huntspill scheme fail, and so all of the work which had been planned before the war started was completed, to ensure that the volume of water needed was always available.[14] Greylake sluice was built by the Somerset Rivers Catchment Board in 1942, and used guillotine gates to control water levels. The original plaque commemorating its completion was incorporated into the new structure when the sluice was rebuilt in 2006.[15]

To help readers visualize, here is a couple of map items from Google Earth that I annotated. First, the ROF37 munitions factory, Huntspill River, the Huntspill Sluice (gates) and their proximity to the town of Bridgwater:

Hunstspil_ROF_map

It looks like they keep the Huntspill River artificially high, even in good weather. The voles must be happy:

Hunstspill_sluice

It seems the writing was on the wall in January 2014, as shown in this video:

Here are some photos from that same day:

DSC_0641[1]

But no, it MUST be AGW because water mismanagement by the Environmental Authority is out of the question.

Of course, this EA map says otherwise, click to enlarge:

EA_Map

This is from a policy document from 2008 which referred to the possibility – so-called option 6 – of allowing parts of the Levels to flood:

Policy Unit 8- Somerset Levels and Moors

Policy option 6 – Take action to increase the frequency of flooding to deliver benefits locally or elsewhere, which may constitute an overall flood risk reduction.

Note: This policy option involves a strategic increase in flooding in allocated areas, but is not intended to affect the risk to individual properties.

Click to access Parret%20Catchment%20Flood%20Management%20Plan.pdf

UPDATE:

Satellite image from Feb 8th, click to enlarge:

Somerset_sat_image_article

Same area seen today from MODIS, the brown floodwaters are obvious, though reduced:

MODIS_Somerset1

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
276 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Janne Pohjala
February 19, 2014 10:54 am

Could it be an similar thing as if you have a pool of water at the beach and use stick to make a small stream in sand and water starts to flow. Flow takes more sand with it making stream bigger and bigger and pool starts to drain faster and faster?
Could this happen underground also? Like if you lower the ground water level on north side, higher water on the south side starts to flow in sand and gravel layer towards north, seeking a weak spot. When the pressure difference gets too high, weakest spot underground gives and sand and gravel starts to flow with water opening up an underground river, which moves water faster and faster to north until both pools are at equal level?
So creating large difference in ground water level changes the flow of water from slowly seeping though sand and gravel bed to new underground river flooding the north pool?
By the way, if this has happened before, how long time ago it was? I mean that is it possible that that underground river created then, could it still be there and would prevent the sudden flood if this underground waterway would still be there? Could the water now flow smoothly using exiting route if it still exists? What is the difference of ground water levels between south and north at the moment? How much pent up potential energy there is?
I agree that current pumping is the safest way, but could it be tested somehow if the northern route could also be used with higher rate. It could double the draining rate?

Corporal Jones' Ghost
February 19, 2014 11:06 am

Nope, tried to it in Open Office draw and i nearly punched the screen out.
I can draw it in a 30 seconds with pen and paper, just spent 20 fruitless and frustrating minutes hoping my computer might be as useful as pen and paper, it’s not!
I’m going to give up on this, sorry.

RichardLH
February 19, 2014 11:19 am

Corporal Jones’ Ghost says:
February 19, 2014 at 11:06 am
“Nope, tried to it in Open Office draw and i nearly punched the screen out.”
I use Paint.net for photos and for quick sketches all the time. It has a very useful layer ability with a undo/redo capability that means you can get yourself out of almost any hole you get into.
A simple pen and ink if that is all you want. Lines, circles, etc. are yours to command.
And all for free with tutorials if you need them.
http://download.cnet.com/Paint-NET/3000-2192_4-10338146.html

GregM
February 19, 2014 11:42 am

richardscourtney February 18, 2014 at 9:51 am (My-oh-My at 9:21 am)
“We are the Environment Agency.
It’s our job to look after your environment and make it a better place– for you, and for future generations”
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!

Janne Pohjala
February 19, 2014 12:25 pm

Could the drawing look anything like this:comment image

Rastech
February 19, 2014 12:29 pm

Corporal Jones’ Ghost, wouldn’t it be easier to download an online map of the relative area (if too big, just cut out the area you want and paste it into a new picture), and just draw the lines on that (like a highlighter pen type width) and save it as a different file name?
Once you get part of it right, save as a new file name, get the next bit right, save as a different file name, and so on, so if one bit doesn’t turn out right, all you have to do is load your last saved file name to save starting over again?
Good luck with it, I’ve spent many long nights doing things like this, and it does get easier.

RichardLH
February 19, 2014 12:45 pm

Corporal Jones’ Ghost says:
February 19, 2014 at 11:06 am
“Nope, tried to it in Open Office draw and i nearly punched the screen out.”
I think that this shows what you wanted
http://snag.gy/ybmIi.jpg

Janne Pohjala
February 19, 2014 12:56 pm

More artistic version of graph:comment image

RichardLH
February 19, 2014 1:04 pm

Corporal Jones’ Ghost:
The http://snag.gy/ybmIi.jpg you can edit for yourself with simple pen type drawing tools provided (and undo) so you should be able to re-post it (or any other image) modified as you like.

Janne Pohjala
February 19, 2014 1:12 pm

OK. Can we say to AGW-positives that there seems to be serious AGW going on is south part of moor, but a few miles north there seem to be no AGW. Could you explain this? Could there be some differences in draining?
I think it’s plausible that EA measured the river flows on south side when factory was still pumping water and taking water away from south and they did not know it? When pumping lessened, ground water started raise in the whole area and GC now only keep north side dry and there is now more water on the south side, which cannot drain on surface though silted waterways.

RichardLH
February 19, 2014 1:43 pm

Janne Pohjala says:
February 19, 2014 at 1:12 pm
“OK. Can we say to AGW-positives that there seems to be serious AGW going on is south part of moor, but a few miles north there seem to be no AGW. Could you explain this? Could there be some differences in draining? ”
The lack of dredging on the River Parret which would probably have improved water flow down stream (alright it is complicated by silt inflow from the Severn as well) and poor maintenance of the KSD water flows seems to have been the major problem.
Bridgewater used to be a sea port at one time – lousy navigation requirements though as do all other rivers on the Severn!
The Gold Corner pumping station/Huntspill River will do little to help the higher reaches of the Parret around Burrowbridge unfortunately AFIK.

My-oh-My
February 19, 2014 3:06 pm

@Corporal Jones’ Ghost:
I would be grateful for some clarification on a couple of points, if you would:
1>”The underground water ‘migrates’ up the vertical line and tries to escape through that middle horizontal line to the sea and it does, but it also moves beyond it to the upper part of the rev E.”
and:
2> “It is this weak Artesian effect that means if you pump water on the North Moor you don’t lower it, it rises!!!”
What mechanism allows the ‘migration’ of the water up our vertical line of the reversed ‘E’, is there a sloping shingle bed and why does the removal of a little of the hydrostatic head cause this movement to start?
Thank you for your contributions.

RichardLH
February 19, 2014 3:30 pm

Corporal Jones’ Ghost:
The image I posted earlier updated with the rough areas that are/were under water
http://snag.gy/Ev8MA.jpg

R. de Haan
February 19, 2014 4:16 pm

The Somerset Floods have EU directives written all over it: http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=84726

My-oh-My
February 19, 2014 5:19 pm

@R. de Haan,
I guess that turning man-made rivers/reservoirs into ‘fish-ponds’ is not the best way forward!

Corporal Jones' Ghost
February 19, 2014 5:51 pm

Janne your second is close, if we lay the flooded area on RLHs drawing over it you have it nailed.
The water is under pressure from the inland aquifers, the less soil on top the more readily it will breach the surface and that is why there is that splash in the North, there is very little cap on the water.
So drawing the water toward the North Moor is a carefully controlled exercise.
The GC pumps start big to get the natural artesian pump to start then the GC is used to keep it from letting go completely, it is a balancing act.
Too much of one for the EA we thought and so they were given the easy option, they didn’t have munitions to make, and the pumps on the end of the KSD were proposed.
But rejected.
There are pumps there now and a permanent installation is almost certain now on the site.
This is a good thing.
Pull the water out on the KSD now as fiercely as they can then dredge the rivers carefully, after a while run the pumps on alternate overall rates, the best way is to have 5 pumps and run them alternately 4 then 1 so as to provide a good scour.
Child’s play.

My-oh-My
February 19, 2014 6:04 pm

Enjoy your ‘invite’ visit today, keep them on the side of common-sense.
Thanks again for your input, do tell us how it went.

My-oh-My
February 19, 2014 6:14 pm

Not that it is important, but since it done; as I see the outlined map, using Google Earth:
http://snag.gy/5u1f4.jpg
Follow the yellow-shingle-road though, the red lines were my first ‘rough’ try (that I then could not find a way of removing)

RichardLH
February 20, 2014 2:46 am

Corporal Jones’ Ghost says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:51 pm
“Pull the water out on the KSD now as fiercely as they can then dredge the rivers carefully, after a while run the pumps on alternate overall rates, the best way is to have 5 pumps and run them alternately 4 then 1 so as to provide a good scour.”
Before they go rushing off to add pumps then a 3 step plan to do it all with gravity would probably be a good start.
http://snag.gy/MaEpX.jpg

RichardLH
February 20, 2014 2:50 am

After all, this has worked fairly well since 1795! I bet those restrictions near the sea come from much later than then!
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/image.aspx?compid=15100&filename=fig04.gif&pubid=62
from
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=15100

richardscourtney
February 20, 2014 3:42 am

RichardLH:
I dot intend to denigrate the expertise of Corporal Jones’ Ghost but I write to support your post at
February 20, 2014 at 2:46 am.
The Levels were drained to provide needed additional agricultural land in support of the Napoleonic Wars. This was conducted from 1770 to 1883
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/621006?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103425633051
Clearly, there have been many land use changes since then, but I would welcome an explanation from Corporal Jones’ Ghost as to why he thinks additional pumping stations with a complex pumping schedule (with possibility of scheduling error) is now needed.
Richard

richardscourtney
February 20, 2014 3:44 am

I intended to begin
I don’t intend
Sorry. Richard

RichardLH
February 20, 2014 4:37 am

richardscourtney says:
February 20, 2014 at 3:42 am
I was taken over a lot of the levels as a kid (my uncle worked for British Cellophane in Bridgewater) to see the engineering that had gone on.
I am sure I went to Dunball quay but I just cannot remember what the sluices looked like then. There is no question that any hydraulic engineer would have a fit about the state of the last few 100’s meters of the channel as it is now!
And they wonder why it cannot shift the amount of water to sea that is required?
As I mentioned up thread, the French (and the Dutch) have a much better grasp of how to use Gravity and the Tides to do a lot of heavy lifting, without the need for continuous pumping.
The Gold Corner pumps were only there in the first place because they didn’t have the time to build a proper, fully gravity drained solution for the Huntspill River (again see up thread). Too much haste in war time I suspect.

RichardLH
February 20, 2014 10:27 am

Found it. The Dunball Clyce was re-built in 1972 when they no doubt did all the piling and narrowed the entrance, etc., extended the Wharf to allow for more gravel shipping as far as I can tell. The entrance was much wider before then but the only photos I can find stretch back to 1900’s which was certainly before my time!
They always had problems with that exit to the river, silting up and the like (14 ft of silt not being considered unusual!), as it was a compromise because of objections by landowners back in the 1700’s that put it there in the first place!

milodonharlani
February 20, 2014 4:50 pm