![5758659-large[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/5758659-large1.jpg?w=300&resize=300%2C201)
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.

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:
It looks like they keep the Huntspill River artificially high, even in good weather. The voles must be happy:
It seems the writing was on the wall in January 2014, as shown in this video:
Here are some photos from that same day:
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:
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:
Same area seen today from MODIS, the brown floodwaters are obvious, though reduced:


![DSC_0641[1]](https://i0.wp.com/live.staticflickr.com/5513/12551395695_0377cc0d48_b.jpg?resize=800%2C600&quality=83&ssl=1)



Given a ‘letter’ from experts published in the Daily Telegraph today,
‘The Government needs to call in the flood experts’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/10652611/The-Government-needs-to-call-in-the-flood-experts.html
I redraw attention to my initial link posted Feb 17th. This is not a long meandering load of old rope. But a real expert who properly lays out facts (see Rainfall para) and his idea of ‘the way ahead’.
http://www.waterpowermagazine.com/features/featurefloods-on-the-somerset-levels-a-sad-tale-of-ignorance-and-neglect-4172602/
Pip
Pip Sant says:
February 20, 2014 at 10:04 pm
“If the capacity of the rivers Tone, Parrett, and Brue in their lower reaches were to be increased by 10m3 s-1 then allowing for the effects of the daily tidal regime, would be expected to evacuate an additional 1.29Mm3 per day.”
I think that says it all.
Coupled with decent maintenance of the Rhynes, Ditches, man made Rivers, Sluices, etc. would remove the need for any additional pumps and let nature and the tides do it all properly (and for free or nearly so). Bring in the French and the Dutch as consultants as suggested in the letter in the Telegraph (though I do think we have good enough engineers here in the UK to do it if only someone would spend the money to ask them and implement what they say is needed in the first place).
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=columnists&issue=1360
I guess our newspapers are not really up for presenting all the facts re: Level money – Allegedly.
There be more to this farming game than meets the casual eye – however private !
Old CJG seems to have gone to ground – checking out the underlay no doubt !
Pip
What I think is surprising with all the experts running around suggesting that dredging is not the answer is that no one looks at the pictures of the water fed to the Dunball Clyce and wonders why it is that the picture looks like a shallow set of rapids!
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72959000/jpg/_72959812_swns_dutch_pumps_19.jpg
and that is before the pumps were switched on!
That last few hundred meters of the KSD has been allowed to fall into neglect over time (since BR flogged off the Wharf probably) and it now acts as a giant stopper on the proper flow of water to the sea.
http://snag.gy/MaEpX.jpg
Been down there, came back this morning!
I spoke to some farmers and was able to check if the ‘cross flow’ runs were clear to the shingle, not one was. Not a single one, walked the entire area we used to inspect with a rope shovel every run has at least a foot of clay like silt on it’s bottom.
100 years of good management lost in just 5/6 years of incompetence.
Not an ounce of shame is on the faces of the EA chaps and chapesses, in fact they see this as more reason to not bother to maintain the moors.
My opinion is that the Levels as we have known them is condemned to a historical footnote, there is no enthusiasm for them as they were and the talk is still of the idea of a wading bird sanctuary, to be discussing the flooding and to be told to ‘look over there’ at a 6inch deep lake/puddle with a few hundred birds on it’s edge and ‘realise’ what a ‘fabulous and magnificent sight’ that is, is galling, infuriating actually.
If I was a home owner on that Moor I’d have drowned that person there and then, I’d be under arrest.
Kiss the Moors goodbye, we are being dictated to by idiots.
Cheered myself up yesterday with lunch in Somerton but the gloom descended once we left the pub.
Just to let CJG know that someone is still reading this thread!
It’s not just the Levels. Sometimes I think “Kiss Britain goodbye”. We are being ruled by student activists who never grew up.
One day, they will be looking for people like yourself who remember how things ought to be done. But we shall all be dead and gone, taking our knowledge with us, and our successors will have to re-invent the wheel. So this is how empires fall.
I suppose there is still an outside chance that the British people will wake up before it’s too late. But they will have a mountain to climb.
Corporal Jones’ Ghost:
Thankyou for your report at February 24, 2014 at 8:05 am. It includes this
I share your anger and despair, but the Levels are merely the beginning.
When the power stations are shut the country will be shut when the wind is not blowing or is blowing too strong for the windfarms to operate.
The dictation is not by “idiots”: we are being governed by adherents to an evil ideology which sees a bird sanctuary as more valuable than the homes of hundreds of families.
Richard
Corporal Jones Ghost
Do you know what size pumps where in the ROF buildings as comments have been made that the buildings are rather small. I could understand if the pumps where steam but finding actual data is proving difficult.
Corporal Jones’ Ghost:
As I have suggested above, the mismanagement of the KSD extends over its whole length as well as the feeds to it.
As far as I can tell, after BR flogged off the Wharf, they were allowed to reduce the exit to the sea by extending the dock and someone allowed a farm access road to infill 1/4 of the width and no-one has bothered to dredge that last few hundred meters before the sea exit.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72959000/jpg/_72959812_swns_dutch_pumps_19.jpg
http://snag.gy/MaEpX.jpg
This mean that the last few hundred meters of the KSD probably account for the majority of the drop to the sea! It is like having a flat road all the way to the coast and the all the downhill is in the last few hundred meters!
Why are we not surprised that the KSD doesn’t drain that well.
It was always thus. The KSD is neglected until such time as we have a big flood and the it gets some care and attention for a few years,dredged, etc. Has been like this almost since it was first built!
Just like the insane, these people are deaf to reason, and blind to the glaringly obvious.
So they aren’t ‘just like’ the insane.
They actually are insane.
Was the closing of the Mental Hospitals and ‘Care in the Community’, actually a recruiting drive?
Cannot see anything about how the existing drainage system will be maintained in any of the plans.
http://huntspillenergypark.com/consultation-and-planning/
As CJG believes the factory site is so key to drainage in the area then surely the site must have a robust drainage scheme before any development takes place
I have been following this thread with total fascination, having lived on the Moors for most of my adult life, and until now never really appreciated just how involved the management of the area really was.
Of course, I knew the moors and levels are a completely artificial environment, carefully maintained this way for centuries. I also knew that the Huntspill and KSD had been created to provide a water supply for the munitions factory at Woolavington (but not so recently, I would have guessed early 19th century). But I had no idea of the volumes of water used, or the pipeline over/around the Poldens – I’ve driven past the pumping house by Crandon bridge hundreds of times and noticed the BAE Systems sign but never put two and two together.
If you’re still following this thread, Corporal Jones’ Ghost, I have a couple of questions/observations:
1. If water flows freely under the Poldens (A39 ridge), why was there a need to pump water over them from the KSD? Was it to provide two independent water supplies (in the event of the sluices on the Hunstpill being destroyed) or was it because the South Drain/Cripps River couldn’t provide enough water on their own?
2. Could the bottleneck at the western end of the KSD be there deliberately to increase the speed of flow through it, encouraging scouring and preventing the build up of silt in front of the sluices?
3. It seems to me that the Huntspill and the KSD from the M5 at least as far as Peachey Bridge should be cnsidered as ‘linear’ reservoirs, just as much as drainage channels. I don’t know the Hunspill very well but the level in the KSD seems to vary considerably, suggesting it is acting as a buffer. A couple of weeks ago (after the floods began but before the Dutch pumps arrived) I walked from Peachy Bridge to Bawdrip and back. At the start of my walk the KSD was completely full, lapping over onto the footpath but by the time I returned (about one hour later) the level had dropped by about 2 ft. I imagine this was as a result of the tide falling, allowing the water out through the Dunball Clyse. It certainly seemed to me that the KSD was functioning as designed.
4. The fact that the worst affected area (downstream of Langport at least) seems to be west of the Tone and south of the Parrett suggests to me that the River Sowy hasn’t been doing its job (either through a deliberate decision not to open the Monk’s Leaze Clyse sooner or inadequate flow through it), namely to divert some of the flow in the Parrett into the KSD. That would have reduced the flow in the Parrett at Burrowbridge, where it is joined by the Tone. Is this a reasonable assessment or am I over-simplifying things?
5. On the KSD between Peachey Bridge and Bawdrip there are two very large wooden posts, one on either side of a small rhyne that joins the KSD. Each post is surrounded by four ‘benches’ arranged in a cruciform shape and the footpath takes a little detour around the whole arrangement. Do you have any idea of the purpose of these posts? Were they anything to do with the work undertaken by the ROF?
Finally a thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread, for educating me.
renewablejohn:
As the Huntspill River (which is the supply to the factory site) is some 2 meters above its feedstock from the South Drain and pumped up to that level by the Gold Corner pumps I am not sure how anything to do with the factory or its drainage is part of the problem. That area around the GC pump inlets is one of the few ‘dry’ spots on the map.
Almost all of the flooding is around the River Parret and the KSD. In places that are very far away upstream from the factory area you are discussing.
RichardLH
The KSD is a pinchpoint on the alternate drainage of the Parrett. Learning from history it appears to have a pumped outlet at Westonzoyland onto the Parrett and a pumped outlet to the Huntspill via the ROF site. Obviously even if you could reconnect the Westonzoyland site there would be no point until the capacity of the Parrett was increased by dredging. However the Huntspill is a different matter with huge capacity and the redevelopment of the ROF site being at the planning stage. A robust upgrade of the pumping capacity between the KSD and Huntspill should be sort as a S106 agreement for development of the site as well as maintaining the existing drainage systems on the site to cope with any additional drainage capacity required for the development.
renewablejohn
The seaward outlet of the KSD has been considerably neglected as I mentioned above. Almost all of the ‘drop’ to outlet levels is in the last few hundred meters. This is hardly a sensible state of affairs. There are images which clearly show that the width of the outlet has been decreased since BR flogged off the wharf. An access road has been allowed to spill into the KSD itself at the very point that it should be as wide as possible. The amount of drop can be seen in the image I supplied above which was BEFORE the pumps at Dunball Cycle were switched on and there is what can only be described as a shallow rapid from the A34 onwards.
The KSD has always suffered, as do all of the man made rivers including the Huntspill, from the peat in the base rising up to block the channel. This has always been the case. Look through the history books if you do not believe me. IN fact one of the reasons that the Huntspill is so shallow is precisely because of that problem.
http://somersetrivers.org/index.php?module=Content&func=view&pid=17
“The initial design was for a channel depth of 25 feet to allow a gravitational feed from the South Drain. Unfortunately the spoil from the excavations was too heavy for the peat subsoil and pushed the banks back into the channel. A new scheme was devised with a 16 foot deep channel which required water from the South Drain to be pumped into the channel.”
Prospective 8 Km of dredging from Rivers Tone /Parrett intersect (when banks are suitably dry) to ‘The Somerset’ rail bridge near M5 motorway.
I reckon the Parrett has an average width – measured to the ‘green’ bank edges of about 12.5 metres, if we consider the banks as being vertical (they are not), with 1 metre extra depth dredged, then we have less than an extra cross sectional area of 12.5 square metres. 8,000 metres of this creates less than 100,000 tonnes extra capacity. Enough to fill a circular area of approx’ 179 metres radius to a depth of 1 metre. same as 10 hectares or 27.4 acres… Not a lot when one considers 179 m radius, much less the amount of flooding we see on the levels.
It was said one group of the Dutch pumps could / were pumping 15 tonnes a second, so that would be 100,000 tonnes in less than 2 hours (at £200,000 per week in fuel costs !!) to pump the prospective extra water in the Parrett.
Once again ‘Yer tis’ http://www.waterpowermagazine.com/features/featurefloods-on-the-somerset-levels-a-sad-tale-of-ignorance-and-neglect-4172602/
Pip
Pip Sant
But your calculations don’t take into account the flow of the river. Surely it’s not simply storing that extra volume of water, it’s transporting it out to sea. If you assume a mean flow of 1m/s (for easy arithmetic, I don’t know how accurate that is – being tidal it will vary significantly) and taking your additional cross-sectional area of 12.5m^2, that means an additional 12.5m^3 of water is flowing out to sea, not far off what the pumps you mention are achieving.
Sorry, I meant 12.5m^3/s.
I agree with regard to flow.
But a gut feeling says a square of 312 metre length of side by 1 metre deep contains near enough 100,000 m³ or tonnes of water just isn’t going to make a vast difference compared to the vast amount flooding the land.
The EA website reports :-
‘Over 65 pumps, including those imported from the Netherlands, are working to pump millions of tonnes of water off the levels every day.’ and that on top of the normal use of outflows to the Severn.
Surely extra depth right now would mean deeper river and not much else.
BTW. only 8Km to be dredged from Tone intersect to Somerset Rail Bridge beside the M5.
We have a massive problem with no easy answers.
Pip
Dunball Wharf/Clyce
What it used to look like
http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c274/richardlinsleyhood/DunballRailway_zpsbe727f3c.jpg
What it looks like today (with the pumps off!)
http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c274/richardlinsleyhood/dunballwharf2014_zps4053e0b6.png
See all that white water and ripples inland. That is down to poor maintenance (including allowing an access road to fill in part of the KSD) and lack of dredging.
A few hundred meters of dredging and maintenance would improve the flow to sea more than just a little.
And that is just one part, the rest upstream and on the levels is in no better state (as your article notes).
There’s also the question of what you do with the 100 000 m^3 of silt you’ve just removed from the river. It the old days it would have gone on top of the banks or been spread on the adjoining fields but you can’t do that anymore. Also, given that dredging simply shifts the problem downstream, it could get wet just to the north of Jn 25. Makes you realize that the system Cpl Jones’ Ghost explained, of getting the water flow to do the hard work for you by scouring, had its advantages. Minimal disturbance to the wildlife and no spoil to dispose of
Agincourt: As it is mud which the Serve Estuary has in a rather great abundance I suspect you could just drop it offshore in the deepest channels and it would be redistributed again by morning!
As I am a great believer of using scour and the tides to do the work of pumping and silt removal ala Mont Saint Michel I can only agree, but we do rather need to get it all sorted out first for it to work properly. Some immediate work on the seaward end of the KSD would be a great start. And cleaning all the ditches, rhynes, etc. would also be very, very useful.