Flood risk remains high, says Environment Agency

Andover Advertiser: Flood risk remains high, says Envionment Agency Flood risk remains high, says Envionment Agency

THE Environment Agency today warned that although water levels are falling the risk of flooding returning is still high.

Mike O’Neill, operations manager at the Environment Agency, said: “The River Itchen flows at Easton have reduced from a peak of 15 tonnes per second last week to around 13 tonnes per second this morning (February 18).

“The reduction in the height of the water levels in Water Lane and Park Avenue is partly due to the reduced flows but also down to the multi agency effort to reduce the risk of flooding to around 100 properties in Winchester city. This is a combination of the work the Environment Agency and army have done by lowering bags from the M3 and A34 bridges upstream of Winchester, as well as the Hampshire Fire and Rescue pumping operation and the sluice operation carried out by Winchester City Council.

“The river remains very responsive to even small amounts of rainfall, we would urge members of the public and businesses to continue to remain on alert as the risk of flooding continues. Although not as intense as the last few weeks there is still some rain forecast over the coming days.”

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:35pm Sat 22 Feb 14

IanIEA says...

Inside the Environment Agency Blog: http://www.insidethe
environmentagency.co
.uk - An ex-EA manager put the internal green conflicts succinctly in his comment the other day, so it's lack of proper direction and priorities: John: "You can consider me one of those senior EA manager - worked in various functions for 9 years, the last 3 as a AEM before leaving in 2011. Most functions outside of FCRM are over funded and inefficient (sustainable places, biodiversity, groundwater, fisheries, even EM itself). At least a fifth of the budget could be re-allocated to higher priority projects by reducing these functions without any detrimental impact to their ability to meet legislative requirements. Unfortunately, the Pitt Review from the 2007 floods was rushed, so didn't go far enough, otherwise, the EA would not again be in the position it is in. That being said, there are some very fine, hard-working and dedicated employees."
Inside the Environment Agency Blog: http://www.insidethe environmentagency.co .uk - An ex-EA manager put the internal green conflicts succinctly in his comment the other day, so it's lack of proper direction and priorities: John: "You can consider me one of those senior EA manager - worked in various functions for 9 years, the last 3 as a AEM before leaving in 2011. Most functions outside of FCRM are over funded and inefficient (sustainable places, biodiversity, groundwater, fisheries, even EM itself). At least a fifth of the budget could be re-allocated to higher priority projects by reducing these functions without any detrimental impact to their ability to meet legislative requirements. Unfortunately, the Pitt Review from the 2007 floods was rushed, so didn't go far enough, otherwise, the EA would not again be in the position it is in. That being said, there are some very fine, hard-working and dedicated employees." IanIEA

3:36pm Sat 22 Feb 14

IanIEA says...

Inside the Environment Agency Blog: http://www.insidethe
environmentagency.co
.uk - An ex-EA manager put the internal green conflicts succinctly in his comment the other day, so it's lack of proper direction and priorities: John: "You can consider me one of those senior EA manager - worked in various functions for 9 years, the last 3 as a AEM before leaving in 2011. Most functions outside of FCRM are over funded and inefficient (sustainable places, biodiversity, groundwater, fisheries, even EM itself). At least a fifth of the budget could be re-allocated to higher priority projects by reducing these functions without any detrimental impact to their ability to meet legislative requirements. Unfortunately, the Pitt Review from the 2007 floods was rushed, so didn't go far enough, otherwise, the EA would not again be in the position it is in. That being said, there are some very fine, hard-working and dedicated employees."
Inside the Environment Agency Blog: http://www.insidethe environmentagency.co .uk - An ex-EA manager put the internal green conflicts succinctly in his comment the other day, so it's lack of proper direction and priorities: John: "You can consider me one of those senior EA manager - worked in various functions for 9 years, the last 3 as a AEM before leaving in 2011. Most functions outside of FCRM are over funded and inefficient (sustainable places, biodiversity, groundwater, fisheries, even EM itself). At least a fifth of the budget could be re-allocated to higher priority projects by reducing these functions without any detrimental impact to their ability to meet legislative requirements. Unfortunately, the Pitt Review from the 2007 floods was rushed, so didn't go far enough, otherwise, the EA would not again be in the position it is in. That being said, there are some very fine, hard-working and dedicated employees." IanIEA

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree