Tree Surgery on the Riverbank.
The Environment Agency are spending huge amounts of available funding, planting young trees to barren sided riverbanks all over the country, attempting to create and encourage  essential natural root stabilization to prevent future bank erosion.
Yet a tree surgeon was assigned, (by the Environment Agency and Flood Action Group) to cut down "all" the young but very much established saplings along the edge of the river Caldew adjacent Millhouse.

When asked, he stated that he was just doing what had been requested.

During this project, most of the riverbank saplings and trees were destined to be cut down at the base just like this one shown below.
An example can seen here. This very healthy mature tree has been completely destroyed down to an irretrievable level.

Its roots would have been worthy of providing riverbank stability for many future generations.

It's roots will now die, & decay.

This randomly chosen example of cutting down this solitary tree, (the only one for a lengthy stretch) means this length of the riverbank will now be left without any form of root stabilisation.
The Flood action group were quite determined to have most the riverbank trees and saplings cut down to the base such as this one.
 
"Thankfully, common sense prevailed, as a last minute riverbank intervention by an experienced long term practically minded local resident stepped in to stop the wholesale destruction, which would have undoubtably devastated the natural stabilization of our riverbank with immediate effect, and for future generations".
                              _____________________________________
This is a copy of a proceeding defence statement made by a member of the Millhouse Flood Action Group,    9th March 2017 :-

"This work has had full approval from the Environment Agency and Natural England to pollard and remove trees on the Caldew, We also have permits for the work and permission from both landowners who have responsibility for the bund.  This is another piece of the bigger picture the Flood Group are working towards to make things better for the village".
                           ______________________________________
These important saplings with essentially matured roots are the new generation to create riverbank stabilization to our stretch of river. 

We are so fortunate to have inherited this natural resource on our riverbank.

There are many communities situated beside barren sided rivers all over the country.
Due to their riverbank earth texture makeup they are unable sustain tree growth, therefore are constantly plagued by bank erosion. These communities would love to have our natural gift of tree root growth on their riverbanks.
There are many hundreds of Farmers in this country who are fighting a constant battle with river edge erosion adjacent their land.  In some cases, fences have to be re-errected or even re-sited several times each year.   Without vital tree root growth on their bordering riverbanks, the course of their rivers change constantly, eroding banks and destroying fences.  These farmers attempts to plant trees for stability on their banks are dashed by the very next high river level that whisks them away, together with their un-established roots.
These are 2 randomly selected photos of rivers with associated lengths of bank erosion, somewhere in this country.

Here is a typical example of what can happen when a riverbank lacks a stable tree root system. 
It is important to note:   the stretches of riverbank that are tree lined, "DO NOT" suffer from any form of erosion.   
In the example on the above left, large rocks have had to be imported to prevent further erosion, to compensate for the lack of an established root system.  There are examples of this on the western side of our stretch of the river Caldew.
And once this riverbank erosion is ignited, it is extremely difficult to artificially encourage new tree growth from scratch on any of these eroded sections, due to buffeting from regular raised river levels.
We are so fortunate that our stretch of the Caldew is blessed with this natural format of tree lined growth.  We should not destroy this valuable natural asset, but encourage it.
Prior to a last minute intervention from a long-stead resident of the village, the majority of the saplings & small trees were witnessed as being cut down to the sock tops wholesale, and completely stripped from the riverbank.

Until this riverbank intervention, there was very little evidence of efforts to save or effectively coppice any of these saplings at a high level.
This would have undoubtably effected the essential stabilization of the riverbank for future generations, when inevitably these invaluable sapling roots would have died-off and rotted away.

.    So why did the Environment Agency and Flood Action Group request that the riverbank be completely stripped of its greatest asset?
.    So why were we having our riverbank trees cut down to the sock tops, when other areas and rivers are desperately trying to get some sort of credible natural riverbank root stabiliztion system started?
.     Why has a huge amount of money been ploughed into this project that simply WILL NOT help the village's flood resilience in any form?   Once again, this valuable funding could have been used on a credible resilience project for the village.
Just over an hour following the first riverbank consultation by the long-stead villager,

the tree surgeon came back and positively stated,

"there has been a turning of tide",

and he then suggested a credible sustainable compromise.
He came up with the welcome suggestion of coppiceing the saplings, not to the originally planned ground level, but to a much higher level just above the top of the flood bank/bund,    (as shown).

This is a logical compromise, as it avoids the saplings being blatantly cut down in their flourishing prime.
These photos,
just above the bridge, show the young established trees before coppiceing,

and after the high level Coppiceing or Pollarding.
The coppice procedure will encourage new budding and top-end growth, at the same time maintaining the essential healthy, already established root growth to create bank stability.   In this format, when newly done, their trunks/butts offer absolutely no resistance to the current flow of the swollen river. 
BUT the BIG negative to coppiceing trees on riverbanks is that the new budding also develops low down on the trunk, in turn, (without regular maintenance) creates "more" resistance against the river water swell, which again contradicts this whole project.
The individuals who ordered this work to be carried out, (in it's original requested format) sadly must be very much out of touch with riverbank reality.  The original planned project format, of completely stripping the saplings, would have stripped our stretch of river of it's greatest natural asset.

We'll keep you posted on this page of the progression of development of these newly coppiced saplins.
                                            _____________________________
Apparently, the Environment Agency and Flood Action group had 2 reasons for cutting down these trees.

(1)  "They cause friction and resistance to the current flow, which could cause them to be pushed over". 

Response:  There are dozens, of very mature "remaining trees" on the western bank, (other side) which have had their well established roots and trunks actually growing out of the water for hundreds of years.  Their vertical profile angle has never been disrupted or changed by any of the extreme river levels.   The trees seem to flourish better with their exposed roots and trunks actually protruding from the river bed, up through the water.
The big contradiction is, by the coppiceing procedure it incourages new budding low down on the trunk which without regular maintenace will cause even more friction and resistance to the water flow than before.

(2)  "To prevent them blocking the river when they get blown over".

Response: The big contradiction to this theory is that as the river is situated in a sheltered valley it is extremely rare for any tree to be blown over.  ALSO as the majority of our wind comes in from the west it would have the effect of blowing any susceptible tree on the (eastern) village side, onto the bank, not into the river.   The large "remaining trees" on the western side are more likely to be blown into and accross the river. 
There are probably hundreds of mature "remaining trees" lining the edge of the western side of the river.

These western side "remaining trees" are much more likely to block the river, if they ever blow over.

So why has a huge amount of money been spent on Tree Surgery, and only on the village, (eastern) side of the river?
Sadly, the Tree Surgery is yet another Environment Agency and Flood Action group expensive "hare-brained" scheme that unfortunately, after another huge pointless outlay of funding, will NOT contribute in any form, to the vital long awaited flood resilience the vulnerable properties of MILLHOUSE so desperately still require.

To date, their attitude has been to randomly fire money at a selected project with the thoughts that it will instantly make it, and the village better.  Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much thought being put into their choice of projects, and their sequence of priority to provide crucial resilience for MILLHOUSE. By their high profile projects such as this, it is their way of showing they are doing something.

Some individuals of the Flood Action Group have repeatedly stated that "all the small MFAG projects will add up to a credible big picture".
Contrary to their remark, in reality, the schools that most of us attended, preached that various wrongs never made a right. The same applies to various individual "smalls" which do NOT equate to a credible "big".

There are many people of the same opinion.  The practicality of the groups opinionated choice of inventive projects has serious shortfalls to provide any crutial flood resilience to our beloved MILLHOUSE.   There is an emerging distrust in their choice of actions and closed shop atitude.  To date, the small pieces have not added up to a larger picture, and from the nature of previous and future proposed projects, never will.  The recent numerus lame duck projects organised by the current individuals of the flood action group in a blind tangent, will prove to be our beloved village's embarrassing legacy for this, and future generations.
Sadly, once again a huge amount of money has been fired at this totally unnecessary riverbank tree surgery project, another project that will not benefit MILLHOUSE in any form. 
Instead of instigating this quite unnecessary tree surgery, and other lame duck projects on a tangent, it would have been a great deal easier, and just as beneficial to the village for the self opinionated officials to stand in a row on the bridge and throw £20 notes into the river Caldew.

                                                            __________________

The sooner the original overflow path for the river Caldew bridge is reinstated, the sooner the properties in MILLHOUSE will actually become desirable and marketable, (as they used to be).
Share by: