the world has gone mad

[renewablejohn]

Sounds like he got just what he deserved.

No he should have got a thank you from the EA for carrying out the work they should have gone and a cheque to cover the cost of him carrying out the work to such an excellent standard.

[Joeboy]

Such arrogance.

What from the EA and Natural England. Maybe people should get the 'facts' right before believing the biased 'facts' put forward by the BBC showing two pictures unrelated. The second one just after the work had been completed, Has the BBC run out of money to send a reporter to go back and get an up to date picture of the good job which was made of the river restoration and desilting and how well nature has recovered given the TLC to aid recovery. No lets just ignore the facts that the villagers who kept on being flooded because EA could not get around to unblock one arch of a three arch bridge went to the Parish council for action to stop the flooding. The Parish council got no joy from the EA to carry out the work so approached the Ripirian owner to carry out the duty of a Ripirian owner in maintaining the river bank and what a cracking good job they made of it with obviously a very skilled excavator driver. Since the work has been completed there has been no more flooding and the residents are extremely grateful. Just a shame it was not the EA in the dock for not doing the wotk in the first place with compensation for all those suffering flood damage.

Nope that's not what I mean. Wind your neck in John and displace your anger elsewhere. Possibly into his appeal?

[CrofterMannie]

Opinion on whether or not the river needed dug out isn't relevant to his conviction. He deliberately, knowingly and repeatedly broke the law and that's why he has been convicted.

[Mr Gus]

You didn't link to anything useful to reflect that either though RJ, which given that it was several years ago recovery & replanting footage would have given far broader context, something from the council would have been useful, as many oppose EA for a variety of reasons on certain projects (here too) but nothing, the obvious hits are going to be (are) the major media outlets with prominent placement on the net, if you want to big up his work to counter the argument / pictures then it would have been good to include them at the time.

Like I said he has history of doing his own thing so it's not clear cut, (ie more important to put over detail from the council & villagers) because he certainly had a name for himself beforehand clouding the issue. didn't have any pieces in support of him float to the top.

Is the council helping out in a defence / appeal fund & publicly speaking out?

[dan_b]

Well then here's the Murdoch Press reporting on teh same thing. Murdoch's media is not typically supportive of clean tech, renewables or effective conservation actvities, but they've got pretty similar before and after shots.


https://news.sky.com/story/farmer-jaile ... r-12862372
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... onths.html

How about the presumably biased Farmer's Weekly? They should be supporting farmers making every square inch of land "productive", no?

https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/environment/ ... river-lugg

It seems he pleaded guilty.

Such arrogance.

What from the EA and Natural England. Maybe people should get the 'facts' right before believing the biased 'facts' put forward by the BBC showing two pictures unrelated. The second one just after the work had been completed, Has the BBC run out of money to send a reporter to go back and get an up to date picture of the good job which was made of the river restoration and desilting and how well nature has recovered given the TLC to aid recovery.

[renewablejohn]

You didn't link to anything useful to reflect that either though RJ, which given that it was several years ago recovery & replanting footage would have given far broader context, something from the council would have been useful, as many oppose EA for a variety of reasons on certain projects (here too) but nothing, the obvious hits are going to be (are) the major media outlets with prominent placement on the net, if you want to big up his work to counter the argument / pictures then it would have been good to include them at the time.

Like I said he has history of doing his own thing so it's not clear cut, (ie more important to put over detail from the council & villagers) because he certainly had a name for himself beforehand clouding the issue. didn't have any pieces in support of him float to the top.

Is the council helping out in a defence / appeal fund & publicly speaking out?

Not my problem if the press want to sell newspapers by making wild statements and not doing the research then nothing changes but if they want to do some honest reporting you don't have to delve to deeply. Send a reporter out to take a current picture I could post one but I don't have copyright so if you want to have a look go through the last few pages of the River Lugg thread on The Farming Forum and there is a picture from Dec last year when the high river levels where on and the village not flooding and some current pictures taken in the last few days. As for detective reporting you don't have to look far into the Parish Council meeting minutes to come across the discussions with EA and minuted that approval had been received to carry out the work both from EA and Forestry Commission to remove 250 trees. The reason he had to plead guilty is that those approvals are not enough in the days of SSSI as the red tape also insists that Natural England also have to approve the work that EA and Forestry Commission have already approved and that was the failure. Still at least the locals are happy that their houses are no longer flooding.

[renewablejohn]

Well then here's the Murdoch Press reporting on teh same thing. Murdoch's media is not typically supportive of clean tech, renewables or effective conservation actvities, but they've got pretty similar before and after shots.


https://news.sky.com/story/farmer-jaile ... r-12862372
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... onths.html

How about the presumably biased Farmer's Weekly? They should be supporting farmers making every square inch of land "productive", no?

https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/environment/ ... river-lugg

It seems he pleaded guilty.

Such arrogance.

What from the EA and Natural England. Maybe people should get the 'facts' right before believing the biased 'facts' put forward by the BBC showing two pictures unrelated. The second one just after the work had been completed, Has the BBC run out of money to send a reporter to go back and get an up to date picture of the good job which was made of the river restoration and desilting and how well nature has recovered given the TLC to aid recovery.

But the after shots will always look like that if the job is done properly. Take a look at the current pictures and you will see the landscape has recovered and the river is doing what it is supposed to do. If the press want a job then investigate and report the raw sewage going down the rivers from the various water companies. Or highlight the failings of the EA not to carry out drainage work or even when they do have a go at draining they get it so badly wrong that they remove the clay puddle lining keeping the water in the drainage channel.

[renewablejohn]

These are the guidelines that Mr Price would be following as a Riparian owner in Herefordshire.

https://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/downlo ... ian-owners

[cojmh]

I don't have a horse in this race but thought I would look up the points being raised on other forums.

A picture here

some minutes from a meeting (not sure about the voracity of these but I am not reading all 169 pages ) can be found here

Anyway, guess people need to make up their own minds

[nowty]

These are the guidelines that Mr Price would be following as a Riparian owner in Herefordshire.

https://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/downlo ... ian-owners

I don’t think he read page 11 about staying legal.