River Lugg, Herefordshire

Status
Not open for further replies.

deere 6600

Member
Mixed Farmer
Same here.When we were young we use to call him Mr Roadman and he knew every square inch of his alloted area .He ensured all ditches and drains were maintained without fail and now,sadly,roadside ditches are silted up creating more surface water on the roads and the resulting potholes.
He also cleared the offletts to let water run off the roads now they just don’t bother pathetic really
 
The reason farmers take things into their own hands is because the EA leave them with no option. The complete lack of action when questioned time and time again becomes intolerable. They have ruined our river. It needs banks re profiling and dredging but they will never do it. They won’t even clear the trees anymore. All you see them doing is pratting about trimming a few willow branches.
The EA are failing on a lot of levels, that much is undeniable. However they were engaging with Mr. Price and would have been more than happy for him to carry out any consented works (as above, the discussion was about clearing one bridge arch and a small amount of bank re-profiling). For reasons best known to him, he decided to carry out works far and beyond what had been discussed over a length of 1.5km.
Also, in what I can only imagine must be a huge coincidence, shortly before he commenced the works, Mr. Price was refused planning permission for a development of several new houses near to the river, one of the reasons for the refusal being... flooding.
 

Werzle

Member
Location
Midlands
The EA are failing on a lot of levels, that much is undeniable. However they were engaging with Mr. Price and would have been more than happy for him to carry out any consented works (as above, the discussion was about clearing one bridge arch and a small amount of bank re-profiling). For reasons best known to him, he decided to carry out works far and beyond what had been discussed over a length of 1.5km.
Also, in what I can only imagine must be a huge coincidence, shortly before he commenced the works, Mr. Price was refused planning permission for a development of several new houses near to the river, one of the reasons for the refusal being... flooding.
Getting planning on fields that flood doesnt seem to have stopped the big housebuilders
 

TheTallGuy

Member
Location
Cambridgeshire
The reason farmers take things into their own hands is because the EA leave them with no option. The complete lack of action when questioned time and time again becomes intolerable. They have ruined our river. It needs banks re profiling and dredging but they will never do it. They won’t even clear the trees anymore. All you see them doing is pratting about trimming a few willow branches.
These days it's not necessarily the responsibility of the EA to do such works, but that of the Riparian Landowners who may have to obtain consent from the EA for the nature of the works.
 

Northern territory

Member
Livestock Farmer
These days it's not necessarily the responsibility of the EA to do such works, but that of the Riparian Landowners who may have to obtain consent from the EA for the nature of the works.
I think it is but they do there best to avoid it . Basically told us the money goes to the towns and the rest have to lump it. I even know of one example where they did a fairly substantial job for an insider that wasn’t even a recorded job.
 

Exfarmer

Member
Location
Bury St Edmunds
These days it's not necessarily the responsibility of the EA to do such works, but that of the Riparian Landowners who may have to obtain consent from the EA for the nature of the works.
Are you sure about this. The riparian rights have been eroded since before William the Conqueror as the needs. Of millers and navigators took precedence, but required acts of parliament to usurp these rights.
I m amazed that they were restored in one simple act.
 

Werzle

Member
Location
Midlands
I think it is but they do there best to avoid it . Basically told us the money goes to the towns and the rest have to lump it. I even know of one example where they did a fairly substantial job for an insider that wasn’t even a recorded job.
What beats me is the EA will always moan the budgets been cut but they waste what money they have. Top spec trucks with winches that have never been used when chopped in, inspection gates for access put in by outside contractors from hundreds of miles away when local firms could do it but gates arent needed when stiles would do. Loads of small things that must add up to hundreds of thousands. They even sold off the tractors and kit at losses at one point and then contracted out the work . They spend millions on flood prevention in towns with crappy portable walls but could stop the flooding with river , ditch and flood plain maintainance. Its bloody frustrating to witness. They really need shaming in a massive way.
 
His site was on flood zone 1 with no chance of flooding .
Vladtheimpailer needs to check ones facts and not mislead people.
It was also over 500m away from the river.
I recall there flooding being one of the reasons for rejection of the planning application. I'll have a dig around and see if I can find the document that contained this.
 

lloyd

Member
Location
Herefordshire
I recall there flooding being one of the reasons for rejection of the planning application. I'll have a dig around and see if I can find the document that contained this.
Flood zone 1 is the safest area to build regarding flooding .
Just because a report might not have been presented on an application does
not mean a particular site is prone to flooding.
 
Which bit of mitigating circumstances do you not understand when it comes to sentencing.
The 'mitigating circumstances you cite' (i.e. '...the instructions from the various parties to carry out the work') would have formed the case for the defence in the event of a Not Guilty plea. However they have no bearing on the sentencing as he has pleaded Guilty. The Law is very black or white in this... you can't be 'a bit guilty' or a 'bit innocent'. He's Guilty so no more evidence can or will be submitted.
There are however other types of mitigations that could be considered by the Court to decide on the tariff which may include his mental and financial state, his 'good character' etc. (though I don't think he'd be expecting much from this as he was previously convicted in 2007 for unauthorised works) and the likelihood of him re-offending (see previous point...).
Possibly the most serious of his offences was Breaching a Stop Notice which falls under Contempt of Court and is viewed very dimly by the people in red gowns and funny wigs. Custodial sentences are not uncommon for this.
 

Pilatus

Member
Location
cotswolds
@vladtheimpailer ,why did this particular thread motivate you to become a member of this forum,and why so very little info about your self on your profile page, what have you got to hide??
I get the impression you seem to be on both sides of the fence , as they say, on the “River Lugg” case. :scratchhead:
Another words “being gamekeeper and poacher”.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 77 43.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 62 35.0%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 28 15.8%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 4 2.3%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,284
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top