Council Votes To Ignore Flood Risk to Preston Residents

Preston City Council has voted today by 28 votes to 25 AGAINST a motion from Riversway Councillor Jack Davenport to "suspend further work on Riverworks until the flood risk assessment can be completed" - this assessment, due out next month, looks at the flood risk posed to existing houses by the river, such as those in Walton Le Dale, Frenchwood, Broadgate and Penwortham.

Jack Davenport argued that "Flooding concerns are more important than Riverworks and suspending work shows that we are taking the flood concerns seriously, there will be no cost to us if we delay the work in favour of making sure our residents are safe and protected"

Mayor Christine Abram, said the matter could be dealt with at the next full council meeting on October 18. Coun Davenport, said: "Better hope it doesn't flood before that, Christine."

Lancashire Evening Post Coverage Here

74% of local people voted AGAINST the idea of the Riverworks Ribble barrage and housing plans in a recent LEP poll,

By voting to oppose this motion, the council has shown that it puts the wishes of those greedy developers behind the Riverworks Barrage and Housing proposals ahead of the interests of local people, and ahead even of the need to protect local people from the flood risks in the area, exacerbated by our increasingly wet weather and our old and shoddy flood defences, a flood risk that would be greatly increased by building a barrage across the Ribble, and thousands of houses in it's flood plain, as is suggested in the Riverworks proposals.

It seems that since developers stand to make £millions from this irresponsible scheme, the council is not going to let things like the flood risk to local people stand in their way.

What is encouraging is that 25 councillors ARE now concerned about the threat of floods, and we hope that this number will increase as local people continue to show their opposition to this deeply irresponsible assault on our environment, and on the safety and quality of life of local residents.

Ribble Increased Floodrisk Alert for Autumn and Winter

The River Ribble is at "an increased risk of flooding" over the next six months, through Autumn and into Winter.

This increased floodrisk is due to the high levels of rainfall we are experiencing this year, which has had the effect of saturating the Ribble's floodplains pretty much to capacity with no prospect of drying out before the wet Autumn that forecasters are predicting begins.

The extraordinarily high levels of rain that have already fallen this Summer are 200% above the average from May to July, making the ground saturated throughout the Ribble corridor, particularly on the low-lying floodplains.

These figures have been released by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, whose statistics also show that:

'the speed of the River Ribble is 465% faster than average and that the water saturated in the soil is at an exceptionally high level.' according to This Is Lancashire.

Ribbleside residents are eternally grateful for our floodplain areas which have protected our communities from the serious floods which have affected so many areas so far this year, and for our free-flowing River which drains all that rainwater away (the Ribble being at low tide during local episodes of flash-floods in Preston and Penwortham meant the floodwaters were drained quickly), but it seems that the threat is not over. The already saturated ground will not be able to hold much more of the predicted high levels of rainfall expected over the Autumn and Winter months, which means that the Ribble will be at "an increased risk of flooding" during the coming months as the floodplains will struggle to cope.


Flash floods earlier this summer in Middleforth, Penwortham and Broadgate, Preston.

As Save The Ribble have pointed out, the Flood Defences in the Broadgate area are in a woeful state of repair and we need Preston City Council to spend money on repairing our essential flood defences NOT on funding feasability studies for barrages and floodplain building developments which will ruin our environment and actually INCREASE OUR RISK OF FLOODING.


Broadgate during high rainfall and a speeding Ribble surging past those fragile post-and-panel defences.


According to This Is Lancashire, 'The Environment Agency has already given "an enhanced flood risk" warning to all of England and Wales, and with forecasters predicting a wet autumn the Ribble looks set to have another record breaking season, which can only be bad news for residents on the Ribble floodplains.'

The Centre for Ecology and Hydrology summarise their findings:
'The Monthly Hydrological Summary for the UK, published today [15th August 2007], includes an analysis of the unprecedented summer flooding. The wettest May-July period for England & Wales in a record from 1767 resulted in near-saturated soil conditions and river flows more typical of a notably wet winter, with extensive floodplain inundations in both June and July. In the July Hydrological Summary, scientists at the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology and the British Geological Survey provide a detailed appraisal of a summer flood episode that has no close modern parallel.'

This Is Lancashire report that the the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology statistics show 'the speed of the River Ribble is 465% faster than average and that the water saturated in the soil is at an exceptionally high level.'

Spokesman for the CEH Barnaby Smith told This Is Lancashire that "The soils are extremely wet in comparison with previous summer months and with more rain predicted it is unlikely soils will dry out. We are going to get more floods. The River Ribble will be vulnerable to winter floods over the next six months."'



Ian Rowland, Flood Risk Manager for the Environment Agency told This Is Lancashire that "We are dealing with a force of nature here and you can never say never to a flood occurring. We can only manage the risks.

"However we do monitor flood levels throughout the year and try to attain the strongest possible idea of whether a river will flood.

"In the event of a flood we ensure the river is put on high alert and flood warnings are sent out to the local media."

'It will depend on weather patterns throughout the winter months if the Ribble breeches its banks however some of the causes of flooding are already in place along much of the Ribble.

The Environment Agency encourages those who believe they are at a serious risk flooding of flooding to call the Floodline on 0845988188 or visit www.environment-agency.gov.uk, and sign up for direct flood warnings.' (This Is Lancashire)


For more on issues of flooding and the Ribble see:
the Dangers of Riverworks;
Why A Barrage Will Increase Ribble Floodrisk;
Why building on the Penwortham Green Belt will increase floodrisk;
and why the Environment Agency are opposed to further developments on floodplain.

You can read the This Is Lancashire story here.

You can contact us at savetheribble@tiscali.co.uk

Green Belt Facing New Threat - Greater Protection is Needed NOW

The Social Market Foundation (SMF) think-tank has published a study which claims that of the Government's pledge for 3 million new homes in Britain by 2020 "almost 2 million homes would need to be built on non-previously developed land".

According to the BBC News, the SMF claim that 'the green belt, which was planned to prevent urban sprawl, contains ex-industrial sites and scrubland and "was not as green as people believe"'.

As such, the SMF 'suggests there may be a case for reconsidering the future of the green belt which often protects "neither wildlife nor areas of outstanding beauty".

The Green Belt is "not as green as people believe"? What utter nonsense!

As has been well recognised for many years, Green Belt of all kinds in many different landscapes and both rural and urban areas serves an important function for wildlife and for people. Green Belt also plays a crucial role in ensuring the sustainability of our communities. Yes, Green Belt areas DO also include areas of the country which are not designated as being of Outstanding Natural Beauty (ONB) but this does not mean they are NOT beautiful in their own distinctive way, nor does it mean that they are therefore worthless.


The much-loved Green Belt area in Penwortham, South Ribble - just a few minutes walk from Penwortham Town Centre and Preston City Centre. There are meadows and woodlands, allotments and sports fields, in a precious stretch of Green Belt which links the urban areas of South Ribble and Preston - providing vital and ACCESSIBLE quality open green spaces and fresh air and sheer beauty to a large number of local people from diverse backgrounds and communities.


A close-up of Preston City Council's Composite Masterplan, showing the new developments being muted in pink - all over our meadows, woodlands, allotments and sports fields. The Riverworks proposals include a large urban development on the core area of Green Belt - leaving a small pocket which would be formalised into a park opposite Preston's Avenham & Miller Parks.


As local people are also aware, this area of Green Belt is also operational floodplain, and as such, also protects our communities from flooding - taking all that rainfall to which we are prone safely down to the sea! As such, we suffer from flooding only very rarely, and despite this summer's unprecedented levels of rainfall, we have been fortunate in only having relatively minor local floods which the River Ribble has quickly drained.

As all of this Green Belt is also operational floodplain - which the Environment Agency strongly advise should NOT be developed - this area is clearly inappropriate for development even without considering its huge value to the biodiversity of the River Ribble corridor and to the quality of life of local people!

As Richard Bate from planning consultants Green Balance recognises, the Green Belt serves 'a number of crucial purposes' and "Simply letting the market rip in areas where it would like to go - very often in green belt areas - won't necessarily put development in the places that will do the most good for everybody in town and country alike".

Housing and Planning Minister Baroness Andrews told the BBC that 'the government believed it was possible to build the homes needed by future generations while protecting the environment and green spaces.'

The Government needs to back up this statement - and therefore their own policies regarding development, biodiversity, and the health, well-being and quality of life of British citizens by ACTING TO STRENGTHEN THE PROTECTION OF GREEN BELT AREAS NOW.

The UK Government has already pledged itself to following the principles of sustainable development - which means ensuring that our development does NOT have adverse impacts on the future environmental as well as economic sustainability of our environment and our communities - it does NOT mean ensuring a sustained rate of economic development.

This means that developers and planners need to start being more imaginative in terms of how and where new developments take place - continuing to chip away at our valuable green spaces is not the answer. Affordable housing needs to REMAIN affordable; ALL citizens should have free and easy access to quality open green spaces, including woodlands and meadows and rivers, allotments, sports pitches, and clean fresh air and the sounds and sights of birds and insects and trees and flowers - and freely-flowing Rivers!

Green Belt areas also contribute a central role in the UK's Biodiversity Action Plan Habitat & Species targets.

The Government also recognises the vital importance of easy access to our green spaces spaces without having to resort to getting in our cars to find them, as their Quality of Life Counts document shows, and as their Planning Policy Guidance 17 (Sports, Open Spaces and Recreation) reinforces. This document is the guideline for planning departments and developers, and follows the policy of:

"promoting more sustainable development - by ensuring that open space, sports and recreational facilities (particularly in urban areas) are easily accessible by walking and cycling."

Accessible green spaces are of enormous benefit to the health and well-being of our communities, promoting "social inclusion and community cohesion" (PPG 17) and it is vitally important that people who live in cities also have easy access to these fantastic facilities. By allowing the Green Spaces already under such pressure between and surrounding our urban developments, towns and cities to be developed further can only be detrimental to local communities, our wildlife and environment and biodiversity on a local and national scale, and on our ability to genuinely attain sustainable development.

Green Belt needs increased protection NOW - particularly those areas close to and within existing urban areas. As it is, Green Belt is already being constantly chipped away slice by slice - what the Campaign to Protect Rural England have termed 'Death by a Thousand Cuts' - and the Government needs to ACT NOW to INCREASE the protection of our existing Green Belt areas, already under considerable threat, if we are to conform to any sense of sustainable development and ensure our communities and our environment can sustain a decent quality of life for ourselves and for future generations.

Just a couple of years ago in 2005 The Guardian reported that 84% of people in England believe the Green Belt should continue to be protected - a figure which more local issues have echoed for Ribblesiders, not least the resulats in the recent local elections in Preston and South Ribble showing majority support for Councillors of all political persuasions who made their opposition to developing on local Green Belt and floodplains and barraging our beautiful river abundantly clear - concerns echoed by the overwhelming majority of people in South Ribble who opposed the recent proposed merger with Preston City, due in no small part to many South Ribble residents' concerns regarding Preston's proposals for developing on the Green Belt in South Ribble.

You can read more about the Riverworks threat to our Green Belt and River Ribble here.

Click here for the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

Contact us at savetheribble@tiscali.co.uk

A BARRAGE TO DEMOCRACY

Elaine Abbott’s revealing account of the development of the Tithebarn Project (LEP 5/7/07) provides a timely warning of how the democratic process is threatened when Councils tie themselves into agreements with big business.

Elaine’s account shows how Preston City Council’s pursuit of the Tithebarn project resulted in the interests and wishes of local people being subverted in favour of the mantra of economic regeneration and the interests of Grosvenor Estates.

Her account makes alarming reading for the 74% of local people who are opposed to the plans to build a barrage on the Ribble, since it reveals remarkable similarities between the early stages of the Tithebarn development and the current Riverworks project.

Elaine writes that the Tithebarn Regeneration Project was fraught with problems because it was obvious from the beginning that:

“Grosvenor Estates were determined that it would be done their way or not at all…..In the early days as a then Labour Councillor, I sat on the town centre management committee. The meetings were shrouded in secrecy. It was a very small committee with very few councillors who were outnumbered by Town Hall Officers and the Duke of Westminster’s [Grosvenor Estates] representatives”.

Whilst members of the committee were threatened with legal proceedings if they discussed the smallest detail outside the committee room, other councillors were angry that, although the Tithebarn project would have an enormous impact on the people of Preston, they were neither allowed to sit in as observers nor see the minutes of the meeting.

Today we have a situation where Preston City Council policy in respect of Riverworks is being driven by Council officers and the un-elected Preston Vision Board - despite opposition from local councillors and the vast majority of local people. Much of the decision making around Riverworks is taking place behind closed doors whilst minutes and business plans – including a recent report completed by the property consultants King Sturges - remain secret from members of the public.

It is clear that, as was the case with the Tithebarn project, the potential of vast financial investments could once again result in the interests of the people of Preston - and our unique River environment - taking second place to those of big business.

According to another article in the Lancashire Evening Post - in which they examine some aspects of the recent barrage funding controversy - some councillors are already indicating that our environment might have to be sacrificed to attract the reported £800 million pounds investment that Riverworks may bring.

Councillor Cartwright, a cabinet member for the environment on Preston City Council “claims his passion to protect the Ribble estuary will be balanced against the millions of pounds which can be pumped into the river (sic) through the….. Riverworks project” (LEP 6/7/07).
We might add that building a barrage on the Ribble would indeed be just as much a waste of public money as pumping millions of pounds into the River and letting it float out to the Irish Sea...

Elaine Abbotts account suggests that decision making around the Tithebarn project became concentrated in the hands of a small and secretive committee.

This echoes the report last week that Preston City Council voted, by a narrow margin (the poll was tied 27-27 and relied on the casting vote of the mayor), to transfer decision making for large projects from full council scrutiny to a select City Centre Committee.
This Committee will have the power to spend £12.9 million of North West Development Agency (NWDA) cash. Previously, any plan which cost more than £250,000 had to be referred to full Council, but this will no longer be the case.

According to Councillor Jack Davenport this means that:

"in the future most Councillors will not be able to get a say in large scale projects (for example, the feasibility study for the Barrage). This removes the bulk of democratic opposition (or support) to any project and renders voter representation virtually mute on the subject.”

Given the widespread public opposition to proposals for a Ribble barrage this concentration of decision making into one committee will, according to Councillor Davenport, make the barrage “far more likely” (LEP 6/7/07).

Preston City Council still insist that Riverworks and the barrage scheme are ideas only and will be subject to full feasibility studies. Yet Save the Ribble and other environmental organisations have already provided enough evidence to suggest that building a barrage would have disastrous consequences for our environment and, along with its associated floodplain building development, would also increase the risk of local flooding
- a fact which even Preston City Council leader Councillor Hudson appears to acknowledge, agreeing that the serious flooding scenes of recent weeks 'would prompt a rethink on the plans' to build houses on the floodplain "If the Environment Agency are saying there should be no houses on flood plain land at Preston" (LEP 30/6/07) - at a time when the Environment Agency are already saying there should be no further building developments on floodplains AT ALL.

So why carry on wasting public money in its pursuit?

The concern of local residents has always been that Preston City Council is becoming tied into agreements with developers and big business that will drive Riverworks and give the barrage project an unstoppable momemtum. Once again there are parallels with the Tithebarn development.

As Elaine Abbott reports:

“the threat that Grosvenor would take their millions elsewhere was enough to send the Town Hall into a flap. The biggest issue of all was the bus station. Some of us, knowing that most people in Preston would not want to see it moved, suggested that it could be modernized (but) there was to be no debate. Anyone who queried this was accused of being a dinosaur and of trying to prevent Preston moving into the 21st century.”

As part of their feasibility study for Riverworks, Preston City Council has promised that there will be widespread public consultation. But if widespread public opposition to a barrage threatens the potential millions of £s investment, will Preston City Council be thrown into another flap which will lead them to override the wishes of local people and the protection of our environment?

Once again Elaine Abbott’s account of the Tithebarn project sounds a warning:

“I (was) not the only one to be frustrated during the past few years to hear that the public were to be consulted about the bus station. It gave the impression that the most popular vote to keep it in its present location would be given serious consideration. That would never happen. The Tithebarn progamme was never intended to include public consultation.”

The LEP reports that Councillor Neil Cartwright, who says that he has not made his mind up about the Riverworks proposals, has called for an informed debate and believes the debate has been hijacked by people opposed to a single part of Riverworks – the barrage.
He says that other ideas include improving the docks area and linking the canal to the dock basin: “the problem is that people have come to the conclusion that Riverworks is just about the barrage and formed their opinion on that alone” (LEP 6/7/07).

In fact Save the Ribble campaign has never opposed the ideas for improving the dock or reinstating the canal in Preston. And neither is Save the Ribble Campaign opposed to investment and economic development. But we do argue that any development has to be environmentally and economically sustainable and should enhance rather than diminish our natural environment!

Unfortunately, it is difficult to have an informed debate about these issues when Preston City Council have now voted to remove the decision making process from the scrutiny of most councillors aswell as local people.

Preston City Council and the Vision Board have placed the Ribble barrage and the associated development on our green belt as the 'key project proposals' of their Preston Economic Regeneration Strategy and Prioritised Action Plan, to the exclusion of other more sustainable and less environmentally damaging alternatives. The Council appears to have already decided that Riverworks is the only way forward for Preston.

Councillor Ron Atkins has questioned why the Council’s Chief Executive supports the barrage project before the outcome of a feasibility study is known - a study which the Council is spending hundreds of thousands of pounds of tax-payer's money on.
Councillor Atkins writes (LEP letters 28/6/07):

“It seems to me that attempts are being made to present the project to residents for consultation as a fait accompli although it originated only as a “Vision” of a group of people with special interests, who are as unrepresentative of the residents as they are of the councillors whom the residents elected”.

By what right do these special interests groups suppose that they can pursue their “Vision” at the expense of the wishes of local people and our environment?

In pursuit of the Riverworks project Preston City Council will have to attract vast amounts of private investment – possibly another Grosvenor Estates – whose only interest will be making huge profits.

The question is will Preston City Council be prepared to listen to informed debate and the wishes of the people if in so doing they risk losing millions of £s investment in the City?

And how will local people – and their elected representatives at the Town Hall – know what decisions are being taken behind the closed doors of the City Centre Committee?

You can contact us at savetheribble@tiscali.co.uk

Preston Vision Board Funding

The Preston City Vision Board is the body responsible for coming up with the unpopular and environmentally irresponsible idea of barraging the River Ribble, and of building large amounts of housing in the beautiful greenbelt areas in its floodplain.

Councillor Bhiku Patel recently asked Preston City Council "How much money is the city council putting forward in terms of supporting the Vision Board"

The answer given by 'a Council Spokesman', and printed in the Lancashire Evening Post was this: "The North West Development Agency and Preston City Council jointly funded the Vision Board for 2007/8 to the tune of £116,760".



However we find that when we check the record in Hansard, on 26th October 2006, Margaret Hodge told Geraldine Smith MP that the North West Development Agency had given Preston Vision Board £457,000.

There seems to be a very large difference between the figure of £116,760, which the Preston Council Spokesman says comes from BOTH the NWDA and the Council, and the £457,000 that the Minister said came solely from the NWDA.

The Council's quoted figures seem totally out of line with those given by the Minister, especially as we know that the feasibility study into the docks development cost over £120,000, and the feasibility study into the Barrage and Housing plans is likely to cost at least £235,000 (and as this is future expenditure, we don't think it was included in the Minister's figures).

Save The Ribble suggests that to clear up any confusion, the Preston Vision Board should now open up their accounts publicly to the people of Preston, and the council should state exactly how much money and council officer time they are devoting to the work of the Vision Board so that the people of Preston can know for sure:

Exactly how much public money is the Vision Board getting?

How much comes from the NWDA and how much from the Council?

What exactly are they spending it on?

How much, for example, was spent on lunches where Vision Board members met "key decision makers" as part of their "Contact Strategy"?

It's time for some transparency and democratic accountability from the businessmen and bureaucrats who are deciding the future of Preston and our river behind closed doors - as this is public money, we should have a right to know exactly how every penny is being spent, and whether it is being spent in our interests, or in the interests of greedy developers.

RIVERWORKS, WHO STANDS TO GAIN: PROPERTY CONSULTANTS OR THE ENVIRONMENT?

Property Consultant, architect, and Riverworks supporter Tarquin Scott has presented his vision for the development of the River Ribble and Green Belt, and derides Save the Ribble Campaign’s concerns as “flawed” (Lancashire Evening Post, “River Quibble” 21/2/07).

Mr Scott’s article suggests that a key aim of Riverworks is to “conserve our environment”. Mr Scott’s arguments indicate that he has not read the Riverworks documents properly since these make it quite clear that the objective of Riverworks has nothing to do with protecting the environment and everything to do with “creat[ing] development opportunities on a regional scale”.
With a stated aim to “provide alternative development options to those emerging in the large city conurbations of Liverpool and Manchester….Riverworks is an urban concept on which a third city can be developed”. Riverworks
Furthermore, Mr Scott’s article suggests that he does not understand the full environmental impact of the proposals themselves.

In making a link between Riverworks and environmental benefits Mr Scott relies on some rather contorted and spurious arguments:

- Mr Scott argues that since the River Ribble has already been interfered with by human development since the 19th century (specifically the dock development and canalisation and diversion of part of the River) this excuses and justifies “further adaptation” by the construction of a barrage.

This argument is about as logical as saying that since we have already been cutting down rainforests we might as well carry on since we have already had an impact on this environment.

Mr Scott recognises that these past developments “must have altered the nature of the estuary to an unknown degree”. However, he does not acknowledge that in the decades since the dock closed the Ribble has recovered to such a significant extent that it is now the most important estuary River in Britain, probably Europe, for wildlife.

The lowest section of the river channels are now reverting to their original state and the Ribble is now recovering well from the past impacts on its ecosystem, its mudflats and saltmarsh areas showing positive recovery rates. The river’s quality is good, fish stocks are better than they have been for decades, and the numbers of bird species which the Ribble supports now place it as an Internationally important Wetland.

The construction of a barrage would cause significant changes to this delicately balanced inter-tidal ecosystem, the full impact of which could be devastating to the environment. It could also increase the floodrisk to several communities in the Ribble corridor. This is why so many local people, environmental organisations, several other Borough Councils which border the estuary, and a growing number of local councillors are opposed to it.

Current Environment Agency and Defra policy regarding the River Ribble is NOT the “further adaptation” of our “much altered river system” but managing the Ribble as a precious resource through the natural management of its environment and flood defences. This involves ensuring that the precious environment is protected from further human interference and the effects of climate change, as well as ensuring local communities are protected from flooding.

This objective is actively pursued by returning areas of farmland to the Ribble’s intertidal zone, the latest of which is happening at Hesketh Out Marsh, just downriver of Penwortham and Preston. This policy, rather than building barrages, has been identified by the EA & Defra as the only viable and sustainable way forward both environmentally and economically.

The Ribble at Hesketh Out Marsh.

- Mr Scott and the Riverworks documents argue that constructing a barrage in the dock area “would create a navigable waterway between Junction 31 of the M6 and the dock entrance”. Mr Scott, Preston City Council and Preston Vision Board envisage local people using water buses to commute to work instead of driving. Nice idea, but Preston isn’t Venice and clearly Mr Scott et al are ill-informed and do not understand either the geography or the nature of the Ribble.

One crucial fact that Mr Scott and others are ignoring is that because of the geographical fall of the Ribble between the Tickled Trout and the estuary, one barrage would not be enough to create a navigable waterway without causing permanent flooding to Penwortham and Hutton.

A consultation document commissioned by Preston Council in 1986 showed that there would need to be a minimum of two such structures, ideally four, to even potentially navigate the whole stretch.
This report concluded that even with four weirs or barrages, “access by boats from one stretch of water to another would be difficult and restricted to periods of very high water levels”, and even then “in places the River remains relatively shallow” and therefore un-navigable ("River Ribble Weir Appraisal", Halcrow 1986).

The same report points out that “the raising of water levels by a weir over low tide water levels is of major concern” as high river levels significantly increase the risk of flooding from waters flowing down-river.
As such any weirs or barrages on the Ribble “would need to be gated so that the retained water level can be lowered in advance of heavy river flows”.
The report recognises that the gates would need to be left open for significant periods of time, even months on end, therefore any potential navigation would be limited to favourable weather conditions.
Water buses on the River would therefore be at best unreliable, and even when running, would take a very long time indeed to negotiate the necessary gates through the weirs from one stretch of river to another.

- The rather contorted nature of Mr Scott’s environmental benefits argument is further illustrated by the aim of integrating the barrage “with a new lower Ribble crossing to link Liverpool Road with Riversway”.
As many studies have consistently shown further road building simply encourages increased car use.

- Mr Scott accuses Save The Ribble Campaigners of assuming “that a barrage” would be a concrete eyesore” and argues that “in addition to providing an iconic and eye-catching design, there is no reason why measures to accommodate inter-tidal marine life and wildfowl in the River Ribble cannot be incorporated”, and even suggests “the barrage could be an ideal location for a centre to inform visitors of the wildlife in the vicinity”.
We are not sure how Mr Scott reconciles this version of a barrage with his integrated road crossing. Presumably, in between dodging the traffic on the road crossing and the visitor centre car park, visitors will have the opportunity to find out about the wildlife the Ribble used to support before the barrage was built. A barrage cannot be reconciled with inter-tidal marine life as it would directly interfere with the River’s intertidal ecosystem.

Mr Scott suggests that engineers building a barrage should look to “beautifully designed solutions” such as America’s Hoover Dam for inspiration. Considering the Hoover Dam is 221.4 metres high, 379 metres long and has flooded 110 miles of river valley perhaps planners in Preston would be thinking on a slightly smaller scale, but nonetheless any such structure would hardly be sympathetic to our local environment.













The Hoover Dam: An inspiration for Preston?

Actually, opponents of a barrage on the Ribble would not care if it was the most aesthetically pleasing structure in the world. Whilst it is the case, incidently, that a barrage would destroy the aesthetic qualities of an ever-changing natural river environment, we are predominantly opposed to the barrage quite simply because of the environmental damage it would cause.

- The other environmental benefit Mr Scott proposes is that the barrage could be used to generate hydro-electric power. In fact a barrage on the Ribble would only be able to generate such a comparatively tiny amount of power (unless they do intend it to be the size of the Hoover Dam) that any environmental benefit of this would be dwarfed by the enormous environmental damage it would cause.

- Finally, Mr Scott briefly addresses the issue of building 4,000 houses and businesses on the Ribble floodplain in Penwortham. He says “I partly agree with their environmental concerns, but again consider that a balanced analysis must be addressed before consigning the Riverworks proposals to the bin”.
However, the Riverworks argument’s assumption that all those new residents would work in Preston and would walk or cycle to their places of work, and therefore reduce reliance on cars, is by no means certain, and this still does not address the increased floodrisk problems facing these same new residences and all other existing communities in the area that would be caused by building on the floodplain.
The development would also destroy a large area of designated Green Belt, which includes our sports pitches, allotments, and a diverse range of wildlife habitats which are of enormous value to local people on both sides of the River, and to the environment. Hardly beneficial to the environment, and certainly not sustainable development in any shape or form.

The idea that Riverworks will benefit the environment by discouraging car use is frankly ludicrous. Not only will the new floodplain housing and business developments increase the volume of traffic in the area, but creating a water sports venue on the River will attract even more cars to the area, quite apart from the pollution and noise caused by the various motor boats themselves. There would also be the ridiculous situation where local people both sides of the Ribble who currently walk and cycle by the Ribble and Green Belt for peace and fresh air and the sounds of running water and bird song would have to get in their cars and drive somewhere else to find what is currently on their doorstep!

Mr Scott ends his argument by claiming that “in an ever changing world, doing nothing is tantamount to moving backwards if we wish to conserve our environment”.
Is he seriously claiming that by NOT building a barrage on the Ribble we will actually be causing harm to the environment? How, exactly?

Current policy is NOT about “doing nothing”, it’s about acting positively in conserving the Ribble’s irreplaceable intertidal habitat at the same time as protecting our communities against the impacts of climate change – positive actions which are genuinely sustainable in environmental and economic terms, for now and for the future.

One wonders what Property Consultant Mr. Tarquin Scott's own stake in Riverworks is...?

It is not surprising that Property Consultants and developers should support the Riverworks proposals: they stand to make millions of pounds from building a barrage on the Ribble and developing enormous housing and business developments on our Green Belt and floodplain.

People like Mr Scott, Preston Council and the Vision Board can dress up the Riverworks proposals all they like: any claim that the scheme will be of benefit rather than harm to the environment is clearly nonsense.

Contact savetheribble@tiscali.co.uk

The River Wild

The River Ribble is not a pretty chocolate-box river - she is beautiful, wild and free, her moods changing from calm to stormy in hours...


This isn't the sea on a stormy Winter's day, it's the River Ribble, in spate and flowing between Preston and Penwortham to the sea...

These pictures were taken today, 18th January 07, from high tide until 2 hours later...


...walking downriver from Priory Park in Penwortham - where huge waves were whipped into spray by the high winds...


... and it was difficult to believe that the tide had been going OUT for over an hour at this point...


... walking back upriver over an hour later, by Liverpool Road Bridge the surface was more calm but flowing down towards the sea at high speed, drowning the riverside footpath here near the allotments...


... and Broadgate sails by as the Ribble speeds on her way to the sea...


...and trees are carried down towards the sea on the Ribble's spate waters at high speed...


... and Leyland Rd is very close indeed, here near the Bridge Inn...


... the Riverside footpath on the Penwortham side has disappeared altogether under the flood waters...


- careful with that poop scoop -


...the bench usually overlooks the Ribble here, set back from the river's edge by several metres, but today it is swamped by the spate waters, despite high tide being 2 hours earlier...


... to compare with low tide and little rain a couple of weeks earlier, these joggers are passing the same benches...


- the high rainfall and high river level means the water table rises -


- including on Margaret Rd, but luckily the spate waters will drain down to the sea in a matter of hours, allowing the water table to subside too...


... the drains backing up and spraying water out are an impressive sight (but only if not in your kitchen or back garden!)...


Long Live the Ribble Wild!

savetheribble@tiscali.co.uk

Riverworks - Pub Debate Primer

It’s a warm, dreamy, summer afternoon, and you are resting your aching feet in a riverside pub after a pleasant ramble along the soft green banks of the River Ribble. You are nursing a pint of cask-conditioned real ale, appreciating the softness of your barstool, and the murmur of pleasant conversation with friends, when suddenly the topic of the Riverworks initiative rears it's ugly head!

Are you ready to put forward the pro-river arguments? Pour yourself a beer and read through this dry run of some of the arguments put forward by the acolytes of the Riverworks 'Cult of Concrete', along with the pro-Ribble responses.

Isn’t turning the river into a water sports park a good idea? - the Riverworks people say it will expand our range of leisure options which can't be a bad thing.

We have no objection to people taking boats on the Ribble, but we do object to keeping the river artificially at high tide, for a number of reasons. One is that it will drown the mud banks that many birds find their food in. It also means that long stretches of the riverbank will be covered with concrete to provide walkways and moorings for boats . It is hypocritical of the council to pretend this would expand leisure options when they are thinking about building new housing over 3 different sets of football pitches - at Vernons, Penwortham Holme and Frenchwood as part of the Riverworks proposals. These pitches provide leisure opportunities for hundreds of people all year round, as do local allotments that they are also talking about building over.

And do we really want power boats and jet skis on the Ribble? - today I saw 14 swans on the water by Avenham Park, heavy usage by boats would drive away this birdlife, and the wake would swamp their nests (if they can nest anywhere along banks encased in concrete).


OK - So the Ribble Barrage may affect wildlife near Preston - but the environmentally significant wildlife and the migratory birds in the Ribble Estuary are miles away.

The wildlife near Preston, Walton Le Dale and Penwortham is very significant to the people who live there and enjoy their access to the beautiful river and the fields around it as it is today. They don’t want their green areas covering with housing, roads and concrete. Fish like the Atlantic Salmon, which is an endangered species would find a barrage to be a major obstacle to getting up the river.
And anyway, building a barrage WOULD affect the estuary; The ecology of the estuary depends on the silts that are washed down the river. A barrage would disrupt this flow of silts and cause more and more damage every year to the crucial environment of the Ribble Estuary - at the moment there are 250,000 birds and a huge density of invertebrates in the mudflats that support them - cut off or restrict the flow of silts and this huge ecological resource would be lost forever.

But the council say that "this is a river which has lost it's identity" - we need a big marina to attract tourism to our area.

There are plenty of people who think our river is very beautiful - especially when the mudflats and rocky stretches are exposed - the Save The Ribble blog has published loads of local people's photographs that show just how beautiful it is. If the council tried to promote the River properly instead of denigrating it, a whole range of new tourists could come - people interested in Lancashire's Civil War heritage, the Vikings, the Romans and all the other history of the area, as well as people interested in the opportunities to walk and cycle in the green areas so close to the city centre. Type 'River Ribble' into Preston Councils' tourism website search engine and you come up with nothing. The council has done nothing to promote this beautiful river - this couldn't be connected with their plans to encase it in concrete could it? Preston already has a marina on the docks - and they can't even manage that - it is full of blue-green algae and stinks during hot weather - if they build a barrage, our whole river could end up like this.


Yeah, but a Ribble barrage is going to protect us from floods isn’t it.

The barrage in the Riverworks proposals is not being specifically designed as a flood defence barrier - it has a different job, which is to raise the level of the river to a permanent high-tide level. A flood defence would be in a different place and be a different design. The barrage will increase the risk of tidal flooding to those downriver from it, as it will displace the incoming tide sideways. Also because silts will accumulate on the riverbed upriver from the barrage, it will reduce the capacity of the river to carry off rainwater when it is in spate and increase the risk of flooding to upriver areas - including the new housing they want to build in it’s floodplain. Raising the average level of the river will also have the effect of raising the level of ground-water beneath housing that is near the river - with all kinds of dangerous effects given that much of this land was formerly marshland. The Welsh Assembly is having to pay £20 million a year to dredge the silts from Cardiff bay and pump out the rising ground waters since they built the Cardiff bay barrage - who will foot the bill for the dredging and pumping necessitated by the Ribble Barrage?

But this is all just ideas - it isn’t really going to happen anyway, so why are you making so much fuss?

The Cardiff Bay barrage started off as some planners whim, but ended up being built. We think there is growing interest from developers and building firms behind the scenes in these Riverworks ideas that is giving a lot of impetus to driving them forward, despite the opposition expressed by local people. There has already been large amounts of council time and money spent dreaming up and promoting these ideas, and they want to spend a considerable amount more on feasibility studies - this is our money and should not be being spent on ideas that are not wanted by local people.

The council should have asked the people of Preston and South Ribble what they wanted BEFORE making these Riverworks proposals - we think ordinary people would have come up with a very different set of priorities than turning the River into a Power-boat Playground. The people who live downriver and upriver whose homes could be affected by these proposals will want to have their say too, people at Freckleton and at Ribchester for example. Freckleton Parish Council has voted to strongly oppose any barrage plan.

The best time to campaign to stop the barrage and housing proposals, and defend our sports fields and allotments is now, before the Riverworks proposals gather too much momentum and money behind them and become unstoppable. We are having some success - we helped persuade the National Lottery not to back these ideas because of the high level of local opposition, and we are beginning to make local councillors listen - but it will take a lot more campaigning before we change the council’s mind.

OK OK - you’ve convinced me - how do I join the campaign?

Easy! email savetheribble@tiscali.co.uk or write to Save The Ribble Campaign PO Box 1104 Penwortham Preston PR2 0DB - and welcome to the Save The Ribble Campaign! You can email our blogs web address to your friends and workmates, and you can print off our leaflet and window poster to show your mates and put it up in your window or on your work noticeboard - spread the word! (And buy me another pint - my throat's gone dry!)



pubs debate ribble development environment river wildlife greenbelt barrage flood

Phil Widdows Shoots From The Lip - Riverworks is "Bloated and Bonkers"

Our blog is generating a lot of heated debate about the housing and barrage elements of the Riverworks proposals, and attracting new readers all the time.

One such new reader is Phil Widdows, the Lancashire Evening
Post's opinion columnist, who has his own blog where he
posts personal opinions, that whether you agree with them or not, are entertaining and forthright: Shooting from the Lip.


"rather earnest protesters getting hot, bothered and holier than thou about the idea of building a barrage across the River Ribble" - (How Phil Widdows sees us!)

Here is what he has to say on his blog about Save The
Ribble's article Riverworks, the Housing Sums That Don't Add Up:

Sold Up The River?

The rather earnest protesters getting hot, bothered and holier than thou about the idea of building a barrage across the River Ribble to turn what is too often a dribble into a useable leisure facility ("but won't anyone think of the little birdies?!?") have finally hit on something that deserves serious answers.

At their blog they point to all the stuff other than the barrage itself - including the jolly wheeze of building houses and commercial property on what is and will be a
flood plain - included in the bloated and bonkers Riverworks scheme and ask, if Preston and South Ribble have an official oversupply of housing, why is the council
spending money on feasibility studies, and asking for much more money from the National Lottery to push these ideas forward?

They then add:

One thing is clear, the Riverworks housing and barrage proposals are ideas that are being driven by the potential profits of developers, rather than by the wishes or needs of residents of Preston and South Ribble.

Whether the barrage itself is a good idea or not is up for debate (it's far too expensive and will never get built, but that needn't spoil a good fight). What must not be allowed to happen is for Preston City Council to spend public money on studies to test the feasibility of a housing scheme which, under its own planning policy, stands as much chance of coming to reality as Togo have of winning the World Cup.

Step carefully, councillors, or the barrage could quickly turn into a very different kind of "water gate" to the one you expect...

As Deep Throat (no, not that one) said ... "Follow the money".

Phil Widdows is right to be pointing out the mess of contradictions the council is getting itself into - here is a link to the council policy on housing development that is being blatantly ignored by supporters of Riverworks in the council: Draft SPG9

This policy states clearly:

The tightened control rules out the building of new houses on “greenfield” land and cuts back the number of houses to be approved on “brownfield” land.

and limits the number of new houses that can be built in Preston to just 180 a year until 2016.

It states

An oversupply will contravene the policies of both the Regional Plan and the Lancashire Structure Plan

Given the clarity of this policy, how do we explain the enthusiasm of so many people at the Council to build 4000 houses in this area?

We say it is time for Preston's council officers to start listening to their own council policies, and more importantly, to the views of Preston people, who are becoming angrier at the Riverworks housing and barrage ideas every day.

We will carry on asking the council awkward questions - the 350,000 birds in the Ribble Estuary ARE important, as are the people who live near the river, whose homes would be at increased risk of flooding if the barrage were to cause the water table beneath them to rise.

One thing is clear - blogging is working - the council can no longer get away with weasel-worded hype and every detail of the Riverworks proposals is now beginning to be carefully scrutinised by people who care about the River Ribble, it's people and it's environment.

Blogging reaches the places other campaigning methods cannot go!