Reading the comments on this story a few days ago on .world was depressing AF.
The thread was full of justifications for prosecution; they shouldn’t have used a digger, and they could have done more damage than good, and they should have let the authorities do it, blah blah blah
Clearly none of them had read that it had been an ongoing campaign that knew what they were doing and had appealed to the authorities several times. Just straight to justifying authorities criminalisation of public good.
Here’s a video from Channel 4 to give a better visual of what they did: https://youtu.be/Kj9Hvdzu_zw
No, removing silt from a river increases flow and so increases downstream flooding.
While it can be justified the default position of wild cat dredging is that its bad. Often done by farmers to move flood water on to other people too.
Aye, it’s almost as if that was their purpose because the river had become near stagnant.
The Environment Agency were clearly doing fuck all, but now that an organisation has done something about it (after multiple complaints to the EA resulting in nothing) they’re up in arms. Their press release reads as so flimsy as to be laughable.
This isn’t just some greedy farmer trying to improve his land not caring about the knock on effects downstream. They clearly put a great deal of thought and planning into what they do and why.
https://riverrodingtrust.org.uk/
“Local busybody appalled to learn rules also apply to them”
