Once again today, the outlook is wet. As the lugubrious cows observed in The Herald's cartoon yesterday, since Gordon Brown entered No 10 barely a month ago, this son of the manse has endured the suitably biblical trio of fire (at Glasgow Airport), flood (in Gloucestershire) and now pestilence (in Surrey). Of the three, if climate scientists are to be believed, the most intractable is likely to be the wet one.
In Scotland, global warming is likely to translate into warmer, wetter winters and more sudden summer storms. We would be foolish not to plan for an increase in the frequency and severity of flooding, even if this time around we were spared the worst of the mess and trauma visited on the inhabitants of Tewkesbury. This week, torrential rain in Grampian has caused some local flooding and the village of Pennan was threatened by mudslides.
In some respects Scotland offers a model of, if not best, then better practice in flood management. In theory, there is a stronger planning assumption in Scotland than England against building on flood plains, making a Thames Gateway-scale development in Scotland unlikely, though it has not prevented Stirling Council from planning to redevelop old barracks in the Riverside area of the town. And since Scottish legislation in 2003, the law has laid a duty on all responsible authorities to promote sustainable flood management for individual river systems all the way from source to sea, a distinct improvement on England's piecemeal approach. Even so, it seems unlikely that the equivalent of five inches of rain in a day would not have overwhelmed Scotland's most flood-prone communities, including parts of Glasgow and Edinburgh, Paisley, Perth, Elgin and Hawick. Among common issues to be addressed are antiquated infrastructure, deforestation and the disappearance of what amounts to hundreds of square miles of absorbent gravel and grass under impervious tarmac and buildings.
It is surely better to deal with the cause of flooding than the effect. People have always lived along rivers, relying on them for water, food and transport, which is why our historic towns and cities are on riverbanks. The recent history of these rivers has involved the draining and development of wetlands (the natural sponges that mop up excess water) and the straitjacketing of rivers through dykes and culverts. A recent pilot project on the River Devon in the Ochils suggests that "soft" flood prevention, such as recreating wetlands and allowing water into uninhabited flood plains, could offer a cheaper alternative to "hard" engineering solutions, involving ever-higher flood barriers. The flood-prone Borders town of Hawick would benefit from a similar approach. Farmers upstream could be paid to use riverside fields as temporary reservoirs. However, the terms of the 1961 Flood Act prevent the Scottish Executive from directing grants to farmers. Consequently, hardly any of the £89m set aside by the last Scottish Executive has been spent on soft flood prevention schemes. The Act must be amended as a matter of urgency.
Secondly, Scotland should build on the useful model of Flood Liaison Advisory Groups by widening their membership to include farmers, foresters and community representatives capable of devising local solutions to flood problems. Thirdly, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) should take a more proactive role in this area. Finally, if Scotland in the 21st century is to cope with frequent downpours and rising sea levels, a single co-ordinating body to meet that threat is essential.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article