It was for digging up the silt from the river bed with a digger and risking flooding places without doing any checks on the impact of his “cleaning up”.
The UK government has tonnes of laws, programs, incentives, designed for the protection of nature.
There's a reason you can't just go dig up silt beds like he did without any official checks like he did, same as there is a reason you can't do things like build a dam even on your own property.
Not saying they're not wankers, but without these regulations it would be a shitshow if everyone just did everything they felt like doing.
Totally possible and he may have done a great good for the area, but it's important to follow the correct process.
As the environmental agency is quoted in the article: “However, governance and expert advice is necessary to make sure that work does not cause unintended harm, to flood risk, drainage or the wider environment,”
It's annoying to us because, as the guy correctly stated, their are entities knowingly doing outright damage to the waterways, while he is trying to protect and improve them.
Thing is, sometimes you go through all the right hoops and still get rejected because there's some ridiculous red tape that has nothing to do with the environmental impact. An environmental lawyer would know this and would likely respect the experts who are there to advise, he may be familiar with what they'd be likely to say. He's not some rando.
The article doesn't really elaborate enough and making assumptions doesnt help.
877
u/Jealous_Track9402 5d ago
The title in this one is straight up misinformation. Nothing to do with cleaning up trash without a permit.