Sustainable Recovery Pilot project

Following flooding in 2019 and again during winter 2023/24, local farmers and landowners asked us whether there could be different ways to recover from flooding and manage flood risk in the future.

We know that repeated flooding can have a significant impact on people, businesses, farmland and the local environment. In response, we launched the Sustainable Recovery Pilot and brought together farmers, landowners and local partners to explore new approaches to building long-term resilience.

The pilot focuses on communities affected by Storms Babet and Henk. These areas are connected through the local river and drainage network and face many of the same flood risk challenges.

By combining local knowledge with technical evidence, we are developing a shared understanding of the opportunities and challenges across the area. Together, we are exploring how communities, landowners and organisations can adapt to future flood challenges while continuing to support farming, the local economy and the environment.

The pilot is an opportunity to test ideas, learn from local experience and identify practical approaches that could help communities become more resilient in the long term. The lessons we learn could also help inform future flood risk management across the Lower Witham and beyond.

The Sustainable Recovery Pilot forms part of the wider Fens 2100+ programme, which is exploring how flood risk can be managed across the Fens in a changing climate. Through this work, we hope to develop and test approaches that could help shape future decision-making both within the project area and across the wider Fens landscape.

Lower Witham Sustainable Recovery Pilot project area.

 

The project area sits where four rivers meet: 

• River Witham (from the west) 
• Barlings Eau (from the north) 
• Stainfield Beck (from the east) 
• Snakeholme Drain (from the east) 

When the Barlings Eau joins the Old River Witham near Short Ferry, the water slows down as it reaches the flatter Fen landscape. During periods of heavy rainfall, this can cause water to back up along the Barlings Eau, leading to high river levels that may overtop or, in some cases, breach embankments.

The Barlings Eau drains water from a large area of nearly 300 km². Because water from across this area funnels towards a flat, low-lying landscape, large volumes of water can build up quickly during heavy rainfall. Combined with the slowing of flows where the rivers meet, this makes the area particularly vulnerable to flooding.

Project area and associated hydrological catchmentsThe LiDAR map below shows the height of the land across the project and surrounding areas. Darker colours represent higher ground, and lighter colours represent lower-lying ground. This helps show how water moves through the landscape and why flooding can happen after periods of heavy rainfall.

Lidar map showing the topography of the project and surrounding area.  .

 

For generations, flooding in the Fens has been managed through an extensive network of embankments, drainage channels, pumping stations and other engineered defences. These systems have supported communities and some of the country's most productive farmland in a landscape where much of the land is below sea level.

Land within the Fens at risk of permanent inundation if flood defences were no longer maintained. Shaded areas are below the level of a typical high spring tide.   

Drag lines historically used to dredge water courses in the Fens. 

Historic River Witham bank raising using temporary railways.

 

However, evidence from the Future Fens Integrated Adaptation (FFIA) and Fens 2100+  programme shows that continually maintaining and upgrading flood defences is becoming increasingly challenging. Many flood risk assets are reaching the end of their design life. At the same time, they face growing pressure from climate change, land settlement and more frequent extreme weather events. 

Climate change will increase future flood risk through heavier rainfall, larger flood volumes and flows, rising sea levels as well as longer periods of drought. These changes will place greater pressure on those who manage water resources and flood risk across the Fens. Peat soils are also shrinking and settling, causing some areas to sink lower over time. This makes managing water even more challenging. 

Together, these factors mean justifying the replacement of flood risk assets using the value of avoided flood damages alone is increasingly difficult. Projects must also provide wider benefits, including climate change mitigation, habitat creation, and economic growth, to build a strong economic case. Traditional defences may have a smaller role in future, with resilience and adaptation to flooding becoming more of a reality.

That is why the Sustainable Recovery Pilot project is looking ahead now. We are exploring how communities, land managers and partner organisations can work together to build long term resilience. Our aim is to identify practical, long-term solutions that help people, businesses and the environment adapt to a changing climate. Acting early gives us the best opportunity to reduce future flood risk, strengthen local resilience and support a sustainable future for the area.

We have established a partnership group including the Witham Third Internal Drainage Board (IDB), Lincolnshire County Council, National Farmers Union and Natural England. 

Project partners 

Together, we are working to develop a long-term plan for the Sustainable Recovery Pilot project area.

Our vision is to create a more resilient landscape that works with water, reduces the impacts of flooding, supports farming and nature, and helps communities adapt to future climate challenges.

So far, we have:

• Identified a shortlist of potential measures. 
• Developed a contingency plan to manage flood risk while longer term options are explored. 
• Met with farmers and landowners to gather local knowledge, ideas and feedback. 
• Developed a range of possible scenarios for managing future flood risk. 
• Assessed the strengths, challenges and potential benefits of each scenario. 
• Identified a promising scenario and agreed to explore it in more detail.

Alongside developing future scenarios, partners have continued to invest in local flood resilience.

Actions that have been achieved on the ground. 

a) Lower Witham embankment repairs at Fiskerton to address embankment slips.Repair works to embankment slips at Fiskerton. 

b) Operational Action Plan developed to improve coordination of flood incident management across partner organisations.Water flow directions within the project area.

c) Marsh Drain gravity outfall installation completed by Witham Third IDB. A gravity outfall pipe was installed and the embankment reinstated to improve flood recovery. 

Gravity outfall installed at Marsh Drain.

 

d) Bardney Fen Pumping Station Upgrade completed. Control panels were raised to reduce flood risk and improve operational resilience.

Upgraded Bardney Fen Pumping Station.

 

e) Stainfield Pumping Station works

Works to upgrade Stainfield pumping Station.

 

f) New Cut Drain Penstock Upgrade completed by Witham Third IDB. A new gantry allows safer and faster operation during high water events. 

New gantry installed at New Cut Drain.

g) Short Ferry Pumping Station upgrade completed. An additional pump and new generator connections have increased capacity and resilience 

h) Greetwell Pumping Station upgrade completed. Electrics have been raised above flood level and a new submersible pump installed to improve resilience.  

Flood risk is managed across the project area every day by the Environment Agency and Witham Third IDB. This work will continue while future options are explored.

For the latest updates, visit our Sustainable Recovery Pilot project newsfeed.

We combined short listed measures into potential scenarios including-

• Do Nothing- No maintenance of existing flood risk assets, including recovery and no new flood management works. This scenario is only used as a comparison to understand the impact of taking no action.
• Do Minimum- Risk Management Authorities would continue to carry out their legal responsibilities, but no additional improvements would be made.
• Rebuild and maintain- Restore and maintain existing flood risk assets to a higher condition. This would reduce the likelihood of asset failures and breaches.

• Flood storage and resilience- Promote resilience and introduce storage within the landscape helping communities, infrastructure and landowners become more resilient to flooding and recover more quickly after flood events.

The partnership assessed each scenario against a range of factors, including:

• How well it meets the objectives identified by local communities, stakeholders and partner organisations.
• Costs and benefits to understand whether the scenario offers good value for money.
• Long-term sustainability, including impacts on the environment, biodiversity and carbon emissions.

Based on the work completed so far, the partnership have agreed that Flood Storage and Resilience offers the greatest potential. Further work is now needed to understand its feasibility and potential benefits.

This approach looks beyond traditional flood management and could help deliver a range of wider benefits, including:

• Greater opportunities to attract future funding.
• Long-term benefits for local communities.
• Opportunities to attract funding from a wider range of sources.
• Benefits that extend beyond the project area.
• The potential to be adapted and applied elsewhere across the Fens.

Importantly, no decisions have been made about specific measures. The scenario is flexible and could involve a range of actions. Any measures would need to be affordable, practical and supported by local communities and partners. 

Comparison of potential future management scenarios for the Lower Witham area, showing increasing levels of intervention from “Do Nothing” through to “Rebuild and Maintain”. Scenario 2 (Flood Storage and Water Resilience) is shown as a flexible option that can be scaled according to available funding, local priorities and stakeholder agreement. 

Any measures taken forward through the project would need to show that they do not increase flood risk elsewhere. Flood risk assessments and hydraulic modelling would be used to understand how proposals affect water levels and flood flows across the wider area. Any future measures would be designed to  reduce the impacts of existing and future flooding, to communities, businesses and land managers. 

Many people ask whether the answer is simply to rebuild the embankments to a modern standard.

Rebuild and Maintain was one of the scenarios assessed as part of the project. Initial estimates suggested that this scenario would require significant and unaffordable investment, with embankment works accounting for most of the cost. The estimated costs were more than three times higher than the Flood Storage and Resilience scenario. This option did not include rebuilding all embankments in the area, and even where rebuilding would take place, flood risk would continue to increase as climate change impacts take effect.

Dredging is another option that is often raised during discussions about flooding. While dredging can have a role in maintaining navigable waterways and drainage channels in some locations, it would not provide a long-term solution to the flooding challenges in this area. Flooding is primarily driven by the large volumes of water entering the river system from a catchment of almost 300 km², combined with the flat nature of the Fen landscape. Dredging or desilting would not address these underlying causes. Like all flood risk management projects, investment must be prioritised where it can deliver the greatest overall benefit. In predominantly agricultural areas, securing funding for large-scale embankment reconstruction can be challenging.

As climate change impacts intensify, even newly constructed banks would continue to overtop more frequently. Farmland and communities would continue to flood and be impacted.

For these reasons, the project is exploring whether a combination of flood storage, resilience measures and targeted infrastructure improvements could provide a more successful, sustainable and affordable way to manage future flood risk. 

No decisions have been made. Further work is needed to understand which combination of measures could deliver the greatest overall benefit.

The partners have agreed which scenario we can explore in more detail. However, no decisions have been made about whether any measures will be delivered, or which locations they may be delivered at.

Before any proposals are developed, we need to carry out surveys, feasibility studies and discussions with landowners. This work will help us better understand the opportunities, constraints and potential benefits at each location.

Any future proposals will be shaped by this evidence and developed in partnership with landowners and stakeholders.