AQA Geog4b June 2014 - Morpeth flooding

Are there any other points that you could make for "was there enough warning of what was to come?" apart from:

NO - middle greens didn't even get a warning
NO - high stanners warning was very late

Evaluate how the response to the floods could be improved.

Short term responses to the flooding in Morpeth were criticised by residents. In item 1, resident Andrew Wilson of Middle Greens says he had no warnings and no help whatsoever. The automated telephone service missed out Middle Greens, down to human error. This response could have been improved by hiring 2 people to carry out this task - a fail safe method, so the locations the warnings are sent out to are double checked. This could have potentially largely reduced the impact of the flood in this area.
The flood defences should have received better maintenance, there were cracks in the flood wall at Middle Greens allowing water to leak through. The culverts trash screens should have also been regularly and routinely cleared to ensure no serious blockages, this could've been done by the Environment agency initially employing more people to preform these thorough checks of the defences.
Long term responses have been expensive and lengthy. These include the construction of the new dam, north of the Mitford Estate resulted in an original budget of £21 million. This flood alleviation scheme was unable to receive 100% grant-in-aid funding from the Central government, so £12 million was funded by the Northumberland County Council and around £9.3 million was provided by the Central government. The original plan of £21million has further rose to £26million. This extra £5million coming from council tax which the public are expected to not be very pleased with. This response could have been improved by considering applying for EU funding, or looking into alternative soft engineering responses which aren't so much of an expense, environmental issue and eyesore.

Can someone help me improve this, what soft engineering could they have used? What needs more detail?


Posted from TSR Mobile

Are there any other points that you could make for "was there enough warning of what was to come?" apart from:

NO - middle greens didn't even get a warning
NO - high stanners warning was very late

Is it a good idea to explicitly reference the AIB?

I'm really confused about what we should be talking about.

Say the question was 'Explain why Morpeth was a high risk town for flooding (8 marks)'

How much do we refer to the AIB and how much to stuff we have researched independently?

& if it said 'Morpeth is a high-risk town for flooding. Discuss this statement with reference to items 4, 5, etc'

How much should we refer to items and how much should we bring in other knowledge?


Also (sorry for the questions) but as well as a storm hydrograph we've looked at using the data for standard deviation, a statistical technique. Is this a form of presentation or does it need to be a graph/diagram to be a presentation technique?? (Sorry, probably a really silly question to ask! Confused :/ )

Perhaps the first thing you should do is explain what a response means, again I know this sounds silly but showing the examiner you truly understand what the word means, shows explanation. Just a short paragraph, similar to the prepared paragraph I shared earlier.
The knowledge is good but you should talk more about responses in terms of the evacuation plans and what time they went into play. e.g. Item 4 shows that the Northumberland County Council started to evacuated people at 11.00am on Saturday 6th September. Then SAY this was a good, quick response because the river did not meet pick discharge until 16:00 that same day. Also, mention about Saturday. The fact that the flood happened on a busy Saturday meant the environment agency had to ensure their evacuations were one hundred percent needed, to ensure they did not make a false evacuation and lose money for Morpeth's town/economy.

Also, it is better to talk about two or three responses in detail, and evaluate them. Make a small conclusion at the end (if it were a 15 mark) saying the best response etc.

However, I feel what you have written is still good, well done

If the question explicitly asks you to use items, 4 or 5 then use it the MAJORITY OF the time, if not all. Add additional information you've found to either back-up or addiction what you are saying within your writing. You don't want to chuck everything at the page that you've learnt, it needs to be relevant and strategic. Remember, if you don't use additional information, you're very unlikely to get to the mid to top band of level 2 and you certainly wont get into level 3.

If the question doesn't state, as you put about. Then use both AIB, OS MAP and additional information. I'd say do a balance on all information but if a piece of additional information you've found is very strong and relevant, then by all means use it and talk about it, more so than the AIB.

The examiner wants to know that you have a full understanding of the events from the Morpeth floods 2008 and that you have done some preparation and own research. Ultimately, when your in the exam on Monday, do what your gut feelings tell you and you'll be fine

Oh and if it says a presentation technique then I would always go for a Storm Hydrograph. Standard deviation is not a presentation technique, a presentation technique is visual, graph etc. Standard deviation is more about how significant the storm was, don't worry too much. Just stick with hydro graphs and ensure you can explain and justify the reasons for use, if you're stuck, somewhere on the page I have written limitations and benefits for using a hydrograph. It sounds silly too, but make sure you explicitly say that you will out TIME on the X axis and Rain discharge in mm and cumecs on the Y axis etc.

Good luck, i'm sure you'll do fine.

Is it quite likely that there will be a question about money investment?

Ahh yeah thanks for the advice!
Do you think we will have to draw a storm hydrograph?


Posted from TSR Mobile

has anyone got any key facts for the 2012 flood? i have some comparisons but not loads

Can anyone help me with the question -
'To what extent was the town's flood management plan fit for purpose?'
Where is this flood management plan?!

yes please that would be so so helpful!

Thanks guys! Guren, I already had that stuff in my answer but thanks anyway. If either of you want my fully written answer via email just let me know, I have both of your emails!

does anyone know the flood defences that were in place prior to the morpeth floods and the flood defences installed afterwards?

This would probably be a 10 marker. The first thing I would do is define fir for purpose. In the context of the Morpeth Floods 2008, fit for purpose means that the town's flood management would dramatically reduce the damage the flood caused and how far the flood management was successful e.g. the flood wall keeping water away from Central Morpeth (of course this wasn't the case)

Then I would split it into two paragraphs saying, how Morpeths management was fit for purpose:
1) Item 4 shows evacuations began with High Stanners, beginning at 11:00am on Saturday 8th.
2) The variety of agencies used: Royal National Lifeboat Institution, RAF, firefighters and the British Red Cross.
3) In most areas (apart from Middle greens) there was successful severe flood warnings generally.
4) The flood wall was built to deal with the scale of the 1963 flood, but of course the 2008 flood exceeded those levels.

And how management wasn't fit for purpose:
1)Human error meant that Middle greens was not sent automated phone messages about flood warnings.
2) 18 pleasure boats were inaccessible
3) The flood wall leaked - potentially poor building or maintenance ?
4) The flood wall was not high enough, nor long enough.
5) Sand bag distribution far too late = ineffective anyway

Then you make an overall judgement at the end of the two paragraphs, e.g. 'I believe to a large extent the flood management was fit for purpose OR 'I believe to a large extent the flood management was not fir for purpose'. EXPLICITLY answers the question, don't forget abut what the question is asking you.

Remember, since 2000, Morpeth have been doing practice evacuation procedures and they've had planning in place and hard engineering (Flood wall defense).

Again, quote both AIB, OS MAP(if necessary) and additional research throughout. There is no wrong or right answer to this question it is YOUR opinion, just back it up and be sure to evaluate throughout.