Any Reservoir Undertakers on here?
Any Reservoir Undertakers on here?
Author
Discussion

RedLeicester

Original Poster:

6,869 posts

269 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Or indeed, those with ponds of 10,000m3 or more...?

Stand up and be counted.

Or PM and be counted should you prefer.


Tis the year of change, and from the noises I've been getting here, we could be either home Scott free, or get hit by a veritable ton of extra red tape...

Bill

57,424 posts

279 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
confused

Shaw Tarse

31,836 posts

227 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Bill said:
confused
Don't ask me equally I'm equally confused

flyingjase

3,094 posts

255 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
One would assume that there is some new legislation or the like that classes any water mass of 10000m3 or above as a resevoir?

If that is the case then you are most likely in a very small minority fortunate enough to have sufficient land to accomodate such a puddle.

However just out of pure interest, please share with the group the nature of your challenge!

RedLeicester

Original Poster:

6,869 posts

269 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Thanks for reducing the tumbleweed anyway chaps!

A reservoir undertaker is the chap (usually if not always the owner) legally responsible for maintenance, upkeep and inspection of an artificial body of water over 25,000m3. As of 2011, the level is being dropped (badum, tish) to 10,000m3.

RedLeicester

Original Poster:

6,869 posts

269 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
flyingjase said:
One would assume that there is some new legislation or the like that classes any water mass of 10000m3 or above as a resevoir?
Ours is well over that, but thought it might be of interest to the PH massive as 10,000m3 will drag quite a lot of ornamental or koi ponds et al under the remit of the legislation. Then on top of that, there's all the hoo-hah about the new flood maps and their utter mad inaccuracy, not to mention who's going to end up paying for all the red tape...

Bill

57,424 posts

279 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Aha. I was wondering how you go about burying that much water biggrin Cremation not being an option...

RedLeicester

Original Poster:

6,869 posts

269 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
All gets a bit steamy at that point.

Simpo Two

91,478 posts

289 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Bill said:
Aha. I was wondering how you go about burying that much water biggrin Cremation not being an option...
You could have a pond 1m x 1m on the top and 10,000m deep. Then they'd never know.

And you'd probably get geothermal energy too!

Globs

13,847 posts

255 months

Tuesday 22nd March 2011
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
Bill said:
Aha. I was wondering how you go about burying that much water biggrin Cremation not being an option...
You could have a pond 1m x 1m on the top and 10,000m deep. Then they'd never know.

And you'd probably get geothermal energy too!
Yup - I vote for this idea too.

Two questions spring to mind:

1) How will they know?
2) What is the penalty for ignoring them?

BTW I'm not sure many koi ponds will come in over that size will they? at 2m deep that's a pond 71m by 71m in size...