The John Wilson Interview

I'll just copy a part of one of your statements "the lack of interest of the environmental institutions, government departments, civil servants and those who own the waters and rivers, on what is going on IN the waters"

Virtually everyone not connected with angling will look at a water, be it a lake, pond or river, and they say "What lovely ducks. etc." Not a single person (almost) will give a thougth to what is going on below the surface. That's the way it's always been and always will be.

Now Codger, you make the point as to who is raising these issues. Well, each and every club should be affiliated in some way or another to one of the river consultatives, they're all over the country. Most of them work with RFERACS and therefore the EA and they can also push forward national legislation (to a point) that will change, in time, what happens to our waters.

If there are any individual anglers concerned as to whether they themselves are being represented in they way, they should get along to some of their club's meetings, find out if the club is involved and if not - kick their bl**dy a**es off the committee and replace them with people who will do it.

The answer lies in your own hands. Also join the ACA.

[Codger]

Ok, this has turned into an ACA debate by you guys!

The Thread is about the points raised in an article by John Wilson and what sort of thoughts you guys have got about those points.

So to be really controversial, and this is aimed at the ACA supporters - are you guys really opposed to the point of not having a discussion about the future needs and requirements of having a Severn barrage?

Fred what percentage of anglers use the net, or buy a mag? Of those that do, how many are members? It is evident that the message is not being pushed strongly enough by all of us!

We need a form of compulsive membership, to the ACA, new 'other'body or whoever!

Codger, don't take the slight diversion of your thread personally mate!

It is the likes of the ACA that are responsible for the lobbying you speak of in your first post. To my mind, that the membership is ridiculously low is without doubt a hindrance to the level and amount of work (lobbying)that is done!

And Codger, where were the voices of angling when all the other barrages were built?

There weren't any, because of what has already been said.

We need powerful representatation.

Like this,it's on the website

Tidal Barrage Power? No Thanks! <div align="right">October 2nd, 2007 The Anglers’ Conservation Association (ACA) and the Salmon & Trout Association (S&TA) have read with deep concern the report launched today by the Sustainable Development Commission, Turning the Tide, which assesses the potential for tidal power to generate electricity in some of the UK’s most important estuaries, including the Severn.

The proposed Severn Barrage would have a serious impact on fish within the River Severn estuary, especially migratory species such as Atlantic salmon, sea trout, shad, lampreys and eels, all of which are protected by European legislation. Salmon in particular could become non viable in the rivers Severn, Wye and Usk.

Most alarmingly, it is the potential for turbines to kill high numbers of outwardly migrating juveniles that poses the greatest threat. The estuary is also important for marine species such as bass, mullet, pollock, sole, flounders and sprat, all of which would be impeded by the physical barrier and inevitable change in environmental quality within the estuary associated with building a barrage.

The document makes clear that there would be a legal requirement to compensate any damage to habitats. It suggests: “habitat compensation could include the creation of new habitat, the restoration of existing habitat, or the recreation of habitats within the site, in other designated sites, or in non-designated sites (and then designating them). To compensate for impacts on fish, compensation could involve the artificial restocking of certain fish species to maintain overall numbers.”

It is clear that recreating three of the largest rivers in the UK is preposterous, and that restocking of migratory fish in these rivers would be pointless as they would be killed either on their way to sea or on their return. Salmon populations from particular rivers are genetically unique and therefore cannot be replaced elsewhere.

The SDC notes that: “The practicality and cost of this requirement represents the final test of the overall viability of the proposal.” The S&TA and ACA can only conclude that this test makes a tidal barrage in the Severn non-viable.

S&TA Executive Director, Paul Knight, said, “migratory fish, especially salmon and sea trout, have a very high socio-economic importance in the area, while salmon, shad and lampreys are all designated species under the EU Habitats Directive and eels are now officially classified as an endangered species. Any structure which impeded their migration would have a catastrophic effect on the world-renowned rivers Usk, Wye and Severn, and there is no way of recreating these fish populations elsewhere as compensation.”

ACA Executive Director, Mark Lloyd, commented, “whilst we appreciate the very urgent need to address climate change, we do not believe that a barrage in the Severn or any other estuary is a sustainable solution. The damage to the environment from tidal barrages – ranging from the materials used in construction to the disruption of complex flows of sediment in estuaries – is unacceptable and probably illegal. We would much rather see comprehensive schemes to reduce energy demand coupled with the development of relatively benign tidal stream technologies which could be developed around new marine reserves. That strategy would qualify as sustainable development.”

[Codger]

Yes Eddie, I think the diversion has arisen because of the question at the end of my original post so the diversion was requested I suppose.

However the main point was the John Wilson comments and as yet I seem to be only one who has read it so I look forward to comments on that.

[img]/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif[/img]

I read it, and agree with his comments.What I can't remeber is what he said he was going to do about it.

When you joining?[img]/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif[/img]

[Codger]

Yes, I read that on the site and took it to mean they are absolutely opposed to a Severn barrage.

Sorry, but I do not know of another barrage.

They may well be at this stage,but at least they are involved with the discussions.

Thames Barrage,Taff Barrage to name but two.

[Codger]

I dont know the Taff barrage - sorry [img]/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif[/img] and the Thames barrage is not permanent one.