More Hydropower Plants Planned For Thames

Jeff Woodhouse · May 3, 2011

Fred Bonney alerted me to this, but the ATTRFC (I think that's our new name now) were onto it because Dr Alan Butterworth (formerly EA Thames Fisheries Development Manager (think that was his title) brought it up. Alan is dead opposed to them as they kill fisheries and don't deliver the benefits they are claimed to.

FULL STORY HERE

What a disgrace to destroy this -

jeff-woodhouse-albums-strange-things-seen-whilst-fishing-picture2537-marlow-weir.jpg

This is my (and 13 others) fishery, our pride and joy and we feel privileged to be able to fish there, but a hydropower plant will ruin it, not only for us as anglers but as a viable fishery for the fish. It's not just this one, Boulters weir in Maidenhead and the weir at Boveney, opposite the Windsor racecourse stretch are also now threatened. Promises to refrain from continuing have been broken by the politico powers in the EA, the ones who decide where our licence money is spent.

Tis sad news indeed.

tuolumne fisher · May 4, 2011

spot on m8
the EA are gagging their fisheries, not producing scientific data, and have even replaced a concrete bank that needed renewing with one that is hydro friendly,
it all sucks and unless anglers get pro-active, we'll get what we're given

chav professor · May 4, 2011

It is disgusting!!! Hydroelectric projects will do nothing to reduce carbon outputs. the problem is global. China was building a coal fired power station a week to keep up with demand for energy. then there is India and africa will follow as the Chinese are investing heavily in Kenya.......

This is a liberal minded, wishy washy, feely good environmantal gesture that will destroy more than it could ever wish to achieve. Is there a campaign? This is an oportunity for the Angling Trust to justify its existance - if it can't campaign to stop a project like this (not just voice objection through a letter, though that is a good start) - it is pointless! I am joining this week.

How about a mass non-payment of rod licence fee's!!!!

Alan Tyler · May 4, 2011

Is there not a case to be argued that they'll have to ensure a healthy flow in the river at all times, lest journos see the turbines lying static in the string-o'-lakes that the river has tended (or so I read) to become in recent summers and see a juicy target for a silly-season campaign of Outrage and Revelations of Extravagance? And that this (the increased flow, not the rabid press) will be a good thing in general, even if it does enable the fish to spread out a bit more?

I'm afraid I ask in ignorance, as I haven't been able to get to Old Father T. for years now other than a couple of hours at Reading, so I'd love to hear the whole range of opinions.

At first sight, it looks to me as if any attempt to extract energy from the non-tidal river in the summer is going to be a complete Ealing Comedy. It seems there are boxes to be ticked here, and by gently pointing out some of the emptier ones, (Biodiversity baseline studies... link in to local schools (A-level practical projects?) and Universities (cheap field-work projects?)= community outreach! Two Ticks! Continued monitoring by same to monitor environmental impact? Another Two!... and so on till we run out of abstract nouns) anglers might be able to do themselves a favour or two...

Jeff Woodhouse · May 4, 2011

chav professor said:
How about a mass non-payment of rod licence fee's!!!!

Unfortunately, the licence fees go to the Fisheries Departments who are blameless in this, in fact they're more likely to support us than hydropower plans.

However, I've now written to all of our members, there's only 14 of us in a small syndicate, asking for their support and perhaps to consider joining the Angling Trust since this is way over our heads and exactly the kind of case the Angling Trust was created for.

---------- Post added at 21:17 ---------- Previous post was at 19:31 ----------

Just had a thought -

If Scott Whatmore is looking in - this will affect your weir at Boveney too mate. Mobilise your troops now.

tuolumne fisher · May 5, 2011

The TAC have been responding to the one proposed at Teddington for about a year now
fortunately its amateurish in the extreme, and proposed by a local 'eco friendly' group
nevertheless they have been lambasting us for refusing to meet with them, untrue
at the Friends of the Earth meeting that we and they attended, they resorted to school boy bully tactics, in a bid to disguise there lack of answers
we posted our concerns on their blog, which was promptly closed

so thats a taste of our experiences so far, if we all dont act gawd 'elp us

perhaps whats needed is signs affixed to the proposed sites
its strange how such a fab'n'groovy energy source isn't being highlighted to all and sundry
all brothers of the angle should demand scientific data, so that a balanced argument can be presented

chav professor · May 5, 2011

Can't afford to be apathetical about this type of project, if one goes ahead unchallenged by the angling community it will set a president for others to be built on other rivers!!

When the extraction was calculated for my river I believe they factored appropriate flow rates derived from the river about 20 years ago whilst we were experiencing one of the worst droughts in decades..... Stretches of the rivers that were once havens for gudgeon and spawning chub and roach have all but dissapeared on the lower stretches of the river. it is more like a still water - but hey, ho - they sanctioned the stocking of tench and carp!

Upstream, spawning beds have deteriated year on year - I really worry about the sustainable future of our rivers. I for one have decided to join the Angling Trust. I can't stand by and just say 'nothing i can do'!

Collaboration with 'wildlife' and 'environmental' groups is essential for success. perhaps it may be worth looking at the Norfolk Anglers Conservation Association site to see how they did it??

Jeff Woodhouse · May 5, 2011

Might get the local councillors on the case except that today, they're fighting for their jobs!

---------- Post added at 11:53 ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 ----------

Have now writen to local MPs and Caroline Spellman, Minister for the Environment.

thames steve · May 5, 2011

Glad to hear you are fighting this Jeff and good luck

I do wonder if far too much confidence and faith is being placed in Alan Butterworth to be able to fight this? I know of his credentials and based on them he's the right man for the job but we keep hearing of more proposed developments and progress edging forward. I'm not sure he's winning....

No reflection on Alan....that's more a reflection of angling in general being complacent and thinking "Oh it's Ok, Alan's dealing with hydropower so we'll be alright".

Jeff Woodhouse · May 5, 2011

thames steve said:
I'm not sure he's winning....

It's more a case of - is the Angling Trust winning?

Problem for them is, like any national organisation, does anyone listen to them or take notice of them? On that score they need members, thousands and thousands of them, but we've been there before. Perhaps it is shocks like this that will compel anglers to join - too late in some instances.

Just thinking of my other (tongue in cheek) thread here

How much longer will we enjoy sights like that when there's one of these whirring away -

archimedes-screws-being-installed-at-the-tees-barrage-748991899.jpg

thames steve · May 5, 2011

Like many of us I suspect, I hadn't seen a picture of one that big before

Thanks for posting it Jeff - demonstrates nicely what the fight is against.

Peter Jacobs · May 5, 2011

Jeff,

So is the plan for Marlow weir to be totally encased by these monstrosities or just partially, and if so, how many?

In other words would you loose the weir in total or would it still maintain some of its current features?

Jeff Woodhouse · May 5, 2011

Peter Jacobs said:
So is the plan for Marlow weir to be totally encased by these monstrosities or just partially, and if so, how many? In other words would you loose the weir in total or would it still maintain some of its current features?

I have absolutely no idea, Peter. It all depends on what plans come forward, but as Alan Butterworth (ATr Scientific Advisor - if I give him that title) says after the companies have spent many thousands (could be £70,000 or even £200,000) on plans, it's difficult for the EA to then refuse permission. And as Alan also says, it ruins the fishery by taking all the energy out of the water, that's the idea to turn the energy into power. This kills the weir and fish then may never again breed in there.

Who knows, the EA have not got the evidence yet to determine what damage they will do and no power company can say for sure what power they will generate. It strikes me that in this case where they can build one and test it for results, it seems better to wait and see what transpires. That is what was promised.

chav professor · May 5, 2011

Don't think this may not happen on your river! check out this link Fight the Hydropower! - The Angling Trust

904_cannon · May 5, 2011

amushroom said:
spot on m8
the EA are gagging their fisheries, not producing scientific data, and have even replaced a concrete bank that needed renewing with one that is hydro friendly,
it all sucks and unless anglers get pro-active, we'll get what we're given

I found that out last year Jim when I contacted one of the Fisheries Officers who'd carried out a survey on three sites proposed on the Wear. "Its government policy and I work for government"!!

We had a similar hydro system on the Wear in Durham which used to power the ice rink. When it was working it killed the normal flow and fish passes. However in the run-off tunnel was a sea trout snatchers paradise. We now have three planned on one small section of river.

tuolumne fisher · May 9, 2011

nice one john, hope your tickety boo

jeff, can you email admin at the TAC with the mega hydropower pic
we'll get some printed up and put where the public can see'em, near the proposed sites

does anyone have any thoughts on getting together to fight all proposed hydropower on the thames

Anglers And Hydropower, AAH
we could bang our drum supporting all green energy initiatives, providing they have no negative effects on the environment, thats gotta sound good to the non-angling public

stu_the_blank · May 9, 2011

Am I correct in thinking that the Queen had hydro installed in a nearby weir to power Windsor Castle a few years ago?

If so, is there any data on its effect on the immediate environment?

Or am I mistaken? (must take more water with it!):w

Stu

Jeff Woodhouse · May 9, 2011

stu_the_blank said:
Am I correct in thinking that the Queen had hydro installed

No, she was in favour of a hydro scheme at Windsor, hence the 'trial' one at Romney Weir that isn't finished yet.

I just wonder if she'd be in favour of a waste incinerator in the Great Park, they're far more efficient at generating electricity and save on filling voids with garbage.

stu_the_blank · May 9, 2011

Jeff Woodhouse said:
I just wonder if she'd be in favour of a waste incinerator in the Great Park, they're far more efficient at generating electricity and save on filling voids with garbage.

As an ageing Republican, I'd vote for that!

Thanks Jeff for putting my memory right.

Peter Jacobs · May 10, 2011

Jeff Woodhouse said:
Who knows, the EA have not got the evidence yet to determine what damage they will do

Now, don't get me wrong here Jeff, but this seems a little disengenuous to me: you are apparently quite happy to see the end of the Close Season without any scientic proof or evidence, and yet when it comes to the possibility of losing your pet weir pool on the Thames you now want to see trial-supported evidence.

Personally I agree with you, these monstrosities should not be allowed on the rivers and I'll join any organised protest to help stop their spread.

More Hydropower Plants Planned For Thames

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Moderator

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Moderator