Ham Hydro at Teddington - please post an objection!

As you may be aware, Ham Hydro, a recently formed organisation,
has proposed to install large hydropower turbines on Teddington Weir.
The TAC and Angling Trust have strong environmental and ecological
concerns about the scheme, which has the potential to damage fish
spawning habitats and severely restrict fish migration. The scheme has
the potential to harm anglers the length of the River Thames.

The Ham Hydro planning application for Teddington Weir is under
consideration at Richmond Council and they are still accepting
representations.

Please write to them to express your objection to the project.
You may use the text below if you like, or adapt it if you prefer.
Ham Hydro are mobilising large numbers of people to write in support
so it is vital that we balance this with as many objections as possible.

You don't have to live in the local area to make an objection.
You have a legal right to comment on any planning application!

The easiest is to submit an objection is directly on the planning website,
visit this web address:
London Borough of Richmond upon Thames Planning case file 11/3908/FUL
Press the "Comment" button and complete the form.

NB. You do not need to fill in the boxes with your email address and
telephone number, if you do they will be published on the web site!

Alternatively you can post a printed or written letter to:
Mr. Derek Tanner
London Borough of Richmond upon Thames
Civic Centre
44 York Street
Twickenham
Middlesex
TW1 3BZ

You MUST include all of the information below.

=================================================
From: {Your full name}
Address: {Your full postal address and postcode}

Planning application: 11/3908/FUL
=================================================
Dear Sirs,
I strongly object to the application to install
hydro-electric turbines on Teddington Weir.

The application is insufficiently detailed and
makes far too many assumptions, leaving a number
of aspects of the design open to the whim of the
developer.

1) Environmental Impact Assessment - The study
accompanying the application is poor, sweeping
statements are made about fish habitats which
show a clear lack of understanding of the subject
matter.
Without a full study of the weir pool habitat in
advance of the development, no-one will ever
know what the true environmental impact has been.

2) Noise - Very little has been made of the
whining noise from the gearboxes and generators
themselves, on a river this is likely to carry
a long distance. Nearby business and residents
will be badly affected.

3) Power generation claims - It is well known
that the flow down the Thames has shown a marked
decrease in recent years due to upstream
abstraction for water supply. Assumptions based
on historic river flow data are therefore invalid
and the amount of power generated will fall
woefully short of the claimed figures. The only
beneficiaries of the scheme will be the plant
manufacturer and the installation contractor,
local investors are likely to lose all of their
money.

"Green" technology is a fashionable place where
many people feel they would like to be making a
contribution in the current climate. This must
not be at a hidden cost to the environment.

The Environment Agency have a conflict of
interest as they are landlord, sponsor and
regulator of this project. They originally
promised that no more of these developments on
the Thames would go ahead until the
installation at Romney was operational and its
effects had been studied. Please help them to
keep that promise.

I urge you to reject this poor quality
ill-conceived application.

Yours faithfully,
{your name}
=================================================

good on ya ed
the rest of ya, dont attend the public meetings, dont put up any signs
stay in your comfort zone, bang away on some keyboard and expect someone else to solve our problems
the ATr have got 350,000 members, all they gotta do is get their membership motivated to act together and bobs your blinkers, 350,000 objections
but hey when the likes of tv and radio presenter keith arthur cant travel 800 yards to a hydropower meeting, despite his protestations that he cares for the thames, then you're all excused
angling is full of those that do the talk, but dont do the walk, unless expenses are available
sadly those like ed are lumbered with seeking support via a keyboard

hydro power is coming to a river near you, and relying on piecemeal activities by individuals or individual clubs, aint gonna stop it
look back on your own personal experiences with big business and you'll struggle to call your treatment fair or just

check out ham hydros website or their buddies, ham united group, these potential destroyers of the environment, can manage to throw a party for planting a single tree and get plenty of local news coverage, but they fail to point out that the council within whose boundaries they operate, employs a major contractor for refuse services etc, veouila, the same company that operates an apartheid bus system in palestine

it all stinks folks, the schemes, those proposing them, and the lack of joined up response from angling
if teddington doesn't get the go ahead, because of environmental issues, then maybe others will think twice, but if angling rolls over, they'll assume its open season

edrandall said:

The easiest is to submit an objection is directly on the planning website,
visit this web address:
London Borough of Richmond upon Thames Planning case file 11/3908/FUL
Press the "Comment" button and complete the form.

Click to expand...

Done that. It only takes a minute folks

Well done Ed

I've posted my objection.

Jim, the ATr doesn't have 350,000 members, it has about 14,000. It 'represents' the others through club memberships. You're wasting your breath (or fingers) trying to get people 'up and at 'em' 99% can't even be ar*ed to part with 25 sobs. It has it's flaws but it is incredibly underfunded for what it's trying to do.

Stu

Thanks for the support guys. In the background the Angling Trust have been working hard, Dr. Alan Butterworth in particular is right on the ball with this one. He has put in a solid attack on Ham Hydro's pathetic application and that of their agents so-called environmental statement. In the next few days there will be more news on this, watch this space.

Take a look at this, it is same "fish friendly" archimedes screw turbine type proposed for Teddington...
Salmon fishing ‘harmed by hydro scheme’ - Main Section - Yorkshire Post

A hydro thread on flyforums has over 200 replies. I think we could match that - don't be shy guys.

Posted my objection, people have got to understand that we are all paying for these stupid hydro schemes with the TAX we pay.

These hydros are massively subsidised with TAX payers money and I don't want to see my money wasted this way.

If the findings from Settle Hydro can't put a holt to them I feel nothing will.

Done.
Don't be too hard on Keith, Mushroom, he was at the evening meeting at the Commons a couple of weeks ago for the 'why does London need a Thames Tunnel' meeting doing his bit. He can't be everywhere.
Jerry

barbelboi said:

Done.
Don't be too hard on Keith, Mushroom, he was at the evening meeting at the Commons a couple of weeks ago for the 'why does London need a Thames Tunnel' meeting doing his bit. He can't be everywhere.
Jerry

Click to expand...

Keith Arthur also accompanied Thames anglers to a meeting in Westminster late October, which resulted in the Thames Tunnel Now group being formed, one of the first times the RSPB have committed to working alongside anglers.

Just bouncing this to keep it up in the air

nice one geoff, keep it on the boil

chaps I dont wanna be hard on anyone, all it is are observations
I seem to remember keith being keen to organise the pulling up of the weed that poisons horses, on his local stretch, but never saw him on a litter pick in 20 months
oh, and he has mentioned frequently on his radio programme, that he has no mortgage to pay or children
flaming good job, otherwise he probably couldn't make the two meetings that are mentioned

wot it comes down to is the frustration I feel that those who have the potential, and those that are in the right positions, are to easily cocooned in their comfort zone, ticking the easiest box and placating any doubts about their lack of end results, by handing an organisation a few quid

hydropower sums it all up perfectly
zak goldsmith mp, has stated its right for him to drive around in his guzzling bentley, as long as he plants a few trees, well I'd sooner 'ave the trees that are already there, rather than his selection
alan butterworth, has the skill and expertise, but not youth or health
martin salter, a nice pension as a former mp, paid to big up australian fishing for a years holiday, a job with thames water, the countries biggest polluter, and another with the ATr, yeah great, I bet he's got as many houses as jobs
richard aylard, thames waters director for sustainability, yeah he's gonna sustain the exploitation and decline of our watercourses, with the paid assistance of his buddies
keith arthur, he'll continue to expound his laments while being paid as a journalist

and they'll all attend a meeting once or twice, renew their bonding, and achieve nothing different to wots gone before
we're scratching at straws to save our rivers, and even the regulation in place excludes the basics, roach etc
wot kind of numb nut allowed that to happen, who frigging cares its in the past, but we need it changed
twittering amongst ourselves like a flock of long tailed tits aint gonna make enough of a difference
do something out of your comfort zone
talk to a dog walker when you're fishing, and tell'em the horror stories of pollution and hydropower
get some A4 paper, a marker pen and write a sign and put it up near your weir
or if you cant get near the river, then write to your lettters section at your local paper

and if you're sitting there thinking, there he goes again, wots the point
the point is I do all of the above
the letters are published in my local paper, reaching non anglers
the signs I put up, some of which are mysteriously taken down, despite my use of a ladder, unnerve ham hydro, and the greater their lengths are to remove them, the more it looks like they've something to hide
the talking to other river users has stimulated their interest in their environment

but best of all, the non angling public realises that an angler is concerned for the environment, he aint a beer swilling foul mouthed litter lout

All good stuff Jim, however, Ed asked for fellow anglers to object to a scheme that is likely to badly affect Teddington Weir Pool as a fishery. Four members have confirmed that they have objected. Let's assume that there are a few more who are hiding their light under a bushel and it is fair to assume that Thames Steve and other members of the TAC will have done so already. It's still hardly an avalanche of support is it.

Anybody care to argue that apathy isn't our real enemy? The truth would appear to be that we can't be bothered I'm afraid. You've got next to no chance of getting anybody to get the felt tips out.

Stu

I started the same thread over on Maggotdrowners, on CEMEXangling.co.uk , and another member started it on AnglersNet.co.uk. The title is the same so you should be able to find it easy enough. Only here and Maggotdrowners have elicited any discussion at all (to the thread that is, it's not possible say how many people read it and silently sent in an objection). It's a fair old mixture, mostly support, some strong disagreement, but I think mostly ignorance, people just aren't aware of what is going on.

The important result has been that we've had a fair few new objections come through on the planning website, we were even ahread at one point but Ham Hydro have responded with a more supporters emails too.

stu m8, you're spot on, apathy is the problem, and I've yet to see a marker pen pressed into action
my own marker pen has been busy, with over 30 signs put up and removed by someone
however the unknown sign removers attitude seems to have changed, using a ladder, he/they were able to reach all the signs positioned on the trees, except for one, some of my other signs have been thoughtfully pulled from the trees and thrown in the undergrowth, enabling repositioning, one has even got the comment and ?, written on it
perhaps the one expounding that the companies managing director, formerly of friends of the earth, does not want an enviromental assessment study, WHY, has raised there shackles,
as the head honchos at this company are called chas and james, I was thinking of doing one that says
ham hydropower, chas and james, rab rab, rabbit rabbit rabbit rabbit

anyways if only one person of the many who are informed, gets of his or her butt, its a result, for sure we'd like to get everyone to care tomorrow, but one has gotta do, to start with
I started summit from nuffin wiv nuffin, dipped my toe in the water and encouraged others to care, wot I discovered is that the powers that be, wanna see me throw 18, but they always give me two dice to do it with

what ed, good on ya m8, and the others at the TAC are doing is of course right, but they're lumbered in the dice game, even a law to protect what lives within the river excludes roach etc, the law regarding culmative effects of hydropower ignored
and the company itself a CIC, community interest company cannot legally sell shares, so it sets up another company to do it

I know that putting up signs increases awareness, because I am engaged in conversation by passers by as I position them, yesterday I was asked by a woman walking her dog where she could get information from, google the TAC, anglers and hydropower was my response

amushroom said:

my own marker pen has been busy, with over 30 signs put up and removed by someone

Click to expand...

Jim, Just watch out that you don't get charged with illegal fly posting. It's a serious matter if a Council representative catches you at it. Signs should be on your own private property.

I have to disagree with you on the approach. Even all the scientific objections as regards fish life will most probably be ignored in considering the application. What you have to find is what I will now call the 'Crashed Plane' argument - this is where our local woodlands protection group were fighting plans to build a MSA close by and despite all teh scientific evidence we put forward it was a witness we found that had crashed his aircarft on the very site that scared off the Inspector (Planning had already refused anyway). Many arguments that I have seen put forward can be argued by the applicants saying "Don't worry, we'll sort it out later" even if they don't. You have to find that 'crashed Plane' (kind of smoking gun) to which there is NO argument and scares the pants of councillors.

My hope with Teddington is that it will fall through if the operators are threatened to be sued for £millions for the loss of business because of the imposition of a hideous monstrosity (I don't want to give too much away, you know why). The fear of having to cough up a really big compensation package could make the whole venture completely worthless to the operators, Ham Hydro. Work on the inside on this, but if you make yourself a pain in the end it may be you personally that suffers with a court order or similar.

There's another bit of detail that's also a sticking point but if you know about it don't mention it publicly please. Surprise if what's required....


EDIT: Is there a local preservation society around Teddington and are they against this development? Example, in Marlow we have teh Marlow Society who are proud to enter the best kept village competition every year and have won it in the past. The planned scheme for Marlow will be on public view to anyone walking over our famous bridge so the society (who hold a fair bit of clout) are against it. Also the Councillors on teh Marlow side, but my fear is that it will be the Windsor authority that will pass this and they don't give a **** as to what goes on when it's not in the back yard. Again though, there could be threats of a legal action to seek compensation and that could sink any finacial gain the operator will get from the hydro. You don't invest £1m to claim £2m in benefits but only then have to pay out £3m in compensation - it doesn't add up.

I have posted my objection on their website. It was easy to do and I paraphrased many of the points made by Ed so it won't look like a cut and paste job. If I can do it, many others will be able to. I haven't fished that stretch for quite a few years and promise myself I will every season ( I grew up fishing on the Thames) When I think about all the problems the river faces, mamalian, avian and human it makes me both sad and mad!

jeff, I thankyou for your warning regarding illegal fly posting, and other comments, both past and present, and please dont perceive my responses to anyones comments/posts as wanting to cause harm, an analogy may well be I pour salt on the wound, in an effort to raise awareness of the wound, in my opinion, and of no value of course, these wounds have been festering for to long, and we need to get'em treated before they become fatal for the host, angling

however each sign I position has a mushroom logo in the bottom right hand corner, for precisely that reason, they can then be directly accredited to myself,
I've even got a letter published in my local paper this week complaining that they are a blight on the trees, and could ham hydro answer the questions

if someone/organisation is deceiving my community into destroying one of its resources, then its my communal responsibility to make my community aware, if the avenues to do so, are tailored in such a way that the truth is hidden, and I have no control over the avenues, I'm in a cul de sac, but at least its a visual one within my community
I'm not afraid of court proceedings for my actions, I welcome the opportunity to raise awareness, and for my community to have all the facts, then reach a concensus of opinion
wot I aint interested in, is the deception for green energy that destroys more than it saves
the best standard response to all hydropower developments is on the TAC website, under Anglers and hydropwer Aah, I wrote it way back when and it still reads ok today

regarding your crashed plane approach
I have to disagree m8, relying on others is a recipe for much disappointment, occasional sighs of relief, and the acceptance of having no control within ones environment

the old boys from the angling world of the 1850's, must be turning in their graves, they set the benchmark with their actions and subsequent results, we cant raise a wick, let alone a candle to them, yet we have far more tools

A bit of an update on this.
Ham Hydro's application for an EA impoundment licence has been withdrawn, it was a shambles. This thing hasn't gone away yet and I doubt it will, but the pressure applied by TAC and Angling Trust is having the desired effect. It looks like Ham Hydro are going to be forced to do it properly, they will have to pay for the proper environmental impact assessments that we have always been pushing for. This letter from the EA to the planners says it all really:http://idoxwam.richmond.gov.uk/WAM/...plication/octet-stream&pageCount=1&appid=1001
Thank you to everyone who objected, your numbers have levelled the playing field and made the authorities sit up and take notice that we will not sit idly by and let them get away with not doing it properly.

Thank you Ed, Jim and everyone else who takes their time to help try protect our fishing. Where would we be without you!