Just had an email from the angling trust stating that they have won the case against developers wanting to build a hydro on sawly weir on the river Trent. Well done to them!
Fish legal win again!
- Thread starter mark brailsford 2
- Start date
chub_on_the_block
Well-known member
Yep i read that too. The regulator (EA) failed to consult angling interests when granting the abstraction licence..text below:
"Fish Legal has won one of the biggest cases in its 64 year history by securing an injunction to stop a hydropower development on the River Trent at Sawley Weir. We hope that this case will send a clear signal to hydropower developers that they cannot plan or build hydropower turbines without getting permission from anglers first.
The ruling by the Judge shows that the Environment Agency failed to give proper consideration to angling when it granted the developer an impoundment licence which is now subject to a court injunction. We hope that in future the regulator will pay greater attention to the rights of anglers before giving licences to companies seeking to profit from taxpayer subsidies.
What's more, the Canal and River Trust (previously British Waterways) - the new waterways charity established to promote recreational use of our nation's waterways - was an investor in this development, and tried to defend the damaging scheme at court.
Fish Legal was acting for its member club the Pride of Derby & Derbyshire Angling Association, which was involved in the first ever major case taken by Fish Legal (then known as the Anglers' Co-operative Association) against British Celanese Ltd in 1952. The club would never have been able to defend itself in court without the expertise and financial backing of Fish Legal, which has covered all the costs and risks of this very complex and expensive case. This in turn is only possible because of the subscriptions and donations of the generous members of Fish Legal and the Angling Trust. Many thanks for your support, which enables us to fight to protect fish, and fishing. Read more about this story HERE.
Politicians speak out in The Angle
Your membership magazine, The Angle, will be landing on your doormat in the next week. Keep an eye out for exclusive political interviews in the magazine with the new Secretary State for the Environment Owen Paterson as well as the Fisheries Minister Richard Benyon and his opposition counterpart Tom Harris. They express their clear and forthright views about hydropower and also about cormorants, universal canoe access and bass minimum landing sizes, among other issues. Read quotes from their interviews HERE.
IMPORTANT: If you aren't a member of the Angling Trust and Fish Legal, please join today. It only takes a few minutes to join online at Angling Trust Organisation for Anglers or over the phone and costs less than 50p a week - please call 01568 620447 during office hours.
If you are a member and know someone who hasn't joined the Angling Trust and Fish Legal yet, please forward them this e-mail by clicking here and urge them to join today.
NB: Please do not forward using Outlook or any other e-mail software; if the recipient clicks on the unsubscribe link then you may not receive e-mails from us in future."
"Fish Legal has won one of the biggest cases in its 64 year history by securing an injunction to stop a hydropower development on the River Trent at Sawley Weir. We hope that this case will send a clear signal to hydropower developers that they cannot plan or build hydropower turbines without getting permission from anglers first.
The ruling by the Judge shows that the Environment Agency failed to give proper consideration to angling when it granted the developer an impoundment licence which is now subject to a court injunction. We hope that in future the regulator will pay greater attention to the rights of anglers before giving licences to companies seeking to profit from taxpayer subsidies.
What's more, the Canal and River Trust (previously British Waterways) - the new waterways charity established to promote recreational use of our nation's waterways - was an investor in this development, and tried to defend the damaging scheme at court.
Fish Legal was acting for its member club the Pride of Derby & Derbyshire Angling Association, which was involved in the first ever major case taken by Fish Legal (then known as the Anglers' Co-operative Association) against British Celanese Ltd in 1952. The club would never have been able to defend itself in court without the expertise and financial backing of Fish Legal, which has covered all the costs and risks of this very complex and expensive case. This in turn is only possible because of the subscriptions and donations of the generous members of Fish Legal and the Angling Trust. Many thanks for your support, which enables us to fight to protect fish, and fishing. Read more about this story HERE.
Politicians speak out in The Angle
Your membership magazine, The Angle, will be landing on your doormat in the next week. Keep an eye out for exclusive political interviews in the magazine with the new Secretary State for the Environment Owen Paterson as well as the Fisheries Minister Richard Benyon and his opposition counterpart Tom Harris. They express their clear and forthright views about hydropower and also about cormorants, universal canoe access and bass minimum landing sizes, among other issues. Read quotes from their interviews HERE.
IMPORTANT: If you aren't a member of the Angling Trust and Fish Legal, please join today. It only takes a few minutes to join online at Angling Trust Organisation for Anglers or over the phone and costs less than 50p a week - please call 01568 620447 during office hours.
If you are a member and know someone who hasn't joined the Angling Trust and Fish Legal yet, please forward them this e-mail by clicking here and urge them to join today.
NB: Please do not forward using Outlook or any other e-mail software; if the recipient clicks on the unsubscribe link then you may not receive e-mails from us in future."
barbelboi
Well-known member
Read the email earlier today - good news.
Jerry
Jerry
peter crabtree
AKA Simon, 1953 - 2022 (RIP)
Lucky Pride of Derby were members of the Angling Trust then innit?
Jeff Woodhouse
Moaning Marlow Meldrew
Here's another text on it -
Hydropower scheme stopped in landmark legal case by anglers
Fish Legal has won an historic injunction against a multi-million pound hydropower development on the River Trent at Sawley Weir, in the process exposing major failings in the regulatory process.
The membership association Fish Legal, acting for its member the Pride of Derby Angling Association (PDAA), has won the biggest case in its 64 year history by securing an injunction to stop impending construction of a flagship hydropower scheme at Sawley Weir on the River Trent. The case was heard at a four day trial in Nottingham County Court against developers the Small Hydro Company and the Canal and River Trust (CRT - previously known as British Waterways).
Fish Legal’s expert lawyers and legal counsel fought the case on the grounds that the development would have destroyed the PDAA’s 1,200 members’ enjoyment of their prime stretch of river fishing on which they own the freehold rights. The Judge found that the developers and the CRT did not consult with the PDAA until very late in the planning process, and that they should have made much more careful enquiries about the fishing rights at the outset. Indeed it appears that the company and the waterways charity CRT turned a blind eye to those rights in an attempt to sideline those with most to lose from the scheme – anglers. The Judge recognised that they either ignored or were aware of the risks, both to the scheme and the fishing rights, but they pushed forward with their plans anyway.
If the scheme had gone ahead, the natural riverbanks would have been transformed into a 150 metre-long concrete and steel industrial facility with floodlights and alarms sounding off at intervals. Anglers were expected to access their fishing via a locked security gate into a fenced compound and to perch themselves and their equipment on a series of metal platforms suspended up to eight feet above the river. The developer’s own health and safety witness conceded in court that this would put them “at risk of death”. The Judge ruled that the club should not be forced against its will to accept the proposal at the expense of its valuable fishing rights and that the scheme should not go ahead.
The company had tried to pressurise the club to accept its plan and, in spite of the anglers’ objections, pressed ahead with seeking an Impoundment Licence for the development from the Environment Agency (EA), which was granted.
The EA’s decision to grant the licence has been roundly criticised by Fish Legal and the Angling Trust as a failure of the regulator to fulfil its statutory duty to consider and give due weight to fisheries when granting impoundment licences. In this case, its ‘consideration’ was limited to a single (unclear) sentence:“Part of Pride of Derby’s fishery lies within the weir pool affected i.e. increased periods of reduced flow during operation of the turbine”. This minimal level of attention is utterly inadequate from a public body which has a statutory duty to maintain, improve and develop fisheries (i.e. angling) and the Judge’s decision that the fishing rights would be significantly harmed demonstrates the EA’s failure in this regard.
What's more, by granting the licence, the EA handed the company a statutory defence to any claims against it for damage to the fishery caused by modifying water levels and flow rates. Fish Legal therefore had to limit its civil legal action to the narrower point of the impact on the club’s access to the fishery and the physical ability of its members to fish there, but they still won the case.
The scheme at Sawley was one of many being planned in the region by the Small Hydro Company, but there are also hundreds of others planned across the country by other private companies, often backed by private equity and major financial institutions, who are engaged in a gold rush to make profits from generating hydropower principally because of generous feed in tariffs from the taxpayer.
Even if all the 26,000 sites identified by the EA which might be suitable for hydropower were to be developed, they would still generate less than 0.5% of the nation’s electricity supply but would have a major strategic impact on fish and fishing. Low head hydropower therefore makes a negligible contribution to tackling climate change, but has a very significant impact on freshwater ecology. Taxpayers’ funds would be far better spent on promoting energy efficiency, where no such unequal ‘tradeoffs’ are required.
The club would never have been able to fight the case without the support of Fish Legal, which met all the costs and risks, which could have totalled hundreds of thousands of pounds if the developers had won. This is only possible because of the fighting fund accumulated over decades from the donations and membership subscriptions of tens of thousands of anglers and angling clubs. There is no chance that the club could have stood up to the might of the developers and their expensive lawyers without Fish Legal’s unique legal protection (an appeal, which would increase the legal costs yet further, is still possible).
Coincidentally, Fish Legal (then called the Anglers’ Co-operative Association) was founded back in 1948 shortly before winning a landmark case against pollution for the Pride of Derby Angling Association against British Celanese Ltd in 1952, and then on appeal to the Court of Appeal. PDAA member George Elliott joined the ACA at the time and is still an individual member of Fish Legal and the Angling Trust to this day.
George Elliott said: “Thankfully Fish Legal was able to defend our fishing from this terrible development. I have fished at Sawley weir for decades and have caught barbel, pike, carp, chub, dace, perch and roach from the weirpool. I am so pleased that we will be able to carry on fishing there in the future. It was quite ridiculous to suggest that we should have to fish from metal platforms above the river. Every angler should be a member of the Angling Trust and Fish Legal – together they take action to protect our fish and fishing.”
Andrew Kelton, Fish Legal Solicitor, said:“I hope that developers will learn from this landmark case that it is vitally important to discuss any proposals at the earliest possible stage with angling clubs who own or lease fishing rights on rivers. If they don’t, they could find themselves in court and having to tear up their expensive plans.”
Mark Lloyd, chief executive of Fish Legal and the Angling Trust said: “We are delighted to have been able to defend one of our member angling clubs in this historic case against an aggressive developer, who was granted an impoundment licence by the so-called Environment Agency to spoil a beautiful river and a prime fishing spot with an ugly, environmentally-damaging turbine purely to turn a profit out of taxpayers’ subsidies. Even a thousand of these schemes would make a negligible contribution to tackling climate change, but each one would have a significant impact on the water environment.”
Keith Fisher, the Vice Chairman of the angling association, having been questioned for three hours in court by the developers' QC, said that:“it was a relief that it was all over and that the bully boy tactics used by the developers had not won through”.
Alan Miller the secretary of the Pride of Derby Angling Association said:"It’s quite a relief that we have won and this special place for fishing is protected for future generations of our members. Some of our members travel considerable distances to fish at this spot. We are truly grateful for all the hard work and dedication that has been put in by the Fish Legal team".
Hydropower scheme stopped in landmark legal case by anglers
Fish Legal has won an historic injunction against a multi-million pound hydropower development on the River Trent at Sawley Weir, in the process exposing major failings in the regulatory process.
The membership association Fish Legal, acting for its member the Pride of Derby Angling Association (PDAA), has won the biggest case in its 64 year history by securing an injunction to stop impending construction of a flagship hydropower scheme at Sawley Weir on the River Trent. The case was heard at a four day trial in Nottingham County Court against developers the Small Hydro Company and the Canal and River Trust (CRT - previously known as British Waterways).
Fish Legal’s expert lawyers and legal counsel fought the case on the grounds that the development would have destroyed the PDAA’s 1,200 members’ enjoyment of their prime stretch of river fishing on which they own the freehold rights. The Judge found that the developers and the CRT did not consult with the PDAA until very late in the planning process, and that they should have made much more careful enquiries about the fishing rights at the outset. Indeed it appears that the company and the waterways charity CRT turned a blind eye to those rights in an attempt to sideline those with most to lose from the scheme – anglers. The Judge recognised that they either ignored or were aware of the risks, both to the scheme and the fishing rights, but they pushed forward with their plans anyway.
If the scheme had gone ahead, the natural riverbanks would have been transformed into a 150 metre-long concrete and steel industrial facility with floodlights and alarms sounding off at intervals. Anglers were expected to access their fishing via a locked security gate into a fenced compound and to perch themselves and their equipment on a series of metal platforms suspended up to eight feet above the river. The developer’s own health and safety witness conceded in court that this would put them “at risk of death”. The Judge ruled that the club should not be forced against its will to accept the proposal at the expense of its valuable fishing rights and that the scheme should not go ahead.
The company had tried to pressurise the club to accept its plan and, in spite of the anglers’ objections, pressed ahead with seeking an Impoundment Licence for the development from the Environment Agency (EA), which was granted.
The EA’s decision to grant the licence has been roundly criticised by Fish Legal and the Angling Trust as a failure of the regulator to fulfil its statutory duty to consider and give due weight to fisheries when granting impoundment licences. In this case, its ‘consideration’ was limited to a single (unclear) sentence:“Part of Pride of Derby’s fishery lies within the weir pool affected i.e. increased periods of reduced flow during operation of the turbine”. This minimal level of attention is utterly inadequate from a public body which has a statutory duty to maintain, improve and develop fisheries (i.e. angling) and the Judge’s decision that the fishing rights would be significantly harmed demonstrates the EA’s failure in this regard.
What's more, by granting the licence, the EA handed the company a statutory defence to any claims against it for damage to the fishery caused by modifying water levels and flow rates. Fish Legal therefore had to limit its civil legal action to the narrower point of the impact on the club’s access to the fishery and the physical ability of its members to fish there, but they still won the case.
The scheme at Sawley was one of many being planned in the region by the Small Hydro Company, but there are also hundreds of others planned across the country by other private companies, often backed by private equity and major financial institutions, who are engaged in a gold rush to make profits from generating hydropower principally because of generous feed in tariffs from the taxpayer.
Even if all the 26,000 sites identified by the EA which might be suitable for hydropower were to be developed, they would still generate less than 0.5% of the nation’s electricity supply but would have a major strategic impact on fish and fishing. Low head hydropower therefore makes a negligible contribution to tackling climate change, but has a very significant impact on freshwater ecology. Taxpayers’ funds would be far better spent on promoting energy efficiency, where no such unequal ‘tradeoffs’ are required.
The club would never have been able to fight the case without the support of Fish Legal, which met all the costs and risks, which could have totalled hundreds of thousands of pounds if the developers had won. This is only possible because of the fighting fund accumulated over decades from the donations and membership subscriptions of tens of thousands of anglers and angling clubs. There is no chance that the club could have stood up to the might of the developers and their expensive lawyers without Fish Legal’s unique legal protection (an appeal, which would increase the legal costs yet further, is still possible).
Coincidentally, Fish Legal (then called the Anglers’ Co-operative Association) was founded back in 1948 shortly before winning a landmark case against pollution for the Pride of Derby Angling Association against British Celanese Ltd in 1952, and then on appeal to the Court of Appeal. PDAA member George Elliott joined the ACA at the time and is still an individual member of Fish Legal and the Angling Trust to this day.
George Elliott said: “Thankfully Fish Legal was able to defend our fishing from this terrible development. I have fished at Sawley weir for decades and have caught barbel, pike, carp, chub, dace, perch and roach from the weirpool. I am so pleased that we will be able to carry on fishing there in the future. It was quite ridiculous to suggest that we should have to fish from metal platforms above the river. Every angler should be a member of the Angling Trust and Fish Legal – together they take action to protect our fish and fishing.”
Andrew Kelton, Fish Legal Solicitor, said:“I hope that developers will learn from this landmark case that it is vitally important to discuss any proposals at the earliest possible stage with angling clubs who own or lease fishing rights on rivers. If they don’t, they could find themselves in court and having to tear up their expensive plans.”
Mark Lloyd, chief executive of Fish Legal and the Angling Trust said: “We are delighted to have been able to defend one of our member angling clubs in this historic case against an aggressive developer, who was granted an impoundment licence by the so-called Environment Agency to spoil a beautiful river and a prime fishing spot with an ugly, environmentally-damaging turbine purely to turn a profit out of taxpayers’ subsidies. Even a thousand of these schemes would make a negligible contribution to tackling climate change, but each one would have a significant impact on the water environment.”
Keith Fisher, the Vice Chairman of the angling association, having been questioned for three hours in court by the developers' QC, said that:“it was a relief that it was all over and that the bully boy tactics used by the developers had not won through”.
Alan Miller the secretary of the Pride of Derby Angling Association said:"It’s quite a relief that we have won and this special place for fishing is protected for future generations of our members. Some of our members travel considerable distances to fish at this spot. We are truly grateful for all the hard work and dedication that has been put in by the Fish Legal team".
Last edited:
chub_on_the_block
Well-known member
Jeff - thanks for that further information. How ridiculous to sideline anglers to the point where they would be in danger of death to carry on fishing !
I dont like the sound of the 150m long steel and concrete bank and associated facility with floodlighting either. I would be reasonably confident that this would damage the rivers ecology, so how this was able to get through without any specific consideration or concern expressed by the EA is remarkable. Their role seems to have been limited to the mindless box-ticking of granting an abstraction licence simply because all the water will be returned to the river after it passes through the turbine. The contention that there will be no ecological or fisheries impact from flow changes as a result of the turbine cannot be justified as there have never been short or medium term appraisals of any such schemes. Their statutory opinion is clearly not worth the paper it is written on.
I dont like the sound of the 150m long steel and concrete bank and associated facility with floodlighting either. I would be reasonably confident that this would damage the rivers ecology, so how this was able to get through without any specific consideration or concern expressed by the EA is remarkable. Their role seems to have been limited to the mindless box-ticking of granting an abstraction licence simply because all the water will be returned to the river after it passes through the turbine. The contention that there will be no ecological or fisheries impact from flow changes as a result of the turbine cannot be justified as there have never been short or medium term appraisals of any such schemes. Their statutory opinion is clearly not worth the paper it is written on.
Last edited:
Well I'm blowed, good job they have the subscriptions to pay for such things, otherwise anglers there would have been walking the plank!!
B
binka
Guest
Well done Angling Trust on a landmark victory... and I only joined hours before receiving their email! 
Jeff Woodhouse
Moaning Marlow Meldrew
Exactly, Fred. This a perfect example of our need for the Trust and Fish Legal.
Oh, and for those who keep asking "What have the Trust achieved?" - Take note, chalk this one up!
cg74
Well-known member
I'll ask again; what has the ATr done for the smaller rivers of Oxfordshire or any Oxon river?
If this hydro project offered a genuine environmental threat, then well done to the Fish Legal team.
Last edited:
Jeff Woodhouse
Moaning Marlow Meldrew
I gave you a solution to help, you did NOTHING! Not even a thank you.
cg74
Well-known member
"I gave you a solution"
Nowt like inflating your already over-inflated ego, eh....?
The fact is you offered an opinion (not a solution) on how you thought I could help with improving the rivers in Oxfordshire; I don't think your "solution" holds much credence, as if you knew of a solution then why are the Thames tributaries in my locality in such a state?
As for not thanking, I'll offer you the benefit of doubt that my PM never reached you and publicly say - Thank you Jeff, it was much appreciated.
(I very much doubt that'll be enough, seems you'd rather use it as a tool to discredit me; which speaks volumes about you)
Eric Edwards
Well-known member
Yeah that's right, and what have they done to unblock the grid outside my house - absolutely nothing! That's it, I'm resigning my membership as of now!
Jeff Woodhouse
Moaning Marlow Meldrew
ALL, every one of my PMs going either in or out is stored and has been that way for two years now since I got caught out. The PM system does not fail, if you receive a PM and REPLY to it, the original sender receives the response. If however, you press the wrong tit then who is the tit? I have checked and rechecked (also emails since I get a copy in there also) and no email was received from you.
Thank you for the much belated thank you.
You wanted to get something done, I said you could start up your own local Oxfordshire Thames Tributaries Fisheries Consultancy and come to the ATTRF meetings to present your case. That is a solution to getting something done, you'd be talking to the Trust (The Chair and the area rep, usually) indirectly, it is NOT an opinion. Rome wasn't built in a day (hence the road the Trust is on will take quite some time) and for you there is still time to do something yourself (Thames and its tribs are going nowhere) instead of bleating about nothing. The Lord helps him who helps himself.
mg:PS: Tell you what Colin, you find a way of getting yourself included and approach with a plan to remedy the situation as you see and if it holds water, ie: achieveable and affordable, I will support you and I'd bet many others would too. It's a pity you missed the last one, Dr Mark Everard gave a nice liitle talk about recruitment and river diversity, particularly small rivers like your tribs. He main message, and you may want to keep this one in mind, was "Forget about the impossible things you cannot achieve, concentrate on those where you can have an effect." Well worth remembering, that one.
Last edited:
nicepix
Well-known member
This story relates to Fish Legal. Not Angling Trust. The former act on behalf of clubs and performs a worthwhile service. The latter, well, I'm still waiting for you to outwardly digest what they do for your money.
Jeff Woodhouse
Moaning Marlow Meldrew
You've posted this on another thread, but I shall only answer once, if you don't mind.
Fish Legal / Angling Trust - twins but one and the same. A bit like Siamese twins, joined at every part of their bodies, share the same offices, hold different accounts, or didn't you know that?
When it was all under discussion, they wanted it all to be one and the same and just become the Angling Trust, but there was some problem with the Angling Trust working with members of the Law Society, I don't remember what, but it wasn't allowed and so they kept the legal side seperate in the eyes of the law for that purpose. For everyone else, they are ONE!
However, I have argued that people should be allowed to contribute to either (if only to encourage more members into the Trust) and you can give either a donation. So if you like what they have achieved so much get your hand in your pocket and send Fish Legal a cheque for £15 and prove your worth. I shan't be holding my breath in anticipation though, if you don't mind.
B
binka
Guest
This would make a lot of sense to me, all of my customers are law firms and one of their biggest headaches is keeping up with the changes and ongoing compliance for the Law Society and the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
I would think that by doing things this way it would ensure compliance where needed by Fish Legal and leave the Angling Trust free to go about it's business without that extra burden of what would be unnecessary work for thier side of the arrangement.
nicepix
Well-known member
I posted it on both threads because you are both claiming success for the AT when it is FL who acted on behalf of the clubs.
As I have said before, right from the ACA days; There is a place for an organisation that offers expert support to angling clubs and owners of fishing rights. No complaint from me there.
The problem I have and have had since the ACA days is that the individual anglers does not receive the same help and expertise that the clubs and owners of fishing rights do. For example the River Dearne has two small stretches of day ticket water and about 25 miles of free fishing where land owners do not control fishing or receive anything from it. If the Dearne were to be polluted I could not see AT or FL taking any action. They aren't and couldn't going to go to court for the loss of sport of half a dozen anglers.
Fish Legal should be used as an insurance policy by those with a vested financial interest in fishing and should be a stand alone organisation. The individual angler will get nothing from joining Angling Trust and in my view anglers are being conned out of their subscriptions by misinformation such as posted by yourself and Mark.
B
binka
Guest
On the point about polluting the Dearne, if it was a strong case (and if it wasn't I doubt any organisation including the EA would pursue it) wouldn't the Angling Trust & Fish Legal be likely to take action against a polluter based on the principal and the fact that if they were successful their costs would be covered and compensation awarded against the polluter which would then be used to re-stock the river regardless of who owns the fishing rights (if anyone) and how few fish it, assuming that somebody broght the pollution to their attention in the first place?
I've followed the fors and againsts with interest and literally just decided to join the Angling Trust after much consideration, I don't yet know enough about their structure but to put it into context it cost me less than two days worth of fags... if all they did was no more than to unite the voice of angling and give us a stronger voice then it was money better spent.
Jeff Woodhouse
Moaning Marlow Meldrew
Yes they could. It only takes ONE ANGLER to claim that their 'rights' have been interupted and providing he is there to assist Fish Legal and go to Court, FL would act on his behalf. So that's you bang out of order. Sort your facts out first, always said that.
---------- Post added at 14:27 ---------- Previous post was at 14:26 ----------
Glad to have you on board Binka.