• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Severn river trust

Right...too many posts not making any sense, let's slow it down.

Damian, Neil in particular.......Lawrence the " no" side is a bit weak on my side.

I'm trying to gain facts for both sides, seems ether way they are not there ?

Jason
 
Jason Bean said:
Right...too many posts not making any sense, let's slow it down.

Damian, Neil in particular.......Lawrence the " no" side is a bit weak on my side.

I'm trying to gain facts for both sides, seems ether way they are not there ?

Jason
Click to expand...

Don't know what you are getting out of this, but not sure you know either.
 
There appears to be very few "facts" Jason, just guessimates, plus informed and uninformed opinions based on possible outcomes (of removal of said weir). The closest I would say there is to some (pertinent) facts include:
a/..salmon, trout, lamprey, barbel etc. etc. have NO trouble at all passing up and over said weir.
b/..shad are fish, and they can swim upstream.
c/.. in times of even mild floods the weir is NO barrier to fish movement whatsoever. That is, when there's ~2-3m of water on the Teme and/or the Severn's backing up, the 'weir' disappears...it becomes 'flat water', or is reduced to a 'lump'.
d/.. floods can and do occur throughout the year, June-Aug included (ref. 2007).
e/.. the Teme, especially since the Millennium, suffers in times of drought. Large areas of it dry up.
f/.. abstraction rates do not appear to be decreasing.
g/.. removing the weir will not increase the level of the Teme, but it will reduce the Teme's level...to a degree that cannot be stated with 100.0% certainty.
h/.. reducing the level of the Teme, even by an inch, will not benefit the river's eco-system (I'm on shaky ground there..but I reckon that's close to a 'fact'?)
i/.. a basic requirement of any river's eco-system is that it has water in it, and flowing water at that.

From above list (which is obviously by no means exhaustive) my best guess is that.. whilst removing the weir may not do the Teme's eco-system any damage, the chances are that it won't do it any good. The Teme is already one of England's fastest flowing spate rivers, and anything that adds to the 'emptying', and the speed of emptying, of the Teme will be detrimental to it....IMHO.
As is so often the case, these 'facts' lead one to an indicative conclusion...and not a definitive one. Its sadly 'best guess'. The risks are obvious, the potential benefits (in my belief) are at best doubtful, at worst spurious.
 
Let's go back to the original post.....


Terry Simner said:
Hi All, I know the Severn River Trust was "....established to secure the preservation, protection, development and improvement of the rivers, streams, watercourses and water bodies in the Severn catchment, and to advance the education of the public in the management of water and the wider environment". (website blurb)
But, from looking at the work they plan to do and the work that they have done, they appear to be more 'Game' related rather than 'Coarse'. That is, they wish to improve Severn catchment watercourses, with an emphasis on attempting to improve the salmon and trout fishing.
Do you reckon that's fair comment??
Click to expand...

Fair comment, what's wrong with it... Seeing as it's a spate river?...did you mean the teme or the whole catchment?


So why don't you just say you oppose the weir removal as you just think it will damage coarse stocks in the lower lower river, because that's all your post is about?
 
What you have to understand is that the whole basis of putting weirs in are to either raise levels upstream of it, to divert the flow to power things or protect those below it, to hold water back, Powick has been in existence for hundreds of years in one form or another, this existing weir was part of a plan or hope to make the Teme part navigable, in other words increase the depth of the river above it, so larger boats could go further upstream, now I aint no scientist or mathematician, but logic tells me that if the weir is removed that increased depth is lost, gone! Since the current weir has been in place the Teme has developed as a very good coarse fishery and twenty years ago was one of the top barbel fisheries in the country, so the deeper pools ultimately made the Teme a big fish river, Pike to 30lbs, Chub to 6lb plus, some very large wild Carp, huge dace, quality Roach, big Perch, Bream to nearly double figures and Barbel to 15lb plus, so those were the benefits of creating the Teme into a slower deeper river between Powick and Tenbury, what the EA and the RST call the barbel zone, now the EA and the RST wish to remove the weir to create a river that is totally different to the one I have now explained, to make more favorable to migratory species, and to try and develop a shad spawning site

The changes, their words not mine, will create a lower river Teme with pools connected by riffles and shallows, the greater flow ( caused by the removal of the weir) will scour the gravel areas and create suitable spawning sites for the shad. If by removing the weir nothing changed, I wouldnt be here now, but the very nature as to why the weir is being removed is to change the lower Teme, the evidence is there that low water is a threat to all species, at he moment every year Chris Ponsford and his colleagues have to spend time in rescuing fish from the upper reaches, a part of the river that be described as pools connected by riffles and fast moving shallows (sound familiar?) what we see for the future is exactly the same scenario for the lower reaches if the weir is removed, this will put at risk all fishes, Salmon, trout and all coarse fish in times of drought, Predators will have a field day, its obvious isnt it? The RST have not issued (as far as I know) a final cause and effect impact study of removing the weir, we were told that above the weir would lose approx 1.5 mtrs off its depth, it is accepted that there will be a significant impact on coarse fisheries above the weir, at the moment we are entering into the discussion phase of the project, there will be those that are for the removal and those that are against it, it is a simple as that. However, what is nauseating is that the whole thing is being done on the spurious excuse of creating Shad spawning sites, this will get money from the various organisations that will support it, we know and we have the evidence, that this is a load of you know what just to get the money, overall with all the other re-forming, flood plane alterations and other weir removals work on the Teme that they intend to do, runs to many millions of pounds, as I said one of the main features of this work is in fact to lower the water levels on the Teme and Powick weir is part of that concept.
 
Thing is I reckon this will go ahead, the no's on this site seem to be entrenched and pig headed not to even negotiate a positive...."it's just no"" on there part

Let's.see where they end up....hope I'm wrong
 
Jason Bean said:
Let's go back to the original post.....




Fair comment, what's wrong with it... Seeing as it's a spate river?...did you mean the teme or the whole catchment?


So why don't you just say you oppose the weir removal as you just think it will damage coarse stocks in the lower lower river, because that's all your post is about?
Click to expand...

I was asking a civil question Mr. Bean, as I was unsure of the answer.
The initial subject/topic of this thread was not about Powick weir. In fact, at the time of initiating this thread I knew nothing about the proposal/decision re Powick weir's removal.
You, Mr. Bean, asked for 'facts'...I attempted to provide a few.
I'm not sure what your problem is, but I DO hope you get better soon.
 
Terry, I may be reading in between the lines but the thread is running into a anti game anti SRT thread...or along those lines, ok you may not have meant it and a few if the earlier posters dropped out when they realised it was more than that.

Terry so apologies if you think it's against your original post.

Thing is you know as much as me. Apart from the upper teme the river like many will never be a true viable cash wise game fishery again.

Even the SRT must know that

So again read my posts and think about being anti SRT,

You have no one else to work with for the benefit of the river,

I don't have a problem with any one on here Terry....:D

Just trying to pull it together before everyone gets on there high horses.

And edit....Neil I'm sorry, please don't hold the grudge!
 
No grudge held, but this is indeed an very odd thread, you might think that some are being totally self serving? However given the current state of the Teme you might think any initiative to improve the habitat would be welcome.

Surely there is no agenda against Barbel, anglers, or weirs is there? I would think not, the river has SSI status and that carries a require ment to protect, and in this case improve.
 
Your right Neil, it is odd in the fact that it divides on how the river needs to be improved.

Just glad predation as not taken over.......**** shouldn't have said that:D
 
I don't fish the Teme and am completely open minded, and after initially reading some posts thought there may be an anti SRT agenda. Having followed the thread however and engaged the old grey matter my conclusion is that removing the weir is very risky, with possibly no beneficiaries and there's a good chance it could ruin the Teme as a fishery. It will definitely lower levels. Surely there are more pressing matters to address such as reducing abstraction and sorting out the Himalayan balsam ?? These days what tends to get done is whatever attracts funding, whether it needs doing or not. I generally think the Rivers Trusts are great, but even they can get things wrong sometimes.

Nick C
 
.
(i) Impacts – Immediate
Water level in the river upstream of the weir will be lowered throughout the flow range and the velocity of flow will increase. This will expose parts of the river that have not been seen for some time and will change the aquatic regime and its associated flora and fauna. There are likely to be environmental concerns and these will have to be discussed with the Environment Agency and other interested parties (e.g. local angling clubs).
Local groundwater levels in the surrounding land may fall in response to the lower water level in the river. This may have an adverse impact on the local ecology in the short and long term.
The potential loss of amenity value through the demolition of any weir should not be overlooked, even if there is no apparent local interest in the structure. For the removal of any significant structure, particularly one that has been there for many years, it will be necessary to get the support of the local planning authority.
In any demolition activity there is a risk of releasing pollutants into the environment. In this case of a weir, this could result in contamination of the river or stream during the demolition process. Demolition works are likely to mobilise sediment that could have an adverse impact on fisheries downstream.
Many weirs were constructed in an era when our rivers were heavily polluted by industrial waste. As a result, the accumulated sediments that are found upstream of old weirs can be heavily contaminated. These contaminants are relatively safe when left in place, but could be released into the river system with disastrous consequences if the weir is demolished. It is therefore essential that, when considering the removal of an old weir, the possibility of encountering contaminated sediments is investigated, and plans to deal with the problem are prepared (see Case Study F).
Perhaps the safest way to deal with such a problem is to isolate the affected area by creating a diversion of the river and then removing the sediment in relatively dry conditions disconnected from the river. This option may not be practical, in which case every attempt must be made to create a barrier around the area being excavated to ensure that the contaminated sediment cannot be carried away in the river flow as work proceeds, or after the work has been completed
 
Now post the positive impacts of weir removal from that document Lawrence?
 
I'd do it myself Damian if I could copy and paste from it on my phone.
There are clearly positives and negatives of weir removal, cases for both sides in that document, I don't see just posting the negatives as being helpful.
 
http://temecatchment.com/wp-content...-the-River-Teme-SSSI-Summary-Report-DRAFT.pdf

Well there arent many Damian /Rhys, read it yourself, However I have already put this up, its a draft for making the case for weir removal, but you clearly read what you want to read just to become antagonistic .....but there you go boys, and by the way I am against the weirs removal (in case you didnt know) so I am hardly going to become an advocate for the so called positives for the removal Powick weir.
 
Lawrence Breakspear said:
http://temecatchment.com/wp-content...-the-River-Teme-SSSI-Summary-Report-DRAFT.pdf

Well there arent many Damian /Rhys, read it yourself, However I have already put this up, its a draft for making the case for weir removal, but you clearly read what you want to read just to become antagonistic .....but there you go boys, and by the way I am against the weirs removal (in case you didnt know) so I am hardly going to become an advocate for the so called positives for the removal Powick weir.
Click to expand...
Exactly....... :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top