Thanks all for your really encouraging comments so far. I'm really chuffed that the film has had over 200 views already today and most of those hits have come from these pages! Please feel free to embed it and pass it on to anyone you see fit. I forgot to say that this film couldn't have been made without the contacts and debate that this forum permits. The discussions in the big threads on hydro started by richardw and warrenslaney have been instrumental in fine-tuning the arguments (the film is actually about the fifth draft and a last minute change was made this morning thanks to a PM from the 'Dry Fly Expert' - before I even knew anyone knew I'd posted it). There is obviously one forum member featuring heavily in the film - Paul G - who has also been instrumental in many of the behind the scenes arguments that have gone on, but there have also been many who have helped, either by PMs or just by posting info about their local rivers in threads. This forum is vital.

Anyway, I'm probably sounding like some tool at an awards ceremony and any kind of celebration is premature - there are a whole host of folks out there who don't have a clue or give a hoot about the rivers and they are the people we need to reach and the main thrust of getting the message out to those people starts over the next few days. Jeff - you are right to play devil's advocate, the message should read that we buggered it centuries ago, it is improving and could be improved further, but the installation of tiny hydro schemes can actually set these advances back significantly.

If anyone has watched it and not completed the survey then please do so - Kelham Island Hydro Film Survey - the survey will hopefully be used to demonstrate to public officials that they're really missing the point with this stuff.

If all that isn't enough, the 'fish pass' appendix is now uploaded. Its only 3 minutes long and is well worth watching just for the majesty of the Crimpsall Sluice Rock Shoot, sadly not something easy to replicate!


All the best
Ant

__________________

Sadly lots of low head schemes are planned for Scottish Rivers as well , We have one hell of a fight on our hands , Landowners who have a river going through their land are right up for the schemes as they will make more money!

Col

__________________
"It is not easy to tell one how to cast. The art must be acquired by practice.

Excellent presentation and very worrying given the pressure to produce power (without thought to consequence).

That was a great video, it clearly explained all of the issues which arise from hydropower schemes on rivers.

The explanations of the complex issues surrounding these schemes were addressed in a way which made them completely intelligible to the layman.

My only reservation was the confusion that could be generated by the film's defence of The Goit, which, after all, is an impounded stretch of water. The Goit is promoted as a haven for wildlife and while I can understand that the differing flow regimes which a hydro scheme would impose on this water body is likely to damage the existing habitat that particular criticism is a fine point and something supporters of a hydro scheme could latch on to, it could seem “you want it both ways”

Despite this the film provides a very useful tool for opponents of low head hydro schemes. The film offers an easily shared resource, it’s well thought out and a very good example of how grass root community groups can use modern technology to defend their natural resources from unfettered and badly thought out development.

__________________
Musha rig um du rum da

Hi Diawl B,

There is a difference between an impounded reach of main river behind a weir (which we have loads of in industrial rivers) and an off-main-river backwater refuge (which we have very few of). The backwater refuges are vital for many species for juvenile stages as well as being areas that all species of fish migrate into during spate flows to avoid being washed into the sea.

Jeff

The complexity of that argument (to retain "some" part of a physical structure) is a factual acknowledgement of the rarity of "mid channel island" habitats that weirs cause to exist. These are a rare/endangered habitat type across Europe so have enormous biodiversity value. The correct balance is to retain enough of a weir to promote the island existence, but also to energise the upstream current behind the weir (causing passive narrowing of the wetted channel/consequent expansion of riparian vegetation).

This is basically like a giant flow deflector that we WTT bods usually make out of tree trunks. When we do this, we don't want to impound water upstream of the flow deflector, but we do want to promote mid-channel scour and deposition.

Thanks for your reply Diawl Bach - the unique habitat of the goit (a local word for 'mill race') developed on this channel which had, for hundreds of years, powered a water wheel at the same spot where the developers want to install a new one. There is a habitat management plan in place for the goit which was drawn up as part of mitigation for the development of local flats. Ironically the plan was drawn up by the same company that wrote the somewhat lax Ecological Assessment for the wheel. On one of the days I went down to film, a working party of over 30 volunteers were doing habitat works. If you want perfect irony, the MD for the hydro developers was in there getting stuck in! PR methinks?

The goit race is an 'impounded' stretch of water but its also purely man-made. By contrast, natural river watercourses upstream of an impounding weir are not allowed to run at their natural levels and currents thus affecting many many species but also not attracting, to my knowledge, the same kinds of habitat that one might expect to find in a mill race. Many tiny hydro schemes will be proposed for mill races too. If they are artefacts of the past which have, over time, actually become beneficial for habitats and they don't substantially affect the main watercourse that they draw from, then to my mind they are worth saving. I'm not certain how much the goit at Kelham Island actually detracts from the main channel but as you can see there's quality habitat below the weir and in the goit itself, and presently only very minimum flows are taken into it through the sluice gate. In any case, the hydro development would significantly impact on both these habitats - the goit habitat is obviously at very high risk, and its very alarming to read in the Eco-Assessment (the one written by the same people behind the habitat management plan!) that species would simply move elsewhere, despite the fact there isn't any similar habitat within miles of the site! One of the discussions we've had further to Paul's argument about 'notching' the weir in order to reduce the impounding effect upstream of it, is what would happen to the goit if it was then subject to reduced levels. There would certainly be increased vegetation and improved water-flow above the weir but could this be done carefully enough to also preserve the unique goit habitat? Frankly, we don't know yet, but I'd certainly hope so. In any case, that isn't the argument we're in a position to have - right now there is good habitat, which could be better; it will be decimated by the introduction of a pitiful little water turbine.

I'm chuffed to bits that people are posting so many positive responses about the film so thank you all! Please do fill in the survey too - the film has had just under 400 views so far but just over 20 responses to the survey. Thanks all who've completed it already. Kelham Island Hydro Film Survey

Finally, I've received an email today, second-hand, from a local councillor who originally said they supported the Kelham Island scheme because it was 'in keeping with the tradition of the area'. The email is very positive, but I can't say any more than that just now.

All the best and spread the word!

Many thanks
Ant

PS - thanks to the Ed for the sticky, most appreciated

PPS - I hadn't seen Paul's comments above before I'd posted this!

__________________

Hi there, film watched and survey done, much food for thought, another classic example of subsidies being misused. When will the Govt learn!

Keep it up! TC

Really great job, Ant - that's a really excellent film, and the extra 3-minute appendix is also superb.

I can understand that you've designed the present version to be a campaign film for the situation at Kelham Island, but it wouldn't take much tweaking (mainly of text?) to make it generic enough to be a really valuable tool for anyone who needs to oppose the principle of low head hydro on their own river, anywhere in the UK or indeed the world. (Angling Trust, are you reading this?)

I also think your work is easily high quality enough to be in the running for the environmental section of one of those international fly-fishing film tours... keep it going!

Theo

__________________
theopike.com
wandletrust.org
urbantrout.net

interesting stuff

Very good video, I have sent a PM ant