River Tees 2021

rawson

Member
Messages
31
Reaction score
22
WWC?
Having looked over the Barrage layout, I cannot for the life of me see how anyone came up with the design for such a narrow fish pass unless of course it was an after thought. Can the canoe slalom be used as a fish pass and the Archimedes screw be bye-passed?
I always wondered why they didn't make a 'feature' of the fish pass for visitor attractions. Not often I see canoes in the purpose built feature.
Man and his meddling's, just my ramblings.
 

Tees88

Well-known member
Messages
288
Reaction score
304
WWC?
Having looked over the Barrage layout, I cannot for the life of me see how anyone came up with the design for such a narrow fish pass unless of course it was an after thought. Can the canoe slalom be used as a fish pass and the Archimedes screw be bye-passed?
I always wondered why they didn't make a 'feature' of the fish pass for visitor attractions. Not often I see canoes in the purpose built feature.
Man and his meddling's, just my ramblings.
WWC white water course = Canoe slalom.

There was a camera setup and a viewing window installed, but I'm not sure why they didn't make some of them. Possibly due to low numbers and/or lack of interest from staff.
 

teesfisher

Member
Messages
66
Reaction score
57
The viewing window was never opened to the public for two main reasons:
1 - it's in the basement of the North Pavilion which would create a while host of H&S issues of opened to the public,

2 - the Tees water is usually so peat stained that even though the fish pass is only 1m wide, you can never see anything through the window ( btw - it's not there anymore, but that's a different story). The cameras associated with the fish counter have enough trouble showing any meaningful images.
 

rawson

Member
Messages
31
Reaction score
22
I looked over the fish pass today, there is scope to widen it but it would take some creative civil engineering creating steps down towards the water level which would have to go out away from the bank into the river.
 

Ian Alex

Member
Messages
339
Reaction score
11
Reports of several good fish coming off the upper Tees in recent days.
I haven't been on the River Tees this year, it's good to see some results. A friend of mine managed to take some pictures of fish negotiating the falls on the Greta this week.
 

Andrew B

Well-known member
Messages
2,690
Reaction score
2,069
WWC?
Having looked over the Barrage layout, I cannot for the life of me see how anyone came up with the design for such a narrow fish pass unless of course it was an after thought. Can the canoe slalom be used as a fish pass and the Archimedes screw be bye-passed?
I always wondered why they didn't make a 'feature' of the fish pass for visitor attractions. Not often I see canoes in the purpose built feature.
Man and his meddling's, just my ramblings.
I’m a big fan of fish passes when they done right as I’ve seen what a difference they can make on rivers that had impassible industrial weirs. I’m all for praising em when they get it right but I’ve seen some really expensive and utterly useless designs that you could would never work.
I’ve only seen the Tees Barrage on film but I’ve never been able to work out why they couldn’t ever get a grant together to undergo a major task, that could make such a difference for returning fish avoiding predation?

I had no idea until recently that Falkus maintained that salmon don’t/can’t jump obstacles at night as they need to be able to see where they heading? So as Teesfisher points out that the Tees has such a heavy peat stain? Then all the more need for a pass with an obvious route.
Some of those passes that just have a small passage at the side I’ve found them to be next to no good, with the fish still trying to batter their way up the middle in high water?
 

Grassy_Knollington

Well-known member
Messages
3,835
Reaction score
1,772
From a history of Yarm first Pubcirca 1979

827D9C92-AE20-487A-A7CC-52D6D5CE585E.jpeg


CF034D44-4262-4325-9639-2BEC5E19F1F6.jpeg
 

Tees88

Well-known member
Messages
288
Reaction score
304
Quite a read, will any of the suggested improvements take place? Lets hope so.
Yes, it really is. It really highlights all of the issues we have known about for some time, but obviously, they're independent of each side which helps the cause.

They've simply got to now, we had a meeting recently with the EA & CRT & it was widely accepted by everyone. The next step is to gather the funding and go for a multiple option approach to get the most effective passes for the Barrage. CRT wants their engineers to look into the proposals and do some calcs with regards to flooding & it would also have to meet the criteria set by the EAs fish pass panel to then grant it full approval (the fish pass at the barrage now has only ever had provisional approval). Both shouldn't be a problem. This would be a multiple team effort, due to the complexity & scale of the task, so it won't happen overnight, but it's critical that we get the best outcome rather than some half arsed effort. As we would just be back to square one and no one wants that.

As a side note, there will be changes happening to BS in the near future too.
 

Dalnashaugh

Member
Messages
96
Reaction score
15
Yes, it really is. It really highlights all of the issues we have known about for some time, but obviously, they're independent of each side which helps the cause.

They've simply got to now, we had a meeting recently with the EA & CRT & it was widely accepted by everyone. The next step is to gather the funding and go for a multiple option approach to get the most effective passes for the Barrage. CRT wants their engineers to look into the proposals and do some calcs with regards to flooding & it would also have to meet the criteria set by the EAs fish pass panel to then grant it full approval (the fish pass at the barrage now has only ever had provisional approval). Both shouldn't be a problem. This would be a multiple team effort, due to the complexity & scale of the task, so it won't happen overnight, but it's critical that we get the best outcome rather than some half arsed effort. As we would just be back to square one and no one wants that.

As a side note, there will be changes happening to BS in the near future too.
Thanks, much appreciated.
Is it too early to say, or is there even an approximate timescale for some/all of the recommendations to be implemented?
 

Grassy_Knollington

Well-known member
Messages
3,835
Reaction score
1,772
Yes, it really is. It really highlights all of the issues we have known about for some time, but obviously, they're independent of each side which helps the cause.

They've simply got to now, we had a meeting recently with the EA & CRT & it was widely accepted by everyone. The next step is to gather the funding and go for a multiple option approach to get the most effective passes for the Barrage. CRT wants their engineers to look into the proposals and do some calcs with regards to flooding & it would also have to meet the criteria set by the EAs fish pass panel to then grant it full approval (the fish pass at the barrage now has only ever had provisional approval). Both shouldn't be a problem. This would be a multiple team effort, due to the complexity & scale of the task, so it won't happen overnight, but it's critical that we get the best outcome rather than some half arsed effort. As we would just be back to square one and no one wants that.

As a side note, there will be changes happening to BS in the near future too.

Interesting! Are you able to share any of those proposals?

I know BS used to be a really significant temperature barrier, but didn’t think it held the fish up in the same way since the changes. Not seen it for years though.
 

Tees88

Well-known member
Messages
288
Reaction score
304
Interesting! Are you able to share any of those proposals?

I know BS used to be a really significant temperature barrier, but didn’t think it held the fish up in the same way since the changes. Not seen it for years though.
You will find the proposals in the Fishtek report I shared yesterday.

No, I don't think it's an issue for migratory fish, its smaller species can't pass it. It's been in the EAs plan for some time now, for an all fish - fish pass.
 

Dalnashaugh

Member
Messages
96
Reaction score
15
You will find the proposals in the Fishtek report I shared yesterday.

No, I don't think it's an issue for migratory fish, its smaller species can't pass it. It's been in the EAs plan for some time now, for an all fish - fish pass.
As I understand it, each year the local EA apply for money, from a relatively limited pot, to improve the fish passage situation at Broken Scar and each year something else crops up that is deemed to have priority. I can't see that scenario improving in the foreseeable future.
 

Tees88

Well-known member
Messages
288
Reaction score
304
I'll re phrase the question! Is there any approx time scale for the obtaining of the necessary funding?

Cheers

Geoff
There has only been one meeting since the Fishtek report was completed. In which it was agreed that the recommendations need to be implemented. It's now down to the CRT to look for that money either internally or via funding. There is no time limit as such at present. However, all the answers are there in black and white now so all that is needed is the money.
As I understand it, each year the local EA apply for money, from a relatively limited pot, to improve the fish passage situation at Broken Scar and each year something else crops up that is deemed to have priority. I can't see that scenario improving in the foreseeable future.
That's correct, although I'm led to believe that is due to change & it is going to go ahead. I've not been involved in this myself, it's just what I've been told. I'm not sure if you've seen, but there were plans to put a hydro in at BS, which the EA had certain criteria for to make it fish friendly. This has since been canceled.
 
Last edited:
Top