Please find attached the 2017 Great Ouse Relief Channel hydro acoustic map for...
Please find attached the 2017 Survey report for the Counter Drain Mepal to Salters Lode,&...
The attached reports date back to 2009-2012 when the Environment Agency asked for so...
This year we have split the competition between Ferry Meadows and the Nen...
Summer advice for fishery managers. Act now to protect your fishery with the prolo...
Please find attached the 2017 Ely Ouse hydro acoustic map for circulation. Click the...
Regional Chairman Kelvin Allen discusses the Building Bridges project work with the Nenescape Partnership. Click on the link below.
We are pleased to annouce that we have agreed with the Nene Regional Park and their Hertiage Lottery Fund bid for a Landscape Partnership project that it will include support for the Angling Trust to enhance it's Building Bridges project to focus on education and intergration of Eastern European anglers across the Nene Valley.
This potential 5 year program will bring benefits to the social intergration of anglers from whatever background from Peterborough to Northampton.
The Nene Welland and Witham consultative discussed the possibility of creating a habitat rich backwater on the Nene at Stibbington for a number of years. In 2014 Deeping St James AC worked up a scheme not only to provide off channel winter refuge, but also to provide excellent angling access into what became a 28 peg natural venue on the Nene.
The scheme jointly funded by the EA and Deeping St James AC has shown what can be achieved in partnership.
Click on the download attachment link below for more photos and information.
RIVER NENE IMPROVEMENTS
This scheme was implemented by the Environment Agency with the co-operation and agreement of the Nene Park Trust (landowner) and the support of Peterborough and District Angling Association (PDAA) and the Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire Wildlife Trust.
It's another sound demostration of partnership working and providing benefits for both the river ecologly and angling.
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE WELLAND AT DRAYTON
This £55k scheme of water framework improvements was implemented by the Environment Agency with the co-operation and agreement of the adjacent landowners (Matthew and Melanie Robinson and Alister Brooke-Clarke) and in-kind support from the Welland Rivers Trust and the Wild Trout Trust. Another great example of improving our rivers.
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE WELLAND AT SUTTON BASSETT
This £60k scheme was implemented by the Environment Agency with the co-operation and agreement of the adjacent landowner (Mr Beaty) and in-kind support from the Welland Rivers Trust and the Wild Trout Trust.
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS ON THE WELLAND AT SOUTH LUFFENHAM
This £11k scheme was implemented by the Environment Agency with the co-operation and agreement of the adjacent landowner (Mrs Bellamy) and in-kind support from the Welland Rivers Trust and the Wild Trout Trust.
This £56k scheme was implemented by the Environment Agency with the co‐operation and agreement of the adjacent landowners (Messrs Hart and Parker) and in‐kind support from the Welland Rivers Trust and the Wild Trout Trust.
This is the consultation response to the Environmental Agency for the Islip Hydro Application. As discussed at the forum 5th April 2014.
The forum felt that the application lacked detail on a number of issues, but welcomed the implementation of fish passes as part of the overall project.
The Archimedes screw turbine does seem to have the least impact in terms of fish mortality, but it was felt that best practice to fish access and protection should be implemented.
There is little environmental impact in terms of fish within the assessment, clearly this needs resolving.
There needs to be provision on the protection of the Silver Eel passage at certain times in their migration cycle.
No reference is made to riparian fishing rights above and below the immediate area.
The actual design of the fish pass is at the extremes in terms of height and run angles.
There is no reference to ongoing monitoring and impact on fish and who pays for this additional assessment.
Overall the forum felt that if these additional points were undertaken then upon balance there was little substantive reason to object.
However it was felt that this could lead to further applications along the river, which would each be judged on their own merits.