In a riverside pub near Ironbridge, a notice announces the formation of a River Severn Navigation Society, a pressure group of boat owners, local councils, and "conservationists" who hope to build new weirs on the river. The idea is to permit motor boats to proceed above the present navigation limit at Stourport, as far as Shrewsbury, and perhaps eventually even up to the original navigable limit of Pool Quay near Welshpool. Jackfield rapids would survive and be bypassed by some sort of land based link, with a weir above Ironbridge Gorge maintaining the flow at the price of flooding the innumerable smaller rapids higher up. The "conservationists" among them seem to want to recreate an industrial environment as a museum, and water companies and farmers want to increase abstraction. It is time for iGreens, canoeists and others who love rivers in their natural state, to fight this nonsense and recognise river weirs for the industrial pollutants they are.
They were once a necessary evil. We live at our present high standard partly because our forebears opened up the coal and iron mines that drove the industrial revolution by rendering rivers navigable. However, railways and roads superseded these waterways for industrial use long ago, and their weirs are no longer needed. Why do so many remain? Compare the Wye or the Severn above Bewdley, with the Trent and Thames. The difference is not chemicals but canalisation. Any other pollution like this would have been cleared away years ago, either blown up, or washed away in the winter floods. However, somehow the weirs not only remain, but are regularly maintained at taxpayers expense.
The reason is motor boating. Some people, not content with driving their cars up and down tarmac roads all week, like to drive motor launches up and down rivers at the weekends. There is no other significant commercial traffic, although on some stretches oarsmen also prefer still water . Water companies and farmers also want to disguise their excessive water abstraction, and confuse some people into arguing that weirs improve river appearance at low water levels. On the contrary, by hiding low water levels, weirs permit excessive abstraction to continue unnoticed. If removing a weir reveals unsightly rubbish, the rubbish should be removed, not left covered by water.
Since rivers are usually beautiful even with their weirs, we find it difficult to imagine how much more beautiful they would be without them. Two illusions explain this. Firstly weirs are often maintained on pretty stretches of river where people want to go boating, where industrial development is discouraged, and where parks and paths are looked after. Nevertheless the parks and paths made the river beautiful, not the weirs. Secondly, weirs appear to provide relief from the still water they caused. For canoeists and motor boaters, the weir and its associated locks, sluices and shallows, provide a pleasant interlude in an otherwise relatively boring journey. Fishermen also have a more interesting time in the weir stream than in the deep
reaches. Nevertheless, the weir destroyed many more interesting shallows, when it created the boring bits of river against which it is being compared.
Consider the river Wear in Durham. The bend around the cathedral and castle consisted of a series of rapids and rock gardens before the Victorians built weirs. There was no industrial need; people just wanted to boat on the river. No harm done you might say; it is still a lovely stretch (picture one), until you imagine how much lovelier it would be flowing freely (picture two).
Even more tragic is the Yorkshire Derwent below Malton, marred by the weirs at Kirkham Abbey, Howsham and Stamford Bridge. Since motor boats are not allowed above
Sutton weir at Elvington, the only possible benefit of the upper weirs must be concealment of abstraction, and even a brief inspection of the river below Kirkham and Howsham shows that this objection is not real. The shallows below the weir are vastly more attractive even at summer water levels than the still reaches above. Even if motor boaters insist on keeping one at Stamford Bridge, the weirs at Howsham and Kirkham would be better washed away, or even dynamited!
Unfortunately the trend is in the opposite direction and the Severn weir builders are not alone. The recent campaign for the higher locks on the Derwent to be repaired so motor boaters could cruise up as far a Malton was only stopped by the landowners. Other lunatics would canalise the Wye if the government gave them a grant. Anyone who has seen the motor boats at Stourport waiting to drive on up the Severn should be concerned. There is no need for sympathy for these vandals. They have plenty of other water to use. Besides the 500 or so miles of river navigation in England and Wales there are over 1000 miles of navigable canals, and more which could be repaired. Rather than converting more rivers to canals we should turn the tables on them and campaign to remove the weirs that exist.
A modest proposal
Nature is on our side. If nothing were done rivers would revert to their healthy natural state on their own. For some rivers this process would not take long. I propose that iGreens join with canoe clubs to encourage river authorities to stop maintaining weirs and let nature takes its course. To start with this will only be possible where the only beneficiaries are water abstractors and perhaps a small amount of casual tourist boating. There are a number of possible areas for initial action. My pet hates include the river Aire above Leeds, the Avon near Stratford, the Wear at Durham, the Yorkshire Derwent between Malton
and Stamford Bridge, the Nidd at Knaresborough and the Severn at Shrewsbury. Readers will be able to think of other candidates. The main opposition will probably come from the water abstractors, but even some of them may be helpful. Privatised water companies are keen to improve their public image and if they could gain good publicity by returning canalised stretches of water to free flowing rivers, and save maintenance cost in the process, they might be persuaded. The important idea to get across is that weirs are remnants of past industrial pollution and removing them is an act of conservation. Small successes will encourage bigger successes.
Local canoe clubs should make a point of taking before and after pictures to show how healthy flowing rivers have been recreated. Once some small victories have been won it may be possible to remove the weirs at a famous site such as Durham cathedral. Many battles will be fought but successful destruction of weirs like these would be a national event. A momentum might build up so that even some stretches presently used by motor boats might return to their natural state. Imagine the Thames above Oxford. Presently motor boats can travel 31 miles up to Lechlade through 5 locks that have turned a beautiful Cotswold stream into an, admittedly pretty, canal. The motor boat owners dream of extending their canalisation a further 10 miles to Lechlade. I dream of pushing them 31 miles back to Oxford.
Canoeists and iGreens should start this campaign now. The notice in the Ironbridge pub shows how politicians, keen to curry favour with power boat owners, might spend our money to maintain or rebuild weirs and locks. The end of the process will be state sponsored concrete rapids such as those at Holme Pierrepoint for canoeists, alongside a canalised river system for power boaters. If that happened nature lovers would really have to take direct action with some well placed dynamite! Better to start the lawful resistance now.
Jim Thornton April 2001
Vote in
the River Severn weirs poll
