INVERAR BURN

Rivers 'near' Perth
Post Reply
User avatar
neilfarmer
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 1:11 am
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Hydro Application for the Invervar burn, Glen Lyon

Post by neilfarmer » Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:10 pm

Plans have now been submitted for a proposed hydro scheme on the
Invervar Burn in Glen Lyon.

If built this would destroy the burn for white water paddling, as well
as causing at least 18 months worth of disruption to the track to the
Carn Mairg group of Munros & permanent interuption to the local
residents in Invervar.

Please visit http://www.canoescotland.com/Default.as ... &tabid=474 on the SCA website, for a link to the local community website.

If you read what is on the community website and the river guide on ukrgb, then want to object, the closing date for objections is September 9th.

The Invervar Community website offers a facility to make a quick online
objection. Use this if you are short of time, but a unique letter in
your own words will have more impact, so if you can take an hour or so
to write your own individual response that would be better.
Neil Farmer.

tape34
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:16 pm
Location: North Yorks

Post by tape34 » Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:56 am

We have a club trip to Pitlochry in September and if conditions allow we hope to paddle some of the burns in the area. The Braan is still to fight for, the Invervar Burn is more remote and possibly has less power to offer from extraction?? does this indicate that all paddlable rivers may now be considered as potential for hydro-power?
Pete Ball

User avatar
MarkB
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 4:29 pm
Location: North West England
Has thanked: 2 times
Contact:

Post by MarkB » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:48 am

tape34 wrote:does this indicate that all paddlable rivers may now be considered as potential for hydro-power?
In my view that's been obvious for a while now. If Church Beck at Coniston can be considered viable so can anything else with a drop and (sometimes) enough volume to float a boat.
Mark

User avatar
neilfarmer
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 1:11 am
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Post by neilfarmer » Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:39 am

tape34 wrote:We have a club trip to Pitlochry in September and if conditions allow we hope to paddle some of the burns in the area. The Braan is still to fight for, the Invervar Burn is more remote and possibly has less power to offer from extraction?? does this indicate that all paddlable rivers may now be considered as potential for hydro-power?
Pete Ball
Indeed, that is very much the case. From the experience in Scotland, I would suggest that kayakers in England and Wales start becoming aware of the problem now. How long will the power companies ignore the rivers that are near the polulation centres in E/W? How safe are the weirs on the Thames from small scale hydro schemes?

The Invervar is not that remove, especially from Pitlochry. I would worry that, with more of these schemes, kayakers will just not stay in the area, just pass through.
Neil Farmer.

tape34
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:16 pm
Location: North Yorks

Post by tape34 » Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:06 am

neilfarmer wrote:The Invervar is not that remove, especially from Pitlochry. I would worry that, with more of these schemes, kayakers will just not stay in the area, just pass through.
That's right, we don't know what will be available (except the Tummel of course) but having plenty of possibilities in the area is part of the attraction to us.

Apart from the loss of water to paddling the proposed location does seem to be especially insensitive to the local comunity.

User avatar
Gavers
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 3:22 pm
Contact:

Post by Gavers » Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:30 pm

[devils advocate]

Would they consider it if it wasn't economically viable and (for want of a better term) socially acceptable? If so, why? Not everyone is out to destroy somebody elses fun/livelihood...

[/devil]

Gav (spread the love... ) =)
Paddle like AARDVARK!!

User avatar
james fleming
Posts: 1950
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:38 pm
Location: Braehead, Stirling, Scotland
Contact:

Post by james fleming » Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:53 pm

Copy of letter sent today...







James Fleming



Address left out for the web.



james@planetpaddler.com





Energy Consents Unit

Scottish Executive

Meridian Court

5 Cadogan Street

Glasgow G2 6AT

Date: 24/8/07







Ref: Invervar Hydro–Power Scheme, Glen Lyon, Perthshire





Dear sir / madam



I am writing to object to the 1.2 megawatt hydro scheme that is proposed for the Invervar burn in Glen Lyon. My objections are:



Water sports

As an exceptionally enthusiastic kayaker for almost 25 years I note that the environmental report mentions “canoeing does not take place on Invervar burn”. This statement couldn’t be further from the truth. I personally have been to Invervar burn numerous times along with a number of kayakers. The burn offers some quality white water at grades four and five. Indeed if prove were needed, photographs are available from a number of web sites, http://www.planetpaddler.com and http://www.ukriversguidebook.co.uk, for example.





Noise

It is the policy of responsible hydro companies to site power stations at least 100 metres away from residences because of the problem of noise pollution. The proposed site of this power station is in the old smithy in the middle of the village of Invervar, less than 100 metres from 88% of the permanent residents. Three Perth Housing Association properties and one Perth Council house lie within fifty metres of the power station and the village playground is only a few metres away.

With regards to the noise control issues I would welcome feed back on the specific Regulations this assessment was based on. If the noise assessment was not current with the newer Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 then the 100 meters policy would have to be revised.





Tourism

The environmental report for the proposed hydro scheme claims “canoeing does not take place on the Invervar burn.” In fact the Invervar burn is listed as grade 4/5 canoeing river in the Scottish Whitewater Guidebook and is referred to as an excellent canoeing river on canoe club websites across the UK.



Invervar is also the main access point for hundreds of visitors who come to walk Carn Gorm, Meall Garbh and Carn Mairg in Glen Lyon every year. I am concerned that the access route onto these Munros may be severely disrupted by this development.



Kayakers and other outdoor enthusiasts bring a lot of income to the already fragile local economy.



Salmon

The current proposal includes around 170 meters of salmon pools in the lower reaches of the Invervar burn. If allowed to go ahead with the outflow located so far downstream, the salmon breeding sites will be damaged and further pressure will be added to the salmon population in the Tay river system. The outflow needs to be moved further upstream, above the salmon pools at the bottom of the burn.



I look forward to your comments regarding wrong information on the environment report, specifically pertaining to kayakers and the evidence on which the noise assessments were based.





Yours Sincerely,



Cc

Local Community

http://www.planetpaddler.com forums

http://www.ukriversguidebook.co.uk forums

Local MP

Community MP

SCA

User avatar
banzer
Posts: 3263
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 11:37 pm
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by banzer » Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:43 am

Gawd here we go again...

... how on earth are they going to generate enough electricity to pay off the cost of building the thing? It's a tiny burn. I'll be sending my objections.
A. Boater wrote:It's all Pierre's fault
www.neviscanoes.co.uk

Lyonheart
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:18 am
Contact:

Hydro Scheme

Post by Lyonheart » Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:38 am

The community has set up a web site to represent their concerns about this scheme. I can't post the URL as the BB prevents me as a new user but it is the obvious www and our domain is invervar dot org.

There are plans for 7 schemes in the offing for Glenlyon now. Just Google "glenlyon hydro partnership" for more information.

tape34
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:16 pm
Location: North Yorks

Re: Hydro Scheme

Post by tape34 » Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:48 am

Lyonheart wrote:The community has set up a web site to represent their concerns about this scheme. I can't post the URL as the BB prevents me as a new user but it is the obvious www and our domain is invervar dot org.

There are plans for 7 schemes in the offing for Glenlyon now.
Here's the link www.invervar.org

Does anyone have an e-mail address for these bodies?

Energy Consents Unit
Scottish Executive
Meridian Court
5 Cadogan Street
Glasgow G2 6AT


The Registry
SEPA
Strathearn House
Broxden Business Park
Perth PH1 1RX

??

Pete Ball

User avatar
james fleming
Posts: 1950
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:38 pm
Location: Braehead, Stirling, Scotland
Contact:

Post by james fleming » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:00 pm

Energy Consents Unit

Scottish Executive

Meridian Court

5 Cadogan Street

Glasgow G2 6AT





Web Address here



E-Mail Address: energyconsents@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

User avatar
james fleming
Posts: 1950
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:38 pm
Location: Braehead, Stirling, Scotland
Contact:

Post by james fleming » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:04 pm

SEPA Perth

Best I can do....

Perth Office
7 Whitefriars Crescent
PERTH
PH2 0PA
Tel: 01738 627989
Fax: 01738 630997

Strathearn House
Broxden Business Park
Lamberkine Drive
PERTH
PH1 1RX
Tel: 01738 627989
Fax: 01738 630997

tape34
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:16 pm
Location: North Yorks

Post by tape34 » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:08 pm

Thanks James, I know I could have posted letters but have found a good response from e-mailing previously.

Pete Ball

Lyonheart
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:18 am
Contact:

Thanks for the Support

Post by Lyonheart » Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:07 am

Thanks to you and the walkers we are looking like we will have about a couple of hundred objections. Thanks for the help and support.

Keep them coming! Web link from my www button below.

Colin Wilson
Invervar Community Association

sha
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:59 pm
Location: south wales

bbc countryfile

Post by sha » Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:18 am

The BBC 1 programme COUNTRYFILE just announced that windfarm companies in Scotland are having to wait to be connected to the National Grid because the grid in Scotland is overloaded. so what are they they going to do with the hydropower they produce through this scheme?

User avatar
neilfarmer
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 1:11 am
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Re: bbc countryfile

Post by neilfarmer » Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:43 am

sha wrote:The BBC 1 programme COUNTRYFILE just announced that windfarm companies in Scotland are having to wait to be connected to the National Grid because the grid in Scotland is overloaded. so what are they they going to do with the hydropower they produce through this scheme?
The hydro schemes will not produce that much energy anyway. They will however still have to wait. One of the reasons that they companies want the schemes so close to population centres (Braan, Invervar, etc) rather than in the far north, is this connection to the National Grid.

The rather contriversial Beauley to Denny Pylon line is the answer to the problem, or so we are told! Information can be found on the Mountaineering Council of Scotland Website and more information can be obtained from a Google search
Neil Farmer.

User avatar
james fleming
Posts: 1950
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:38 pm
Location: Braehead, Stirling, Scotland
Contact:

Post by james fleming » Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:36 pm

For what it’s worth, I got an answer back from one of the MSPs re the letter I sent it reads.

“I have written to the Consents Unit to seek to ensure that your concerns are fully taken on board when they consider this application.”

User avatar
neilfarmer
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 1:11 am
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Post by neilfarmer » Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:41 pm

Today I received a recorded delivery letter from SEPA, stating that they had (provisionally) granted the CAR licence. That means that they can extract water from the river, and is the licence that they do not have for the Braan. There is still the approval step from the Scottish government to go through.
Neil Farmer.

husky
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:22 pm
Location: Warrington
Contact:

Post by husky » Sun Jul 06, 2008 9:37 pm

neilfarmer wrote:Today I received a recorded delivery letter from SEPA, stating that they had (provisionally) granted the CAR licence. That means that they can extract water from the river, and is the licence that they do not have for the Braan. There is still the approval step from the Scottish government to go through.
I have one too
Steve
LET IT BE

User avatar
neilfarmer
Posts: 2076
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 1:11 am
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Post by neilfarmer » Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:44 pm

Just for information really:
It almost went unnoticed last week, but the Invervar hydro proposals were approved by the Perth & Kinross Development Control Committee. The final decision is for Scottish Ministers to take, & there is still strong local opposition, so the final outcome is still uncertain.
Neil Farmer.

yurperjoe
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:46 pm
Location: Glasgow/West Scotland

Post by yurperjoe » Wed Nov 26, 2008 10:57 am

Hey,
excellent work Neil.
Lets hope that the Scottish government do the right thing!
J
What does not kill you only makes you stronger!
He who hesitates is lost!

User avatar
Dug
Posts: 1251
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 6:34 pm
Location: Wem, Shropshire

INVERAR BURN

Post by Dug » Sun Sep 06, 2009 11:55 pm

Theres a tree stuck in the 2nd drops section below the 'dam fall'. Take a saw!

Post Reply