Site contents

> Active Project List

> Salmon in the Rea

> Aims and Guidelines

> Questions & Answers

> Executive

Active Project List

Kerbside collection

Plastics recycling: Veolia has indicated that it intends to introduce kerbside collection across the County for plastics next year (blue box?). It is not clear what will happen with the existing bring banks as they are managed by Recresco whereas the kerbside collection boxes will be processed by a firm called Closed Loop. The latter can handle only bottles of 1 (PET) and 2 (HDPE) type whereas the former can handle any kind of plastic object and have recently extended category range to include 5 (PolyP) and 6 (Non expandable PS) types. Whilst Veolia’s plan will bring some form of plastics’ recycling to all of Shropshire, the proposed limitation on container type and content could affect volume by up to 1/3rd – which might end up in the black wheelie bins. Discussions are continuing with Veolia on this matter.

Unadopted roads: Now that SWP have fully integrated Veolia across Shropshire as the sole waste contractor certain anomalies have arisen. Principal among these is the apparent intention of Veolia not to pick up household waste from unadopted roads. This could effect up to 20% of the road system (primarily in rural areas). Currently this has been taken up with the local (Southern area) LJC and will be, at least initially, pursued with Veolia via this route. One option in the long term might be to set up a social enterprise to fill this gap. A sustainable funding stream would need to be defined, however, as this would not be a charity exercise.

Cleobury Country ban the bag

A plastic bag initiative in February 08 proved to be quite successful following a request to all Cleobury Country shops to not offer plastic bags to customers unless asked. Plastic bag recycling and the use of long life bags (e.g., jute bags) were encouraged. – hence the emphasis on ‘minimisation’. This was followed in September 08 with a ‘biobag’ initiative involving the introduction of 10,000 rapidly biodegradable (starch based) plastic bags in all the village shops. This can also be used for the collection of recycle food waste and is focused on that section of the population (possible >50%) intent on using one cycle plastic bags. This initiative was jointly managed by CCEF and Ludlow 21 as a ‘Two Market Towns’ campaign and logos from both areas appear on the bag. This year CCEF and Cleobury Mortimer Chamber of Trade joined forces to launch in May a 2nd biobag campaign involving another order of 20,000 (CCEF and CoT logoed) which will, hopefully, encourage shoppers to be more conscious of the type of bag they use and the final disposal route.

Low Carbon Communities Initiative (LCCI)

Following on from our reasonably successful 3 year MEA (Marches Energy Agency) led initiative (and, in particular the January and May low carbon workshops) which finished at the end of March with 80% of target C savings met, CCEF along with a number of other Southern Shropshire environment groups (Ludlow21, Much Wenlock, Rea Valley, Ditton Priors, etc…) have entered into detailed discussions with Adam Kennerley of Light Foot Enterprises. This Bishop’s Castle based company is a spin-off from The Wasteless Society’s highly motivated environment group which focuses exclusively on reducing the carbon burden of individual households and hence the community – view: http://www.wasteless.co.uk/HES.php The intent here is to extend this low carbon initiative to the entire Southern Area. This would build on Light Foot’s success in Bishop’s Castle, Clun, Newtown and other areas. This would involve us in another three year programme but this time managed by Light Foot, targeting overall to reach effectively 3,000 out of the 23,000 households with a carbon saving each year equivalent to three 2MW wind turbines. Each area will be assigned a Light Foot co-ordinator who will work with the local community group to train volunteers to promote a low carbon lifestyle by visiting individual households (upon invitation only). Ultimately communities would be encouraged to start up their own social enterprise based energy reduction companies (perhaps, for CCEF, consolidated with community renewables, see next section) to sustain this initiative into 2020 and beyond. The overall cost is estimated to be about £1Million of which half would be EU based (Leader) and the balance from The Lottery Fund. Individual groups will also be encouraged to go after some funding from SC (e.g, Grass Roots, Opportunity Fund). The next step is to achieve agreement on the main grant application (re timing schedule and C savings) for submission to EU by late September.

Cleobury Country Community Energy Renewables

In April of this year the MEA and Energy 4All sponsored a workshop to look at the renewable energy potential of the Cleobury Country area. MEA is just completing a three year EU funded RADAR project which examined the area’s total biomass potential whilst Energy4All, principally an AWM funded SE, was formed to develop and catalyse local renewable area initiatives across the UK. The outcome of this workshop was the formation of a community renewables group (provisionally called C3E Ltd [Cleobury Country Community Energy Ltd]) which has focused on developing four micro-generation streams:

Wind: looking at a 5MW local wind farm (5 x 1MW towers) near Cleobury Mortimer. Current status: a consultant has been retained to look at the feasibility of this project.

Hydro: looked at three River Rea locations (Tetstill, Lower Forge [Mawley Hall] and Prescott) it was decided to focus on Tetstill weir which has a 15-20 KW potential to supply the small village (pop. 144) of Neen Sollars. Any design will need to incorporate a salmon fish pass. Current status: a consultant has been retained to look at project feasibility along with 5 other micro hydro projects at Ludlow, Leintwardine (also involves former CCEF member, Brian Wilkinson) and Knighton.

Anaerobic digestion: looking at an AD unit based at Mawleytown Farm. This would take in farm waste, CC commercial and domestic food waste plus any available green waste (garden litter). Potentially up to 30% of Cleobury Mortimer’s energy (as power and hot water) could be supplied from this unit. Current status: developing realistic figures for feed input plus examining the implication of having a food waste handling facility on a diary farm.

Biomass: the local secondary comprehensive (Lacon Childe School) is heated by 5 seperate boilers spread around the school property with an age range from 10-20 yrs. It is proposed to replace these with a single biomass (wood chip) fed boiler. There is potentially 45,000 T/yr of renewable wood from the nearby Wyre Forest, recently developed as part of the ‘Grow with Wyre’ initiative (Worcs. based). A proposal is currently being discussed with Wyre.

The plan, if one or more of these energy streams show realistic potential, will be to formalise C3E Ltd as a community co-op with at least 50% funding from shareholders (£250-25,000 individual contribution range, one vote per contributor). This will involve a major campaign to get the CC community involved and committed to this exciting opportunity which, if multi-stream, may be unique in the UK.

Note: a very recent (July) government initiative to radically (about time!) extend financial incentives for renewable energy has substantially improved returns which can range from 7-20% (Wind versus AD). Rather attractive when compared with current interest rates of 1-3%. View http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/consultations/elec_financial/elec_financial.aspx

SEA

The CCEF is a founding member of the Shropshire Environment Alliance (SEA). This was a Ludlow 21 initiative (David Currant) which grew out of a concern that local government, led by the new Shropshire Council (SC), was not giving environmental issues, particularly climate change, the priority as designated by statutory requirement. It was felt that an environmental ‘voice’ needed to be developed and that, in dealing with SC, a ‘common front’ representing a loose association of all Shropshire environment groups (primarily from Southern Shropshire) would be most effective in driving issues forward and not taking ‘no’ for an answer. Following some discussion it was decided to call this grouping the ‘Shropshire Environmental Alliance’. In May the SEA developed a series of environmental policy questions which were sent to each candidate running for election in the new SC. This had a 40% response (Gwilym Butler responded) rating. The results are posted on www.greenshropshire.org.uk Currently the SEA is studying the Draft Sustainable Community Strategy (deadline response to SC: end of September). As this document will underpin all other Council policies it was felt that if the SEA could play a significant role in ensuring its foundation on good environmental principles then it could be utilised as a way of opening up a constructive dialogue with SC. The next meeting is on September 3rd. Watch this space!

CCC

Looking back at the last comprehensive CCEF report, the CCC (Cleobury Country Centre) should have been in operation for at least the last six months. Anyone visiting LCS recently will see that this is definitely not the case – site work has not even started! This postponement was initially due to a delay by AWM in signing the final contractual agreement which would have released the grant monies needed to finance the Centre construction. In the interim we went into a recession, the first contractor went out of business and finally all AWM funding was withdrawn (literally at the 11th hour with the new contractors just about to start work in May 09). The good news is that alternate EU funding has been obtained, the contract has now been signed (just!) and, hopefully, site work will start within the next month with a targeted completion for early next year. Particular thanks for maintaining the momentum and never talking ‘no’ for an answer must go to CCEF member and CCC project manager, Dr. Chris Dimond, who has shown the patience of Job in dealing with both County and Regional Government authorities. On the environmental side the construction delay allowed us to carry out a site ecology audit (pre-construction) in early April as part of the BREEAM standard. We have had good feedback from the consultants on this. Indications are that we remain on track for at least a ‘very good’ if not ‘excellent’ overall BREEAM rating. We do have a concern, however, that this delay may have affected some of the grant deadlines (e.g., PV panels on the sedum roof). The outcome to this will not be known until we actually get started.

Stop press: building started on the LCS site on October 19/09. Expected opening date: May 3, 2010.

Bill Duley August 31st, 2009

CCEF

don’t forget …. ‘Small changes can make a difference’

Salmon in the Rea

STOP THE PRESS (14/10/09): Grant monies have just been obtained (DEFRA) to put the first fish pass in at Tetstill Weir. Thank you Tony Bostock, CEO, Severn Rivers Trust. Target completion date: Summer 2010!

Breakfast Club Presentation (June 12th, 2008)

‘Salmon in the Rea’ is a topic which up to a few years ago would have been inconceivable for this area. However, before I go into the detail of this I should like to give some background on the complex life of salmon.

Our focus here is the Atlantic salmon which spawns in freshwater and feeds and grows at sea (saltwater). The normal spawning season is from autumn through to winter. Atlantic salmon, unlike Pacific, are unique in that they can spawn more than once: 20-40% return to the sea from spawning and 3-6% return to spawn a second time.

Eggs are buried in a ‘redd’ (gravel bed river substrate) which is excavated by the salmon and covered by materials dug out during the construction of further spawning ‘redds’ upstream. Females will then return downstream while males will remain for further spawning.

The ‘redds’ are important in construction (small sized gravel, stable construction. Note that as the salmon go through their further stages of development they require progressively larger gravels) with egg hatching being very temperature dependant: 3C=145 days, 11C=40 days. Shading can assist in keeping water temps low but also assists in summer when lower flows must be kept below 25C (max habitation temperature). The alevins once hatched in early spring stay within the ‘redd’ utilising the yoke sac as food until they emerge as fry. Ideal conditions require good water flow through the gravel with relatively little fine matter (silt).

Fry evolve to parr by the end of the first summer. Parr thrive on such aquatic wildlife as the invertebrate larvae of mayfly, stonefly and caddis.

The salmon remain at the parr stage for up to 4 years (normally 2) when they reach 100-120 mm (4-5 inches) in length. A proportion of the parr can become sexually active before the end of this stage and are capable of fertilising the eggs of adult females returning upstream. This can have a significant negative genetic impact on offspring fertilised in this way.

Parr evolve to smolt which are then ready to migrate to the sea. Smolts are characterised by their ‘silvery’ appearance and migrate to the sea from April to June.

Growth is rapid in the sea (feed on capelin, sandeels, crustacea) and return time can very from one winter (returning salmon then defined as grilse) to four (MSW [multi-sea-winter] salmon). Since the early 1960s the proportion of grilse has risen significantly. Grilse are more valued by anglers and tend to run in the spring, thereby giving a longer fishing season but lack size (less eggs) and the robustness of the more mature MSW fish plus the possibility of reduced gene pool development (not fully validated).

Salmon generally return to their river of origin and often to the same area in the river bed where they were born. The imprint process is thought to originate during smolt migration and may be related to a ‘smell’ process. This homing has led to genetically distinct sub-populations even within the same catchment area. This is an important point to note when artificially stocking new areas such as the Rea.

Stocking is done normally at the fry stage utilising fish which have originated as close to the new area as possible. In the case of the Rea these would come from the Teme. The Environment Agency has designated for sometime the Rea as within the salmon catchment area. As a consequence, salmon stocking has taken place where no obstructions occur (OK upstream to Tetsill weir), as recently as 2003/04 in Mill Brook.

Salmon migrating upstream have been seen at the Newnham Bridge fish pass (the only one on the Rea – installed in the early 1990s) as recently as December ’06. It is believed that several dozen pairs of salmon spawn each year in the lower reaches of the Rea.

Minor obstructions are not a problem for migrating salmon as long as there is sufficient ‘pool depth’ in front of the barrier (normally a weir) to allow the fish sufficient leap force or momentum. They can jump up to 3m or 10 ft high per step.

In the case of the Rea, weirs at Tetsill (Neen Sollars), Lower Forge (Cleobury Mortimer) and Prescott Mill (Stottesdon) present obstructions which require the installation of fish passes. The latter area is fairly minor in height and the subject of some debate but has the potential of opening the gravel bed streams near Stottesdon in the upper reaches of the Rea. These ideal spawning grounds, if developed, could significantly increase the salmon population potential for the river.

Why the Rea? The salmon population in the UK has been in decline for a number of years. This is thought to be due to a number of factors:

• on the salt water side: intensive over fishing by trawlers, change in ocean habitat conditions (climate change effect), salmon accidentally caught in fish nets, salmon farming (pollution plus escape of ‘farm’ fish weakens the gene pool), etc …
• on the fresh water side: pollution, water temperature increase (25C max.), siltation loading and flow obstructions (e.g., the River Tweed on the Borders has over 100 weirs)

Overall the true reason is not well understood, possibly a synergy of many factors (unmeasured, undefined parameters, especially with respect to what happens in the sea where our comprehensive knowledge equates to one cubic mile of this vast resource). However, fresh water systems can be managed utilising Salmon Action Plans developed by the Environment Agency in conjunction with such legislation as the Water Framework Directive. This takes time and is difficult to enforce but eventually will have a profoundly positive effect on all UK salmon rivers, possibly by 2020/30.

The Rea feeds into the Teme which feeds into the Severs which is a major salmon river. Plans are in place for these main rivers. In the case of the Teme, important work in recent years has been undertaken at and upstream of Ludlow including such tributaries as the Onny and Corve. The Rea is the most significant input point between Ludlow and the Teme discharge to the Severn at Worcester.

The Rea therefore can have a part to play in the salmon redevelopment of the lower Teme. Generally stable gravel beds and pools of the required variety plus biological conditions (low industrial loading, good quality STW at Cleobury Mortimer [shortly to be upgraded], appearance of otters near Mawley Hall) make the Rea favourable for salmon generation: need fish passes as designated above plus, in conjunction with this and into the longer term, work to reduce siltation (primarily a function of bank erosion from pasture farming methods) and better tree management (too many shaded areas which lead, in places, to an essentially sterile river bed). Some concern has been expressed about the compatibility of the existing brown trout population and the introduction of salmon. Independent studies (most recently carried out on the Teme) show that these species generally compliment one another by utilising different areas of the river bed and, in the rare instances where there is competition, trout will predominate. Furthermore, the proposed upgrade programme for the river will only have positive benefits for the trout population which is currently on the decrease (possibly due to over fishing and poor spawning conditions).

There is no reason to believe that the Rea, before the days of watermills (possibly as long as 500 years ago) and, more recently, intensive farming (particularly pasture), was not a viable salmon river though, of course, no one within living memory can recall this – there are some isolated reports of salmon at the bottom of the Lower Forge (Mawley Hall) as recently as the early 1950s. The intention of the salmon restoration programme will be to bring this ‘historic link into the present’.

It should be noted that initially the river will be developed as a ‘hatchery’ area with fishing severely restricted but as the various parts of the salmon life cycle stabilise in the river system, some fishing may be ‘permitted’, particularly in the lower reaches between Mawley Hall and Newnham Bridge. It will be sometime before we see Rea salmon in the shops or featured on the local eatery menu. There currently exists among the salmon fisherman of the British Isles, a ‘catch and release’ programme which sees almost 50% of the salmon caught and released. Nevertheless as a ‘spawning’ river, the Rea should have considerable tourist potential as the developing salmon population will have high visibility. Remember that salmon leave the river only at the smolt stage and hence spend 2-4 years in this fresh water environment.

To make this project sustainable we may need to form a ‘River Rea Trust’ (similar structure to the recently formed Cleobury Country Limited). Anyone interested in joining or finding out more about our salmon project can contact me (01299 270562 or whdpathways@btopenworld.com ). Most of the information covered above is available and complimented by a recent EC publication entitled ‘Ecology of the Atlantic Salmon’ (Natura 2000 series, published 2003, ISBN 185716 713 9) which can be downloaded from the website: www.riverlife.org.uk

Aim and Guidelines

The aim of the Cleobury Country Environment Forum (CCEF) is to examine the impact which Cleobury Country has on the environment and determine the best ways and means to control this so that the rich and diverse heritage of this land is passed onto succeeding generations.

This is accomplished utilising the following guidelines:

• Define key environmental inputs and outputs.
• Analyse the current situation.
• Encourage public involvement.
• Develop both short and long term control strategies.
• Utilise available technical, educational, social and economic tools to meet these ends.
• Relate experience gained to the nationwide programme of environment management.
• View environmental improvement as a never ending process.

The CCEF works closely with both local government (parish, district and county) and associations (Cleobury Country Ltd, Friends of St. Mary’s, etc…) as well as both local secondary and primary schools and any other local organisation or group which shares the CCEF’s aim.

Questions & Answers

What is the Cleobury Country Environment Forum?

In response to the United Nations’ Agenda 21 sustainable development programme local environmental initiatives have been developing across the UK with the nearest group in Ludlow (Ludlow 21). The CCEF is intended as Cleobury Mortimer’s Local Agenda 21 group. It will look at the ecological imprint which Cleobury Mortimer and the surrounding area makes on the countryside and examine ways to control this impact.

Why isn’t the group called Cleobury 21?

The designation Cleobury Country Environment Forum is not carved in stone and members may indeed change its name. It was felt that utilising ‘CCEF’ gave perhaps a broader, more flexible interpretation to the Agenda 21 remit as well as the fact that few people relate instinctively to the term Agenda 21. Furthermore, the reference to ‘forum’ implies a group focused on active participatory discussion within the community which the CCEF will do its best to encourage with an open meeting format.

What do you see as CCEF’s main activity?

To analyse Cleobury Mortimer’s environmental impact and look at how this can be best managed. This will involve the development of specific projects (suggestions invited) focusing on such areas as refuse management (household and commercial), agricultural and garden waste handling possibly linked with energy recovery, expansion of material recovery schemes (i.e., plastics, metals, cardboard), transport, effective sewage treatment, sustainable drainage, etc…

Once conclusions are reached, how will actions be implemented?

It would be the intention of the CCEF to act as a focal point in the development of practical solutions. For example, about 5 tonnes/month (guesstimate only!) of corrugated cardboard is generated as commercial waste in Cleobury. This currently goes to landfill. It should be possible to link this up with a paper recover scheme. To resolve this, the CCEF needs to quantify this waste problem, supply solution(s) to any quality inconsistencies and rationalise transport ultimately leading, hopefully, to a periodic pickup of all waste cardboard as feedstock for a UK paper mill. As a further example, the CCEF might work with the Parish Council to encourage future local housing development along environmentally sustainable lines utilising latest energy conservation technology, use of renewable materials, permeable surface drainage/soak ways, brown field siting and respect for greenbelt integrity.

In order to further its effectiveness would the CCEF seek an alliance with such environmental groups as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth?

The CCEF does not see environmental activity as a separate human function – rather the environment exists, and has always existed as a common thread through everything we do. Some people may simply have a greater awareness of this than others. Such organisations as Greenpeace, etc… have a high environmental profile and, where applicable, their resources will be utilised, but these NGOs deal with issues on a national/global level and tend to promulgate an environmentally focused lifestyle. The CCEF feels that working within the existing community is the most realistic way forward. By highlighting environmental concerns and potential solutions the CCEF would endeavour to increase the environmental awareness of everyone.

Could you give an example of how this might be achieved?

Yes. Let’s examine the ‘Tidy Britain’ campaign. There have been countless local and national initiatives for over the last 50 years but none of these have had a permanent effect – litter remains, aside from the occasional ‘blitz’, an ongoing unsightly problem. The CCEF believes that this can only be turned around by raising people’s overall appreciation of the need for managing our rubbish - by applying first, the concept of reuse, then everything else divided between kerbside recycle and the refuse bin. Just as we have instinctively learned to fasten our seatbelt whenever we are in a car, so also can a better standard of handling discarded materials be acquired.

Do you really think the CCEF will succeed where others have had little affect?

The CCEF opens it doors to everyone in the community to participate in discussions and the development of solutions. It will establish links with key organisations such as the Parish Council and Chamber of Trade to encourage an atmosphere of ‘working together’ for the long term environmental welfare of the area. It will judge its success on the extent to which the environment is elevated as a priority in people’s awareness from something that is ‘someone else’s problem’ or can be tackled ‘when we have more time’ to where it becomes a more integral part of everyone’s lifestyle.

Why is the CCEF being established today? Is their a real need for such an organisation? Cleobury Mortimer already has a large number of clubs and associations – do we really need to have another one?

The environment has become increasingly important over the last 15-20 years. As our living standards continue to improve and our lifestyle becomes more sophisticated, the environmental implications of this have to be addressed both because of their potential long term effect on the countryside as well the utilising of resources which now have a finite limit. No group within Cleobury Mortimer currently addresses this important activity or even seriously addresses such interrelated functions as conservation and wildlife. The CCEF is being formed out of a concern by a number of members in the community that our environmental burden must be analysed and solutions sought if, in the long term, Cleobury Mortimer, and many communities like it are to retain the uniqueness of their cultural and natural history heritage for future generations.

Executive

• Chair and Treasurer - Bill Duley
• Secretary - Dr. Chris Dimond

Membership - 23

New members are always welcome. The group (established in 2002) meets quarterly plus an AGM.

---

For membership detail contact Bill Duley (whdpathways [at] btopenworld.com)

[Edit]