Factors Involved
Three of the largest factors in the proposal have been listed already and have been for the proposal to go ahead. In the view of the sellafield nuclear plant, he reserve of water at ennerdale was vital for their safety and peace of mind of the surroundings areas and workers to act as a permanently operational backup of emergency water. It is only as a back up that it is needed because sellafield already had their own lake which they used primarily in everyday industrial operations which was located at wastewater which had a depth of 76 meters. Albright and Wilson also needed the water for ennerdale lake which they used as a primary resource for the water in every day operations and without that they would be non operational in times where water wasn’t available in the lake by the water authority. North West water wanted to meet these demands in order to keep their customers satisfied and to provide them with the quantity of water needed on a daily basis.
There was a lot more opposition to the proposal then support for it. One of the largest oppositions was from the natural trust. The national trust (NT) s a registered charity set up for the conservation and management of areas of outstanding beauty. The land surrounding the edge of the lake was owned by the NT and so if the proposal was to go ahead it would flood these areas. Some areas around the lake edge was also owned by the forestry commission of great Britain were another opposing factor. In the debate the forestry commission is the government department responsible for the protection and expansion of Britain’s forests and woodlands. Flooding these areas would destroy footpaths in the area which were conserved and managed by the national ramblers association (RA). The RA’s duties are to promote walking in the countryside, protecting rights of way, campaign for access to open country and defend the beauty of the country side. The answer given to the RA to get around this issue was to redirect footpaths. It seems quite logical but would mean maps becoming outdated in the areas and also a lot of planning and authorisation for the new permission for rights of way. It would go against the duties of the RA to let such a proposal go ahead since ennerdale in one of the most least spoilt valleys in the lake district. Linked in with the RA, the youth hostels association was also in opposition of the plans. The youth hostels are dependant upon walkers in this part of the country since they are some of the most remote in England. They are extremely popular with coast to coast walkers of England and local climbers. If the landscape was changed by this new proposal then the hostels would loose customers and therefore money, due to the decreased number of walkers due to the impact of the flooding proposal.
Other factors involved in the opposition of the proposition was from the national farmers union (NFU) who were in the same situation to that of the NT in that it would result in the loss of some farmers land around the lake edge. The NFU is the democratic organisation representing farmers and growers in England and Wales and so they had to step in for the farms as their union representative to protect their land. The land which was proposed to be flooded was areas of boulder clay which acts as better soils, some areas has a better pasture out due to the aspect if the sun and provided the farmers with hay in the winter period. This area of land is known as Inbye land and is vital to providing for the movement of sheep and cattle in the winter period. The south eastern side of the lake has land which is very important for the breeding of wildfowl. Also a new access road would have to be built for the farmers to replace the existing one which was unwanted by the NT, the NFU and the RA.
The copeland borough council are in charge of the ennerdale valley and surrounding areas and so speculated to whether the proposal should go ahead looking at the needs of local companies and residents and the preservation of the landscape of ennerdale valley. The council waned business to thrive in the area and so had to consider how to maintain their current level of success in the area.
The campaign for the preservation of rural England (CPRE) was another factor in opposition. The CPRE exists to promote the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England by encouraging the sustainable use of land and other natural resources in town and country. The CPRE were fighting along side the NT against any changing the landscape of ennerdale valley and could not let the proposal go ahead without good justification.
A small but important factor in the opposition was the wath brow and ennerdale anglers association who ensure that it is possible to fish on the river ehen flowing out of ennerdale lake because it is important for the migration of the Atlantic salmon fish and looking after the rivers sea trout. Increasing the level of the damn would create a problem for the fish getting into the river.
The royal society for the protection of birds (RSPB), were against the proposal because there are some rare birds in this area and the landscape change may affect their habits.
Surrounding areas which created a home for local residents of the ennerdale valley didn’t want the landscape to change because many of them worked in the area and didn’t want those jobs which depend upon the natural beauty of the landscape, to be lost. Also it was thought that it could affect he aesthetic cost in their lives because the area would look more industrial because of the unnatural process’s which were proposed by the NWWA.
The proposal set by the NWWA was sent to the LDSPB who rejected the idea. In spite of this NWWA appealed to the environmental department of the government under the conservative environmental minister Michael Heseltine. The debate was then sent to a public enquiry where an open floor meeting occurs where representatives are allowed to speak either for or against the proposal and can give reasons for their justification. Environmentalists and conservative bodies like friends of the lake district, the NFU, NT, RA, LDSPB, local fishing clubs , RSBP, NWWA, sellafield nuclear plant representatives all attended the enquiry to give their reasons mentioned before about their for or against arguments for the raising of the lake. An inspector listens to al the arguments for and against the raising of the lake. This enquiry was held in 1980.
One of the most interesting arguments was given by the NT because they used the government’s laws against them. The NT claimed that the government had no legal right or the power to make the decision about the lake because the NT was a legal government charity whose job it was to conserve and protect areas of outstanding beauty and that the NT owned most of the land around ennerdale lake anyway.
Eventually Michael Heseltine made the final decision to decline the scheme because of its impact on the area. This was made in 1981. He gave the permission to extract more water and the NWWA was asked to draw up new plans that don’t have such a adverse affect on the land.
The comprise
There had to be some sort of comprise on this matter, in order to meet the demands of the customer to NWWA. Access to the water in times of drought was a problem and so it was suggested that water could be taken from rivers such as the local river derwent. The problem behind this suggestion is a practical point of view which is that when lakes are low so are the rivers!
The NWWA then put forward a proposal which would solve the problem of access to the water. To take water from another point in the lake would make perfect sense to the company. More water would be available in times of drought. A plan to move the intake to the centre base of the lake was sent to the LDSPB. They were keen to make a compromise and they would support and help plan of a new intake under then condition that other changes were made to the NWWA’s water treatment works. They wanted to see the old intake treatment works demolished and the site landscaped. They also suggested that car parking facilities were to be built and screened by trees. Also they wanted he new treatment works moved and located away from the lake and that the design of the building would fit its surroundings with the use of vernacular architecture. It was built to look like a typical farm and barn.
The market supply and demand
The market was a large influence on the change in the lake due to high demands from Albright and Wilson chemical plant and sellafield nuclear plant. Without these keen market factors the proposal may have never been put forward nor the recent changes to the location of the new inlet. In recent years the demand has changes somewhat, again this is due to the market of the area. Albright and Wilson who supply acids and various types of detergents, pervious suppliers in Morocco who supplied phosphate rock to be processed now phosphate rock themselves so now the raw material comes as a liquid and so less water is needed to process it which lowers the demand on ennerdale lake and the NWWA.
Albright and Wilson then broke up and was sold. The site where the company used was quantities of water was taken over by a company which also had a duplicate company in France and so the Whitehaven plant was closed down. The other half of the plant was run down and so only used two thirds of the original amount.
Northern has redirected some of its water to other areas of the country which require water also due to demand. This shows the markets involvements with the rise and fall of demand of water. Now that NWWA has spent so much money on developing a new water intake plant and they are not making as much money back on the water as they are selling less. NWWA are now pumping water to other parts of the country through a new water pipeline.
