The Tummel-Garry scheme was bitterly
opposed by a number of interest groups, including
the Tay District Salmon Fisheries Board.
The public
enquiry which decided its outcome opened
on the 25th of April 1945, in the dying days of the
Second World War, which perhaps helps explain the extreme
nature of the damage done.
|
|
|
The report of the public
enquiry (Cmd 6660, 1945) noted that:
“as regards
the effect upon fisheries, the tribunal found that
the extent of the damage to be apprehended was
the subject of acute divergence of expert evidence……no
attempt was made in the witness box to quantify
any of the apprehended loss. In a matter so uncertain
as the prospects of salmon fishing we think it
was wise to refrain from the attempt.”
Severe damage
was claimed by the local salmon fisheries interests.
The Fisheries Committee set
up to advise on such matters took a similar line
and objected to the diversion of the upper waters
of the Garry. However, the “acute divergence” was
with the two big guns of the salmon world hired
by the Hydro Board. They were the celebrated W.L.
Calderwood, a former Inspector of Salmon Fisheries
for Scotland and one Dr John Berry, a prominent
salmon scientist of the day.
Among a number of
astonishing claims, including the fact he had
never actually visited most of the Garry, Dr Berry
stated
that he was of the opinion that the scheme
"would
not have any permanent depreciation on the [general
Tay salmon] stock."
He claimed that
some extra water to be released into the Errochty
Water, the tempering of spates and droughts by
the reservoirs and an increase in food supply
would make up for the lost spawning and rearing
areas.
In particular he thought that increased abundance of “ water
fleas" discharged from reservoirs would greatly increase fish food.
Ironically, what history actually tells us is
that water
released from dams has usually had
the opposite effect. Recent research on the River Lyon has shown it
to have an impoverished invertebrate community
downstream of a dam, partly perhaps as
a consequence of altered temperatures.
The temperature
regime of the Errochty Water has also been
affected by damming, with spring
temperatures being suppressed, so it is possible that the productivity of the Errochty has actually decreased as a result of the scheme, or certainly not increased markedly!
|
|
Superintendent Macrae described good salmon spawning
areas around Clunes Lodge. They are still there,
awaiting the return of the salmon one day.
The Hydro Board's expert, Dr Berry, claimed that dams would supply more food downstream and offset the loss of the Garry. In fact history tells us dams often reduce food, not increase it!
Hydro power may therefore have had a greater adverse impact on salmon production across the Tay catchment than the "experts" initially envisaged.
|
The enquiry was provided
with contrary opinions on the importance of the
Garry, from the Board’s chairman, Mr Malloch,
and its superintendent, Mr Macrae. Superintendent
Macrae
stressed the importance of the River Garry, detailing
his observations of salmon spawning in the area.
However the cross examiner tried to make Mr Macrae
contradict himself and look naive, whereas his
observational evidence was probably the soundest
evidence presented. |
|
|
Most came down to
pure opinion, some of which would not be supported
by
our modern understanding. With regard to a point
of divergence with Calderwood, Mr Malloch was asked:
"it
seems to be a very uncertain business being a fishery
expert, is it not?" Perhaps seeking to cast
doubt on the veracity of the Hydro Board’s
hired salmon “experts”, Mr Malloch replied
that he was
"not appearing as a fishery expert." "You
are not?" "No, a fishery expert is
usually paid for it. I am here as Chairman of
the Tay Fishery
Board."
And so the Garry's fate was sealed. It was concluded
that the need for electricity at that time outweighed
the concerns of the landscape and fisheries interests
who had put their heart and soul into objecting.
|
|
The report of the Tummel-Garry public inquiry
acknowledged that
“in dry weather
the river will be not much more than a rocky memory.”
|
