Jump to content

New pollution incident

Recommended Posts

In your dreams TT, 15 pages on how to save fish or even catch them, it'll never happen :rolleyes:


Poor old Wandle, its only crime - and also its punishment - is being stuck in south London. It's such a wonderful little river. I used to live very near to it in Colliers Wood, I never fished there but used to walk along it a lot spotting fish (between pollution incidents). There was a guy I'd often see down there in waders who I'd talk to, fly fishing fishing for trout.


I agree that the fines dished out are paltry, and are no kind of deterrent.


I've had many a lovely hour fishing the Wandle. Although it meanders through South London, there are some surprisingly beautiful spots.


OK, so occasionally you'd catch a shopping trolley or try to steer your float past a burnt out moped which had been dumped in the river, but it certainly had big fish... I just always caught the small ones... :rolleyes:


The Wandle Trust did a great job cleaning it up.


They are now appealing for witnesses to the pollution incident:


Wandle Trust

Edited by tiddlertamer

He was an old man who fished alone in a skiff in the Gulf Stream and he had gone eighty-four days without taking a fish. (Hemingway - The old man and the sea)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds as if the pollution was the result of the fire shutting down the plant and allowing untreated sewage into the river, rather than anything the firefighters did.


There may have been no negligence or intent, however the amount of money a company like Thames Water is willing to spend on mitigating a risk will depend in large part on what it stands to cost them if it goes tits up. If the effect of an accidental pollution was a fine big enough for shareholders to demand rolling heads, the amount of effort and money required to be invested in making sure it never happens would suddenly become justifiable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve W,


Did you read that into the original article about the fire? Maybe there is a second (and third) accounting from a later time frame that has changed the "facts" in the article TT put up for us to read?


No possible way can you arrive at your conclusion from the original article.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Any accident is not willfull pollution. However, any factory owners should be aware of potential liabilities from such accidents and be insured accordingly. I used to fish the Don in Sheffield and have fished the West Yorks rivers, all of which have recovered from widescale willfull industrial pollution and are still susceptible to accidental pollution. The Colne suffered a 100% fish and insect kill following one such accident. It is sad, but that's life. You can't prevent all accidents.

Regards, Clive



Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...