The driving of the soughs greatly altered the water table of the whole of the Derbyshire lead field, but this didn't happen until the middle of the seventeenth century onwards (Longhead sough Cromford being the first to be driven in 1640, and Alport sough being the first to be draining mines in that area in 1718), so if it was possible to find records concerning weather pre that time and compare drought years with records of the R. Lathkill running dry, this might help.

anthropomorphic phraseology

Sound scientific facts have proved Magpie is taking from the Lathkill, by three separate people. I am not a scientist but can identify, along with many others, that the Lathkill is living. Viktor Schauberger first claimed water to be alive, I think of the plants and animals that rely upon the flow to be the living factor.

What is a regretful sympton of the modern world is that people living outside an area feel they hold great sway over it. We feel this keenly as residents of the Peak District National Park. The place has become a playground for outsiders!

What is a regretful sympton of the modern world is that people living outside an area feel they hold great sway over it. We feel this keenly as residents of the Peak District National Park. The place has become a playground for outsiders!

The fact is this year we have had a lack of rain. Everywhere passages previously flooded have been exposed, springs and wells have dried up so whats different here.

Mike

This year is an exceptionally dry year, on the back of a year previously 30% down in rainfall, and the BBC decided to do a programe on it. The EA said the lack of surface flow in Lathkill Dale caused them to rescue fish earlier than normal and that the seasonal recharge was later than normal.

Sorry, John, resorting to personal comments now are we?

I don't claim any rights over Magpie Sough, but I'd be failing in my PDMHS duties if I didn't mount a robust challenge to a proposal to completely close off an important site the society has devoted so much time and effort to in the past.

How about if the tail up to any potential obstruction was left open, like Hill Carr? There would be little water in this section and no mobilisation of silt to upset the fishermen. You don't have access now, perhaps a potential blockage further up could be an advantage to you?

Sorry, Jan, resorting to personal comments now are we?

You are, but it isn't going to worry me.

The fishing party photograph was published on the river keeper's website some time ago and if I remember correctly was taken in the 1890's.
There are weirs and fish pools above Alport and until the recent efforts to return the river to it's natural state, fish were raised in pools for restocking purposes. These would I assume be both Brown and Rainbow Trout.
The "red" in the description of fish would refer to the colour of the flesh, a result of diet and always a pleasant thing to see when compared with the rather pale flesh of some fish.
In case it is in doubt I have no problem identifying fish, from high or low vantage points; Rainbow Trout, in the water are identified more easily by features other than external colouration, which itself can be very variable. The naturally breeding Wye Rainbows have additional identification features (as compared with stock fish).
Back to mine drainage.

How have I upset anyone? Peter Burgess first decided that my 'anthropomorphic phraseology' was a regretful feature of the modern world.

What are your objections to blocking water from Magpie Sough? How can it harm what you do? It hasnt harmed exploration of Hill Carr. You could negotiate new access to Magpie Sough if no water can move silt that is disturbed.

I don't claim any rights over Magpie Sough, but I'd be failing in my PDMHS duties if I didn't mount a robust challenge to a proposal to completely close off an important site the society has devoted so much time and effort to in the past.

How about if the tail up to any potential obstruction was left open, like Hill Carr? There would be little water in this section and no mobilisation of silt to upset the fishermen. You don't have access now, perhaps a potential blockage further up could be an advantage to you?

I think it's accepted that the majority of the water flowing down the sough at the moment enters at the boil-up, so if I understand correctly to have any meaningful effect the blockage would have to be between the boil-up and the entrance. From memory this is not particularly far up the sough. Therefore any remaining open section would be fairly short and most of the interesting bits would be lost.

I must admit my first thought on seeing the programme was from the point of view of not wanting the opportunity of future trips to be lost - I can understand how this might be seen as a minority attitude but its one that shouldn't be too much of a suprise on a site devoted to mining history and exporing old workings.

Sorry, John, resorting to personal comments now are we?

You are, but it isn't going to worry me.

I give up! I would love to make a good case FOR your suggestion, but when the main advocate of it seems determined not to listen to reasonable opinion, then there is no point continuing. I believe you are doing your case far more harm than good on this site, which is a shame.

I shall continue to enjoy Lathkilldale, with or without water, but will probably have to do it disguised as a local so as not to attract too much adverse attention. :lol:

How have I upset anyone? Peter Burgess first decided that my 'anthropomorphic phraseology' was a regretful feature of the modern world.

What are your objections to blocking water from Magpie Sough? How can it harm what you do? It hasnt harmed exploration of Hill Carr. You could negotiate new access to Magpie Sough if no water can move silt that is disturbed.

I may have misunderstood, how would one block water flow in the sough by any method other than a complete blockage between the boil-up and the entrance?

How have I upset anyone? Peter Burgess first decided that my 'anthropomorphic phraseology' was a regretful feature of the modern world.

What are your objections to blocking water from Magpie Sough? How can it harm what you do? It hasnt harmed exploration of Hill Carr. You could negotiate new access to Magpie Sough if no water can move silt that is disturbed.

I may have misunderstood, how would one block water flow in the sough by any method other than a complete blockage between the boil-up and the entrance?

Hydro-power was one idea. The water would generate through a pico turbine or some sort during the winter and cause a blockage during the summer when the water is needed in't'dale. Not a complete blockage, only a restriction to the perennial flow. On your other point there would be no advantage to blocking below the water.

Atkins did a flood aleviation proposal back in the 1990's. Part of their plan involved reducing the flow to Bakewell and guess what was mooted!

Not suprisingly then, as you state this is a mine exploration forum, your main objection to the idea would be a lack of access?

Well, yes that would be my own personal and admittedly rather selfish concern.

I imagine others may have rather more complex and thoughtful objections.