Uncategorized

Words from Westminster

With the state of our rivers and seas remaining in the public spotlight, it is a real challenge to keep this blog and its readers up to date with developments.

The local elections in North East Hertfordshire produced some dramatic changes to the make up of the District Council and I suspect our rivers played at least a small part in those results.

At a national level we have seen an apology from Water UK on behalf of the industry they represent, with a suggestion that with £10 billion from customers, all should be fixed by 2030. A welcome acknowledgement of the problem and their culpability, but somewhat misguided to ask for such a large sum from customers to clear up a mess that Ofwat have asserted has already been paid for.

Sir Oliver Heald contributed to the Water Quality: Sewage Discharge Debate in the House of Commons on 25th April, which I’ve reproduced from Hansard below;

This is an important issue, and I agree with the hon. Member for Barnsley Central (Dan Jarvis) that all parties in this place should work to improve what is a very difficult situation for our constituents and the country.

My constituency has eight chalk streams, and I have been campaigning for many years to improve their quality, often with support from Labour Members such as Martin Salter—he is a keen angler—and cross-party members of the all-party parliamentary group on chalk streams, which I helped to set up.

I was shocked when two of my substantial chalk streams, the Beane and the Mimram, ran dry in 2007. I took the Labour Minister to see them, and he was shocked by their condition. The World Wide Fund for Nature joined me and others in starting a campaign, “Rivers on the Edge”, to reduce the huge amount of water being abstracted from these streams. We were successful in that campaign, although by then the Government had changed. It then became clear that not only were these poor streams being abstracted, but they faced pollution, problems with agricultural practice next to them, with nitrates going into them, and all sorts of other problems, including sewage overflow.

I pay tribute to Charles Rangeley-Wilson, who has been involved in all the campaigns, including those against pollution and soil erosion, and to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ludlow (Philip Dunne), whose Bill I supported; we both rebelled slightly against the Government on one occasion over that issue. Charles chaired Catchment Based Approach in producing a restoration strategy for chalk streams, which is a good document that the Government support. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton Deane (Rebecca Pow) came to its launch by the River Mimram is located here in my constituency, and it sets out a national chalk streams strategy. Although many of its recommendations are not about the problem of sewage overflows, it does cover that.

The Government have taken powers in the Environment Act 2021 and the Agriculture Act 2020 that would enable a catchment-based approach to tackling the range of issues involved in river quality. The water plan, which has been released recently, shows where the investment would be, with fines imposed and money reinvested in improving water quality. One of the main recommendations was to have some sort of protection and priority status for chalk streams. I know that the Secretary of State is concentrating on water generally, but Lord Trenchard has tabled an amendment to the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill and I wonder whether she would be prepared to consider it.

We know that the state of our rivers and streams is not what it should be, but between 2000 and 2010 we really did not know that, because the monitoring did not take place. It came as a shock that our rivers were in the state they were in. I welcome the fact that the Government are now being transparent, are committing to targets and are really taking this on.

Viscount Trenchard also spoke in the House of Lords, introducing an amendment to the Regeneration and Levelling up Bill to bring specific “protection for chalk streams so as to reduce the harmful impacts of excessive abstraction and pollution and improve their physical habitat”:

Viscount Trenchard introduced his amendment with the following words;

My Lords, I apologise that I have not participated at Second Reading or earlier in Committee on this landmark Bill, but I am grateful for the opportunity to move my Amendment 372ZA, which seeks to secure greater protection for our wonderful chalk streams, which I believe play a uniquely important part in England’s landscape and natural environment. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville, for adding her name in support of the amendment. 

I declare an interest as the owner of a short stretch of the River Rib, a chalk stream in Hertfordshire. I salute the hard work and commitment of my right honourable friend Sir Oliver Heald, Member of Parliament for North-East Hertfordshire. I declare another interest, in that I am the president of the North-East Hertfordshire Conservative Association, which has recently adopted Sir Oliver as its parliamentary candidate at the next general election. Sir Oliver’s work to improve the environment, particularly the quality of the eight chalk streams in his constituency, is supported by very many of his constituents, of all political persuasions.

In his speech in another place on 25 April, my right honourable friend observed:

“The Government have taken powers in the Environment Act 2021 and the Agriculture Act 2020 that would enable a catchment-based approach to tackling the range of issues involved in river quality. The water plan, which has been released recently, shows where the investment would be, with fines imposed and money reinvested in improving water quality. One of the main recommendations was to have some sort of protection and priority status for chalk streams”.—[Official Report, Commons, 25/4/23; col. 619.]

Some of Hertfordshire’s chalk streams are in a worse state than others. I am fortunate in that the Rib, where it runs past my house, has never run dry, although abstraction undoubtedly contributes to a worryingly reduced flow in midsummer. Some 85% of the world’s chalk streams are in England, and the remainder are in northern France and Denmark. Many of the rare and beautiful habitats that our chalk streams undoubtedly provide suffer a daily onslaught of pollution and over-abstraction.

I welcome the Government’s decision to support the chalk stream restoration strategy published by Catchment Based Approach’s chalk stream group. CaBA is supported by and works with all the major stakeholders, including environmental NGOs, water companies, local authorities, government agencies, landowners, angling clubs, farmer representative bodies, academia and local businesses. Its chalk stream restoration strategy, published in November 2021, sets out how England’s chalk streams can be restored to a near-natural state.

A 2014 review of England’s chalk streams found that 77% failed to meet the required classification of good ecological status as assessed by the Environment Agency, 75% had been significantly modified from their natural state and 55% were at risk from over-abstraction. The primary recommendation of the chalk stream restoration strategy, entitled the “one big wish”, which is supported by all the organisations, companies and agencies involved in the report’s development and by the consultation responses from stakeholders, is for

“an overarching statutory protection and priority status for chalk streams and their catchments to give them a distinct identity and to drive investment in water-resources infrastructure, water treatment … and catchment-scale restoration”.

The Government’s response so far to the one big wish reads:

“Defra is currently looking for opportunities to deliver on this recommendation. The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill provides an opportunity to consider how stronger protections and priority status for chalk streams can fit into reformed environmental legislation”.

In addition, chalk streams have been given priority status in the stormwater reduction plan. Is the intention still to use the REUL Bill to achieve this goal? Does the Minister agree that, as this Bill already deals with the reform of some relevant retained EU environmental legislation affecting planning decisions, my amendment provides a good opportunity for the Government to achieve their stated objective of protecting chalk streams? It would ensure that the impact on chalk streams of relevant projects is explicitly considered, avoided where possible, or mitigated.

An enhanced status for chalk streams, including within the planning framework addressed by the Bill, would drive the investment and resources that have been severely lacking, not only for chalk streams but, as the report by the Environmental Audit Committee of another place made clear, for the protection and enhancement of biodiversity more broadly. It could mobilise resources from several sources, including the option contained within the ELM scheme for chalk stream investment.

Noble Lords may wonder why my amendment covers only chalk streams, as other types of rivers and streams are also in great need of investment. An integrated approach to restoring all types of habitat and associated species through the restoration of natural ecosystem function, particularly natural catchment function, helps to deliver multiple biodiversity benefits alongside a wealth of natural capital associated with restored aquifer recharge, tackling pollution at source and natural flood management, as argued in a Natural England report in 2018.

Nevertheless, the chalk stream restoration strategy argues that the global rarity of English chalk streams provides a potent justification for singling out this river type among others. There are other justifications—for example, the fact that chalk streams are under particular stress because many of them flow through a highly developed landscape; they have been particularly stressed by the myriad ways in which their channels have been modified over time; they have distinct biodiversity, cultural and heritage value; and, for hydrological reasons, they are far less capable of self-repair than higher-energy rivers. Very few chalk streams enjoy protected site status, and an additional degree of protection would act as an exemplar to show how such an integrated approach can be used for these streams, ultimately showing the way for natural recovery of all rivers, streams, fens, lakes and other freshwater habitats.

There is a wide divergence of outcome to be shown with abstraction. All the designated chalk streams have abstraction targets within the CaBA chalk stream group target of no more than 10% of catchment recharge but, on the most extreme examples of the “ordinary” chalk streams, over 50% of the effective catchment recharge—in other words, the rainfall that sinks down into the aquifer—is abstracted, and in dry years that becomes all the effective recharge for those aquifers.

To take another example: on the few designated chalk streams, between 75% and 90% of sewage works remove phosphorus through advanced tertiary treatment. That proportion falls to between 18% and 30% on the ordinary chalk streams. This is why all the partners in the CaBA chalk stream group identified a higher status of protection as key to delivering the aims of the strategy.

The chalk stream restoration strategy sets out a comprehensive and interconnected series of recommendations, covering a range of actions across the catchment needed to restore chalk streams to ecological and functional health. They encompass abstraction reform, water quality, species and habitat improvements in both variety and abundance, land management and development. The Government have shown a commitment to support the recommendations of the report, subject to consideration, and to the suggestion of a specific category of protection. There is a need to ensure that the Government deliver on those commitments. Incorporating my amendment into the Bill would support that aim. I beg to move.

All contributions that move us closer to the ending of abstraction and pollution of our chalk stream environments are to be welcomed. However our position remains that;

The River Rib and Quin catchment is over abstracted. It is abstracted at one of the highest levels in the county, yet disproportionately supports one of the lowest populations compared to other catchments in Hertfordshire.

The Rib and Quin are polluted. That pollution derives from many sources and the spilling of raw sewage by Thames Water into them is only one of them. However,

90% of Hertfordshire’s total of 3800 hours of raw sewage spills in 2022 were in the Lea Catchment, with only 10% in the Colne Catchment. And 50% of that total was released in Sir Oliver Heald’s North-East Hertfordshire constituency.

Rumours of Thames Water investment at Buntingford, Barkway and Therfield are welcome. How adequate they are (when they come) only the future will tell, though waiting 30 years for phosphate stripping at Buntingford doesn’t bode well.

It is this apparent imbalance, lack of equanimity and inequality in the treatment of rivers and chalk streams across the county and country that leads some to question the effectiveness of the Catchment Based Approach. Whether or not CaBA can deliver for East Hertfordshire chalk streams is perhaps a mute point however, without an effective regulator, resourced and empowered to protect the environment.

riverfly monitoring

Cold Christmas Riverfly Monitoring – May 2023

Site: Cold Christmas, River Rib
Recorders: Dave Blowers, Emma Blowers
Survey date: 21st May 2023
Time: 0930hrs
Air temperature:
Water Temperature 12.5ºC
Weather: Bright
Flow: 4
Phosphate:0.82
Nitrate: –
Nitrite: –

Cased Caddisfly782
Caseless caddisfly592
Burrowing Mayfly (Ephemeridae)862
BWO (Ephemerellidae)1233
Flat bodied upswings (Heptageniidae)00
Olives (Baetidae)1193
Stoneflies00
Shrimps (Gammarus)3503
Score15
Bullheads – 3, fish fry (unidentified) 9, Water Hoglouse 2, Leeches, too numerous to count, beetle larvae present, not numerous.

Bright, varying between sunny and slightly overcast. Warm. Water flowing strongly and notably clear. Extremely dense Ranunculus growth, forcing water flow into channels between it.  Amount of weed and algae creates considerable effort processing sample.    
riverfly monitoring

Standon A120 Bridge Riverfly Monitoring – May 2023

Site: Standon A120 Bridge, River Rib
Recorders: Nic Bartrop, Toby Spencer
Survey date: 16th May 2023
Time: 1400hrs
Air temperature:
Water Temperature: 12ºC
Weather:
Flow: 3
Phosphate:
Nitrate:
Nitrite:

Cased Caddisfly502
Caseless caddisfly51
Mayfly (Ephemeridae)162
BWO (Ephemerellidae)3503
Olives (Baetidae)2503
Stoneflies00
Shrimps (Gammarus)752
Score13
bullheads 1, Sticklebacks 1, Crayfish 3, leeches 10.
Record site score for Blue Winged Olives!
Uncategorized

East Herts Greens respond to Affinity Water Plan

In February 2023 the East Herts Green Party responded to the Affinity Water Consultation on Water Resources Management Plan. The following is reproduced from their website and well worth a read. The original piece can be found here.

Background

Affinity Water’s Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) aims to address a significant future shortfall in water resources in their supply area.

Population growth, climate change and the demand for water are putting significant pressure on the local environment and water resources in Affinity Water’s supply area.

Without action – the area Affinity Water supplies faces a possible shortfall of 449 million litres a day by 2050. Affinity Water sought to hear what customers and stakeholders thought about their draft plan to help them shape their final plan which they aim to publish in Autumn 2023.

Every five years, Affinity Water produces a WRMP which addresses these future challenges and provides a roadmap for a reliable, resilient, sustainable, efficient and affordable water supply to customers between 2025 and 2075, whilst taking care of the local environment.

The actions include reducing customer demand, driving leakage down further than ever before, smart metering and significant investment in new infrastructure for new sources of water – working across the water industry to plan and share resources regionally. The plan will also make the region’s water supplies more resilient to droughts, which are becoming more frequent due to climate change.

The consultation took the form of 8 questions. Please find below the questions and East Herts Green Party’s answers.

East Herts Green Party Response

Prepared by Nicholas Cox – February 2023

Q1. Please tell us how well you think we have balanced the main factors relating to our environmental destination in our draft plan. Should we be doing anything differently?

If your mission is to provide sustainable, high-quality water and work together with your community then you have failed dismally because you are destroying our chalk streams and appear to have accumulated a £3 billion liability through lack of investment and you are telling your “community” that we have to pay for your mistakes through higher bills. Why aren’t you lobbying and campaigning for property developers to fund part of the cost? Given the international importance of our chalk streams, before Brexit the EU would have part funded restoration projects, why aren’t you asking the UK government to match-fund what you would have claimed from the EU?

What else should you be doing differently? In addition to the measures mentioned below, Affinity should have a duty to produce a dWRMP that is written in plain English so that members of the public can understand it. It is ludicrous that your company pretends this document can be properly consulted upon when readers require an MSc in Water Resource Management to understand the language you use, let alone comment on your plans in a meaningful way. You should spend some of the many millions you earn in employing science communicators to rewrite your document so that it can be read, understood and consulted upon properly by members of the public.

Q2. Please tell us if there are any other factors that we should take into account in our best value plan. Which do you think are most important?

You claim that “Best value planning” looks to balance the economic, social and environmental cost of a solution or programme of work while still balancing supply and demand. This is woolly thinking. How precisely do you claim to have balanced the economic, social and environmental costs? How do you attribute an “environmental cost” to a globally important chalk stream? Where are your calculations to demonstrate this?

It would be better to use terms with defined definitions:

“Best available techniques” (BAT) means the available techniques which are the best for preventing or minimising impacts on the environment.

“Best Available Technique Not Entailing Excessive Cost” (BATNEEC), a modification of BAT, was introduced in 1984 with Directive 84/360/EEC and superseded in 1996, by Directive 96/61/EC, which applied the framework concept to, amongst others, the integrated control of water pollution.

Q3. Please tell us how well the adaptive approach addresses your main concerns. Is there a different approach we could use?

It is self-evident that you have not been planning for the future. If you were, then you would not be destroying our precious chalk streams and face an unfunded bill of £3 billion to resolve the problem!

The approach that we would like to see is using a not-for-profit model to maintain a basic resource for both residents and for nature. We want to see Affinity nationalised. While you operate to provide profit for share-holders, it is clear Affinity has little real interest or motivation in properly tackling the issues we face with water shortages in our area.

Q4. Please tell us which measures you consider are most likely to support management of demand and so should be considered for inclusion in our draft plan. Which of the identified options should we prioritise?

Firstly we want to see you stripped of responsibility for our water and your service nationalised. Until that can occur, fixing leaks is obviously the top priority and your target of a 50% leak reduction “beyond 2040” is nowhere near ambitious enough. You need a 50% leak reduction by 2030 and a 90% leak reduction by 2040. Your plan doesn’t mention transformational help for existing residential customers to reduce their consumption to the levels required. You have previously provided water flow regulators and low water shower heads free of charge. This needs to be upgraded and broadened into a permanent campaign, not a one off, and needs to be extended way beyond simply giving each home a water butt. Affinity should be spending its own money on installing large-scale grey-water harvesting systems at all new developments in East Herts to cut fresh water use and retrofitting them at existing sites that use large amounts of water.

Q5. Please tell us your thoughts in relation to the SROs that we have identified.

The six Strategic Resource Options need to be developed and progressed in parallel because time is of the essence and the problem is getting worse.

The uncontentious schemes should commence straight away.

For example, the total closure of Friar’s Wash and Redbourn pumping stations and a significant abstraction reduction at Kensworth pumping station offset by transferring more water from Grafham Water reservoir.

Care needs to be taken when transporting water over long distances. Has the risk of importing invasive species been adequately studied?

The water from chalk streams is slightly alkaline with a pH range of 7.4-8.0, high in minerals (esp calcium) and low in nutrients (phosphorus 0.01-0.03mg/l and nitrogen 0.2mg/l) and high in dissolved oxygen. Softer water from other regions might have a lower pH, will this adversely affect local species? Softer water could have a corrosive effect on our chalk beds particularly over the longer term. Have all the necessary environmental impact studies been carried out and peer reviewed? This is critical or your supposed solution could wreak havoc with our precious, delicate chalkstream ecosystems.

Nor is there mention that The New River is still in use today, transferring around 220 million litres of water per day out of our region for London’s use. The pumping stations upstream of Hoddesdon should be permanently shut down and offset by building a water recycling facility at the Rye House sewage works and feeding the recycled water, with levels of phosphates at levels suited to natural rivers, into the New River, perhaps using the Essex Road pumping station for this purpose.

Q6. How should we prioritise demand management? Are there other assumptions or risks (in addition to relying on government policy) that we should consider?

The demand management strategy will fail because a) it doesn’t take into account the insane house building targets set by East Herts District Council and Hertfordshire County Council – some 18,000 new houses are planned in East Herts alone, which will require at least 6.2 million litres / day of water (assuming 2.3 people per household using the current average of 150 l/p/d) – with a further 80,000 homes across the county by 2035 and b) the limit to water use stated in Building Regulations at 110 l/p/d, enforced through the East Herts District plan, is completely UNENFORCABLE at the moment.

It is no more than wishful thinking without proper enforcement, and based around developers willingness to install minor adjustments to taps and shower heads etc which have next to no impact. There is nothing to prevent home-owners using as much water as they want. In an affluent area like Hertfordshire, putting a 110l/p/d limit on usage is pure fantasy.

Affinity Water needs to take this issue seriously, and lobby the government to tighten Building Regulations, as well as actively work with developers to install large-scale grey-water harvesting systems on every new development. In the US, energy companies have spent large amounts of their own money as executives realised that spending money on helping residents use less energy would mean they didn’t need to construct another power station. Exactly the same situation applies with water here – Affinity should be spending its own money on installing large-scale grey-water harvesting systems at all new developments in East Herts to cut fresh water use and on retrofitting these systems at existing sites where users have a heavy water demand that can be met with grey water.

Q7. In choosing the 100Mm3 SESRO option we are balancing the impact on local communities against the risk that we won’t have enough water if we need to adapt to a higher environmental destination or can’t achieve the demand reductions. Please tell us how well we are approaching the balance between the environmental destination and the impacts on the host communities and environment. Is there anything we should do differently?

We support all measures taken to reduce abstraction from chalk streams and their aquifers and are in favour of the abstraction reductions planned for rivers including the Ver in Affinity Water’s dWRMP and look forward to the environmental improvements at the Ver, the Beane and the other chalk streams in this area.

However, 100Mm3 is a massive underestimate if you are serious about restoring our chalk streams. 150Mm3 should be the minimum target, with a strategy for going higher should the need arise.

The definition of sustainable abstraction should be to ensure that chalk stream flows are reduced by no more than 10% from natural at the most water-stressed times of the year with a commitment to meet this target on all chalk streams within the region by 2040.

You plan to reduce abstraction by 228 Million litres a year – actually not a lot given that you are currently abstracting about 13 million litres every day from boreholes at Baldock and Letchworth alone. That is 4,745,000,000, or 4.745 billon, litres per year.

Your abstractions have gradually risen to around 50% of average recharge, putting it amongst the most heavily abstracted chalk rivers in the whole World.

The Lawson Report calculates that to meet the 10% recharge limit, abstraction must be reduced by 81%. There is a simple solution, which is to back off pumping the boreholes, let the springs flow, let the river run, let the biodiversity recover, and abstract that same water further downstream.

Q8. Overall, do you think that our draft plan represents the best value plan for Affinity Water customers, communities and the environment? Please tell us what you think and the reasons for your answer.

No. We have about 10% of the Earth’s chalk streams in Hertfordshire. Over-abstraction of water from the chalk aquifer has resulted in our chalk streams being reduced to dangerously low flows; the source of the River Rib has moved downstream to Buntingford, while the Ash is reduced to just 11% of long-term average flows. The draft plan fails acknowledge the urgency of the problem and is not “best value” for the environment. You should be spending money cutting leakage, installing grey-water harvesting systems, working to get the building rules changed so that homes have a proper and enforceable limit to water use, and ending extraction from our chalk streams.

References:

https://chalkaquiferalliance.wordpress.com/

https://www.revivel.org/

abstraction, pollution

A fun day at Standon May Day

Huge crowds descended on Standon for the village’s annual May Day Bank Holiday celebrations along the High Street and Friends of the Rib & Quin were able to be part of the day. Thanks to the generosity of The Star we were again located in their car park and were able to talk to lots of visitors as they visited the Vintage Car Show in the pub grounds.

Young and old were entertained by the riverfly larvae that had been collected from the River Rib, earlier in the day, finding them in the trays and looking at them under the microscope. Others discussed with great engagement the issues that our chalk streams are facing, with some focus on the posters that encapsulate our concerns that were launched on the day.

riverfly monitoring

Standon A120 Bridge Riverfly Monitoring – April 2023

Site: Standon A120 Bridge, River Rib
Recorders: Toby Spencer, Andy Ayres
Survey date: 13th April 2023
Time: 1000hrs
Air temperature:
Water Temperature: 8ºC
Weather:
Flow: 4
Phosphate: 0.44
Nitrate:
Nitrite:

Cased Caddisfly1203
Caseless caddisfly91
Mayfly (Ephemeridae)112
BWO (Ephemerellidae)602
Olives (Baetidae)802
Stoneflies00
Shrimps (Gammarus)1533
Score13
bullheads 3, water hog louse 6, leeches 10