DOCSLIB.ORG

River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary Report December 2010 Managing Flood Risk We Are the Environment Agency

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary Report December 2010 Managing Flood Risk We Are the Environment Agency River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan Summary Report December 2010 managing flood risk We are the Environment Agency. It’s our job to look after your environment and make it a better place – for you, and for future generations. Your environment is the air you breathe, the water you drink and the ground you walk on. Working with business, Government and society as a whole, we are making your environment cleaner and healthier. The Environment Agency. Out there, making your environment a better place. Published by: Environment Agency Sapphire East 550 Streetsbrook Road, Solihull, B91 1QT Tel: 0870 8506506 Email: [email protected] www.environment-agency.gov.uk © Environment Agency All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency. December 2010 Introduction I am pleased to introduce our summary of the River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan (CFMP). This CFMP gives an overview of the flood risk in the River Trent catchment and sets out our preferred plan for sustainable flood risk management over the next 50 to 100 years. The River Trent CFMP is one of 77 CFMPs for England properties (both residential and commercial) and and Wales. Through the CFMPs, we have assessed 45,473 people at risk in the catchment in a 1% inland flood risk across all of England and Wales for flood event. However, it is expected that both of these the first time. The CFMP considers all types of inland figures could rise quite significantly within the next flooding, from rivers, ground water, surface water 50 to 100 years by which point some 62,027 properties and tidal flooding, but not flooding directly from the and 134,206 people could be affected by flooding in a sea (coastal flooding), which is covered by Shoreline 1% event. Management Plans (SMPs). Our coverage of surface We cannot reduce flood risk on our own, we will and ground water is however limited due to a lack of therefore work closely with all our partners to improve available information. the co-ordination of flood risk activities and agree The role of CFMPs is to establish flood risk management the most effective way to manage flood risk in policies which will deliver sustainable flood risk the future. Amongst others, Local Authorities, Natural management for the long term. This is essential if we England, the Forestry Commission, the National are to make the right investment decisions for the Farmers Union (NFU), the National Park Authority, and future and to help prepare ourselves effectively for a number of Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs) have been the impact of climate change. We will use CFMPs to involved in the formulation of this plan. help us target our limited resources where the risks This is a summary of the main CFMP document, if you are greatest. need to see the full document an electronic version This CFMP identifies flood risk management policies to can be obtained by emailing enquiries@environment- assist all key decision makers in the catchment. It was agency.gov.uk alternatively paper copies can be produced through a wide consultation and appraisal viewed at any of our offices in Midlands. process, however it is only the first step towards an integrated approach to Flood Risk Management. As we all work together to achieve our objectives, we must monitor and listen to each other's progress, discuss what has been achieved and consider where we may need to review parts of the CFMP. The River Trent catchment area has a long history of river, tidal and surface water flooding. At present it Mark Sitton-Kent is estimated that there are approximately 22,851 Director - Midlands Environment Agency River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan 1 Contents The purpose of a CFMP in managing flood risk 3 Catchment overview 4 Current and future flood risk 6 Future direction for flood risk management 10 Sub areas 1 Axholme and North West Lincolnshire 12 2 Sherwood 14 3 Peaks and Moorlands 16 4 Shelford to Gainsborough 18 5 Burton, Derby and Nottingham 20 6 Mid Staffs and Lower Tame 22 7 West Staffs 24 8 Rural Leicestershire 26 9 Upper Soar and Upper Anker 28 10 Birmingham and Black Country 30 Map of CFMP policies 32 2 Environment Agency River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan The purpose of a CFMP in managing flood risk CFMPs help us to understand the • IDBs, water companies and CFMPs aim to promote more scale and extent of flooding now other utilities to help plan their sustainable approaches to managing and in the future, and set policies activities in the wider context flood risk. The policies identified in for managing flood risk within the of the catchment; the CFMP will be delivered through a catchment. CFMPs should be used combination of different approaches. • Transportation planners; to inform planning and decision Together with our partners, we making by key stakeholders such as: • Land owners, farmers and will implement these approaches land managers that manage through a range of delivery plans, • The Environment Agency, who will and operate land for projects and actions. use the plan to guide decisions agriculture, conservation on investment in further plans, The relationship between the CFMP, and amenity purposes; projects or actions; delivery plans, strategies, projects • The public and businesses to and actions is shown in figure 1. • Local authorities who can use the enhance their understanding plan to inform spatial planning of flood risk and how it will activities and emergency be managed. planning; Figure 1: The relationship between CFMPs, delivery plans, projects and actions Policy planning • CFMPs and Shoreline Management Plans. • Action plans define requirement for delivery plans, projects and actions. Policy delivery plans (see note) Projects and actions • Influence spatial planning to reduce risk • Make sure our spending delivers the best and restore floodplains. possible outcomes. • Prepare for and manage floods • Focus on risk based targets, for example (including local Flood Warning plans). numbers of households at risk. • Managing assets. • Water level management plans. • Land management and habitat creation. Note: Some plans may not be led by us – we may • Surface water management plans. identify the need and encourage their development. Environment Agency River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan 3 Catchment overview The River Trent CFMP covers the conurbation, Stoke-on-Trent, The CFMP area also has national entire River Trent Catchment from its Derby, Leicester and Nottingham. and international significance for source above Stoke-on-Trent down nature conservation with rivers and The physical characteristics of to Keadby Bridge. Beyond this the other habitats of high ecological the catchment vary significantly, River Trent flows into the Humber importance. Designations in the including both low lying ground, Estuary. The CFMP area includes catchment include 316 Sites of such as the broad flat flood plains all of the River Trent’s tributaries, Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), of the Tame and Trent, and steep covering an area of 10,452km2. 17 of which fall within the 1% dramatic landscape, such as that Major tributaries join the Trent from flood outline, including entire in the Peak District National Park three main areas: watercourses such as the River in the northwest of the CFMP area. Blythe and the River Eye SSSIs and We also find that the geology, • The Peak District extensive wetland areas, such as soil types and land use changes (Dove, Derwent and Erewash). the River Idle Washlands, and the considerably throughout the Humberhead Peatlands SSSIs. Two • Central Midlands catchment. Impervious upland Special Protection Areas (SPA), 15 (Sow, Tame and Soar). areas with thin, less productive Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), soils change into flatter, lowland • Lower catchment and one Ramsar site (Cop Mere mudstones with loamy soils. (Torne and Idle). – part of the Midlands Meres & Here agriculture is an important Mosses) also fall within the current Although 70% of the land use industry. As a result, the response 1% flood outline. The landscape in within the River Trent CFMP area is to rainfall and mechanisms the catchment is also designated agricultural, it is home to around of flooding vary immensely. for its importance. There are two six million people, containing It is important to understand statutory landscape designations in much of the metropolitan area of this variation when assessing the CFMP area, Cannock Chase Area Birmingham, which is the second flood risk, and in determining of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and largest city in the UK. The other appropriate means of managing the Peak District National Park of main urban areas of the catchment the flood risk. which less than 2.5% fall within the include the West Midlands current 1% flood outline. River Churnet, near Leek 4 Environment Agency River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan Map 1: Location and extent of River Trent CFMP Area Environment Agency River Trent Catchment Flood Management Plan 5 Current and future flood risk Overview of the current were flooded in Girton alone. The distribution of flood risk from a 1% annual probability river flood, flood risk The most severe tidal flooding is illustrated in Map 2. Table 1 took place in October/November Flood risk has two components: summarises where there is flood 1954 as a result of a series of tidal the chance (probability) of a risk to more than 100 properties. surges, breaching defences on the particular flood and the impact (or We recognise that there is also a tidal River Trent. consequence) that the flood would potential risk from surface water have if it happened. The probability What is at risk? and groundwater flooding. Surface of a flood relates to the likelihood of water flooding is most associated a flood of that size occurring within Using a broadscale hydraulic with the steeper upland areas a one year period, it is expressed model we estimate that there are such as at Buxton, Stoke-on-Trent as a percentage.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Advisory Visit Rivers Meden and Maun, Thoresby Estate
    Advisory Visit Rivers Meden and Maun, Thoresby Estate, Nottinghamshire January 2018 1.0 Introduction This report is the output of a site visit undertaken by Tim Jacklin of the Wild Trout Trust to the Rivers Meden and Maun on the Thoresby Estate, Nottinghamshire on 4th January, 2018. Comments in this report are based on observations on the day of the site visit and discussions with Andrew Dobson (River Warden, Thoresby Estate) and Ryan Taylor (Environment Agency). Normal convention is applied throughout the report with respect to bank identification, i.e. the banks are designated left hand bank (LHB) or right hand bank (RHB) whilst looking downstream. 2.0 Catchment / Fishery Overview The River Meden rises to the north of Mansfield and flows east-north- eastwards through a largely rural catchment. The River Maun rises in the conurbation of Mansfield and flows north-eastwards past Ollerton to join the River Meden at Conjure Alders (SK6589872033). The rivers then separate again and re-join approximately 6km downstream near West Drayton (SK7027875118) to form the River Idle (a Trent tributary with its confluence at West Stockwith SK7896894718). Both rivers flow over a geology comprising sandstone with underlying coal measures and there is a history of extensive deep coal mining in the area. Table 1 gives a summary of data collected by the Environment Agency to assess the quality of the rivers for the Water Framework Directive. Both rivers appear to have a similar ecological quality and closer inspection of the categories which make up this assessment reveal that fish and invertebrates were both ‘high’ and ‘good’ for the Meden and Maun respectively in 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Nottinghamshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2016 - 2021
    Nottinghamshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2016 - 2021 Final June 2016 Nottinghamshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Review Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Rev Date Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by 1 August 2013 Outline Local Flood Risk Hannah Andy Wallace, Gary Wood, Group Management Strategy for O’Callaghan, Flood Risk Manager Highways Consultation Flood Risk Manager Planning, Access Management and Officer (Project Commissioning Manager) (Project Executive) 2 December Local Flood Risk Management Amy Ruocco, Sarah Kelly, Carl Pelling 2014 Strategy – Draft for Client Water and Principal Associate Comment Flood Risk Consultant Consultant (URS) (URS) (URS) 3 June 2015 Local Flood Risk Management Amy Ruocco, Sarah Kelly, Carl Pelling Strategy – Second Draft for Water and Principal Associate Client Comment Flood Risk Consultant Consultant AECOM AECOM AECOM (formerly URS) (Formerly URS) (Formerly URS) 4 July 2015 Local Flood Risk Management Amy Ruocco, Sarah Kelly, Carl Pelling Strategy – Final Draft for Water and Principal Associate Consultation Flood Risk Consultant Consultant AECOM AECOM AECOM 5 October Local Flood Risk Management Derek Hair Andy Wallace Transport and 2015 Strategy – Final Draft for Highways Principal Project Flood Risk Consultation Committee Engineer Manager AECOM 6 December Local Flood Risk Management Derek Hair Clive Wood Transport and 2015 Strategy – Final Draft for Highways Principal Project Flood Risk Consultation Committee Engineer Manager 7 June 2016 Local Flood Risk Management Derek
    [Show full text]
  • RED LION Leek, Staffordshire
    three circular walks from the RED LION Leek, Staffordshire Brough Park and Brindley’s Mill (2 miles) Never far from the town centre, but with parkland and rural interludes. The Churnet Valley (5½ miles) Town and country walking with a long stretch alongside a canal feeder in the quiet Churnet valley. Text, mapping and photography © David Dunford 2018. All rights reserved. www.walksfromthedoor.co.uk THE RED LION OPENING HOURS Market Square, Leek, Staffordshire ST13 5HH Tittesworth Reservoir (7¾ miles) tel 01538 388652 Mon to Sat 9.30am–late Lakeside walking and superb views. web www.redlionleek.co.uk Sun Midday–9.30pm Brough Park and Brindley’s Mill field. Follow the path along the top of two fields. 11 After a kissing 3 Turn left and then right (Ball Haye Rd) at the bottom of the hill. 4 At gate, climb three steps into a fenced section and then pass through a a T-junction opposite the entrance to the Leisure Centre, turn right. 2 miles: Easy hand-gate on your right. 12 The path descends between two gates 5 Follow the road for 700 yards until you pass a playing field on your Allow 1–1½ hours. Some muddy stretches after rain and one steep and down a flight of steps, then descends further before swinging left left. 6 Turn left into Tittesworth Avenue and follow it round to the descent, with uneven steps. behind a workshop to a final short flight of steps down to the road. right. 7 Turn left into Nightingale Gardens. 8 By a litter bin, turn right 1 From the front door of the Red Lion, turn left and walk past the 13 Turn left and follow the riverside road to the main road (the last into a driveway and follow it behind a school and downhill to Wardle market cross.
    [Show full text]
  • Sow and Penk Internal Drainage Board (IDB) BAP Area Monitoring
    Sow and Penk Internal Drainage Board (IDB) BAP area monitoring River Sow floodplain ©Matt Jones Baseline monitoring February 2016 Introduction The IDB has a direct capacity to exercise control over a number of watercourses within the Sow and Penk area (see Map 1), it is therefore of principal importance to suitably monitor the effect of work carried out on IDB maintained watercourses to assess its impact on the biodiversity of the wider riparian environment. To effectively monitor ecological systems in order to develop and deliver beneficial policies and practices, baseline data must be gathered to provide a benchmark to measure fluctuations in habitats or species populations over time (OECD, 2001), particularly in relation to appropriate habitat management and reducing biodiversity loss. Staffordshire Wildlife Trust has been commissioned to monitor the extent of Water vole Arvicola amphibious and Flowering-rush Butomus umbellatus to help the IDB fulfil its duty conserve biodiversity. Current baseline data A desktop study was carried out using Staffordshire Ecological Records (SER) ecological records database to output all existing records of Flowering-rush B. umbellatus and European Water Vole A. amphibious within the Sow and Penk IDB Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) area. The current available data originates from a number of sources and surveys, notably records from structured surveys and monitoring including, but not limited to Staffordshire Mammal Group surveys, structured surveys carried out by Staffordshire Wildlife Trust and surveys undertaken as part of the data collection for the Flora of Staffordshire (Hawksford, et al., 2011). This data will form a primary baseline from which data collected through future surveys can be compared to monitor populations of A.
    [Show full text]
  • ·Ct7ttlestonb .Btl.NDBED • • .PENKR.IDGE UNIQN Comprises the '21 P'lll"Ishes .Ood Townships Of
    ·Ct7TTLESTONB .Btl.NDBED • • .PENKR.IDGE UNIQN comprises the '21 p'lll"ishes .ood townships of ..:Actou-with-Bednall, 81-ewood, Bashbury3 Cannock, Cheslyn-Hay.. Churok­ Eaton, OoppenhaU, DuD.StQn, Essington, Featherstone, Hatherton, Hilto~ HQJltington, Kinv.aston, Lapley, Norton-Canes, Penkridge, Sar.edon, Shares­ hill, Stretton, and Great Wyrley. Its registm!Uu. ailltricl ~omprises also the ~xtra-paroohhll place i.lalk>d Teddesley Hay, and in 1841 contained 1-6.07 -i iwhabUants, of whom t:l228 were males and 7846 females, living in :3!42 hot.tse.$, besides which the;re were 131 uninhabited houses, aoo ten building, when the census was taken in that year. The Union W01·klwuse is an old building at BBEWOOD, but x~eeived. such additions between 1838 and 1842 as have rendered it capable of accommodating 200 inmates. It has • well-propo;rtiQned ooard-room, and very comfortable hospital wards. The Guardians meet on alternate Thursdays, at 11 o'clock. The manage­ ment of the Union is celebrated for its admirable blending of economy and liberality ; and in 1850, the Poor Law Inspector of the district informed the Guardians that out of 38 Unions under his inspection, Penkridge had the smallest amount of taxation per acre, and gave the largest average amount cl relief to individual paupers. The cost of relieving the poor was £3719 in 1846; £!363 in 18-18; and £3956 iu 1850. The Union embraces an 11rea of 94 square miles, and the gross annual value .of its rateable property is about £110,000, so that its poor rates have averaged less than 9d.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Local Boundary Commission for England Further Electoral Review of Staffordshire Stage 1 Consultation
    Submission to the Local Boundary Commission for England Further Electoral Review of Staffordshire Stage 1 Consultation Proposals for a new pattern of divisions Produced by Peter McKenzie, Richard Cressey and Mark Sproston Contents 1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................1 2 Approach to Developing Proposals.........................................................................1 3 Summary of Proposals .............................................................................................2 4 Cannock Chase District Council Area .....................................................................4 5 East Staffordshire Borough Council area ...............................................................9 6 Lichfield District Council Area ...............................................................................14 7 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council Area ....................................................18 8 South Staffordshire District Council Area.............................................................25 9 Stafford Borough Council Area..............................................................................31 10 Staffordshire Moorlands District Council Area.....................................................38 11 Tamworth Borough Council Area...........................................................................41 12 Conclusions.............................................................................................................45
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Recommendations on the Future Electoral Arrangements for Newark & Sherwood in Nottinghamshire
    Draft recommendations on the future electoral arrangements for Newark & Sherwood in Nottinghamshire Further electoral review December 2005 Translations and other formats For information on obtaining this publication in another language or in a large-print or Braille version please contact The Boundary Committee for England: Tel: 020 7271 0500 Email: [email protected] The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by The Electoral Commission with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Licence Number: GD 03114G 2 Contents Page What is The Boundary Committee for England? 5 Executive summary 7 1 Introduction 15 2 Current electoral arrangements 19 3 Submissions received 23 4 Analysis and draft recommendations 25 Electorate figures 26 Council size 26 Electoral equality 27 General analysis 28 Warding arrangements 28 a Clipstone, Edwinstowe and Ollerton wards 29 b Bilsthorpe, Blidworth, Farnsfield and Rainworth wards 30 c Boughton, Caunton and Sutton-on-Trent wards 32 d Collingham & Meering, Muskham and Winthorpe wards 32 e Newark-on-Trent (five wards) 33 f Southwell town (three wards) 35 g Balderton North, Balderton West and Farndon wards 36 h Lowdham and Trent wards 38 Conclusions 39 Parish electoral arrangements 39 5 What happens next? 43 6 Mapping 45 Appendices A Glossary and abbreviations 47 B Code of practice on written consultation 51 3 4 What is The Boundary Committee for England? The Boundary Committee for England is a committee of The Electoral Commission, an independent body set up by Parliament under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • The Protection of Public Rights of Navigation
    The Protection of Public Rights of Navigation River Access For All Ltd January 2015 Contents Introduction Page 2 The Statutes Page 4 The Commissions Page 7 Rivers Mentioned in the Commissions Page 2 7 Other Rivers mentioned in other Sources Page 2 8 Acts of Parliament & other statutory instruments Stating or Implying Pre-existing Navigation Rights Page 30 Tolls as an indication of rights Page 3 3 Observations Page 3 5 Conclusion Page 36 Important Note This document contains many links to source material and is intended to be used in .pdf format. If you have a version that does not benefit from these links, a .pdf version can be obtained at http://www.riveraccessforall.co.uk/docs/totally_compelling_evidence.pdf 1 Introduction Opponents of recognition of public rights of navigation in all rivers claim that there were historic limitations on navigation. In particular, they claim that navigation was limited to the tidal sections of rivers, with the exception of a limited and defined listing of the “Great Rivers” (e.g. Thames, Severn and Trent). We suggest, however, “Great Rivers” does not have a precise meaning and effectively means any river capable of navigation; we also believe that there is no historical evidence supporting a distinction between tidal and non-tidal waters. The evidence below shows that, while some of the statutes and Commissions do refer to “Great Rivers”, they related to a diverse number of rivers of varying scale (e.g. the commission of 1415, June 10 ) specifically protected navigation on the River Brant in Lincolnshire under statutes that referred to “Great Rivers”.
    [Show full text]
  • Doxey Marshes Stafford
    RESERVES WALK STAFFS WT Doxey Marshes Stafford oxey Marshes is a nationally natural bends back in the artificially Continue along the path as it important reserve for hundreds straightened River Sow, lowering the heads past the river. The large of birds. Stretching from the M6 height of some of the areas and willow trees are some of the Dalmost right into the centre of Stafford, creating the islands you can see in front 4oldest on the reserve. They have been the Site of Special Scientific Interest of you. The result has been a more pollarded, a management technique follows the floodplain of the River Sow diverse habitat and also areas which which stops them becoming too large, and is a mix of wet grassland, reedbed can store extra floodwater to help whilst providing useful timber in the and rush pasture creating a haven for protect Stafford from flooding. past. These old willows with their old many different species of bird. branches, holes and deadwood provide Carry on along the path and great roosts for bats. then drop down a short slope, From the car park at the end of turning right onto Warren’s Follow the path as it heads Wootton Drive near the M6 2Lane. Cary on down this track before along the river until you reach a junction follow the path around stopping off at the viewing platform on kissing gate. Go through this 1the back of the houses away from the your left. This is Boundary Flash, and gate5 to the main bird hide. This hide motorway.
    [Show full text]
  • 68. Needwood & South Derbyshire Claylands
    National Character 68. Needwood & South Derbyshire Claylands Area profile: Supporting documents www.naturalengland.org.uk 1 National Character 68. Needwood & South Derbyshire Claylands Area profile: Supporting documents Introduction National Character Areas map As part of Natural England’s responsibilities as set out in the Natural Environment White Paper,1 Biodiversity 20202 and the European Landscape Convention,3 we are revising profiles for England’s 159 National Character Areas North (NCAs). These are areas that share similar landscape characteristics, and which East follow natural lines in the landscape rather than administrative boundaries, making them a good decision-making framework for the natural environment. Yorkshire & The North Humber NCA profiles are guidance documents which can help communities to inform West their decision-making about the places that they live in and care for. The information they contain will support the planning of conservation initiatives at a East landscape scale, inform the delivery of Nature Improvement Areas and encourage Midlands broader partnership working through Local Nature Partnerships. The profiles will West also help to inform choices about how land is managed and can change. Midlands East of Each profile includes a description of the natural and cultural features England that shape our landscapes, how the landscape has changed over time, the current key drivers for ongoing change, and a broad analysis of each London area’s characteristics and ecosystem services. Statements of Environmental South East Opportunity (SEOs) are suggested, which draw on this integrated information. South West The SEOs offer guidance on the critical issues, which could help to achieve sustainable growth and a more secure environmental future.
    [Show full text]
  • Cycle, Walking and Wheelchair Path
    Trent Vale Trail Cycle, walking and wheelchair path Phase 2 “Connecting Collingham with Besthorpe, Girton, Spalford, South & North Clifton and the Fledborough Viaduct” Version DRAFT 1.0 12 July 2017 Produced by Jacob Florijn Alan Hudson Sustrans – Newark Group 64 Hine Avenue, Newark NG24 2LH M: 07722 656582 H: 01636 689181 Email: [email protected] Contents 1. Executive summary ........................................................................................................... 4 2. Project team and structure ................................................................................................ 7 2.1. Constitution .............................................................................................................. 7 2.2. “Friends of the TVT” resources .................................................................................... 7 3. Objective of the initiative .................................................................................................. 8 3.1. History of the southern Trent Vale area ....................................................................... 8 3.2. Trent Vale Landscape Partnership ............................................................................... 8 3.3. “Bigger and Better” RSPB initiative .............................................................................. 8 3.4. Proposal for multi-user Trent Vale Trail ........................................................................ 9 3.5. Key links & places of interest .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • River Basin Management Plan Humber River Basin District Annex C
    River Basin Management Plan Humber River Basin District Annex C: Actions to deliver objectives Contents C.1 Introduction 2 C. 2 Actions we can all take 8 C.3 All sectors 10 C.4 Agriculture and rural land management 16 C.5 Angling and conservation 39 C.6 Central government 50 C.7 Environment Agency 60 C.8 Industry, manufacturing and other business 83 C.9 Local and regional government 83 C.10 Mining and quarrying 98 C.11 Navigation 103 C.12 Urban and transport 110 C.13 Water industry 116 C.1 Introduction This annex sets out tables of the actions (the programmes of measures) that are proposed for each sector. Actions are the on the ground activities that will implemented to manage the pressures on the water environment and achieve the objectives of this plan. Further information relating to these actions and how they have been developed is given in: • Annex B Objectives for waters in the Humber River Basin District This gives information on the current status and environmental objectives that have been set and when it is planned to achieve these • Annex D Protected area objectives (including programmes for Natura 2000) This gives details of the location of protected areas, the monitoring networks for these, the environmental objectives and additional information on programmes of work for Natura 2000 sites. • Annex E Actions appraisal This gives information about how we have set the water body objectives for this plan and how we have selected the actions • Annex F Mechanisms for action This sets out the mechanisms - that is, the policy, legal, financial and voluntary arrangements - that allow actions to be put in place The actions are set out in tables for each sector.
    [Show full text]