Idle Catchment Partnership Action Plan

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Idle Catchment Partnership Action Plan Working together for a better water environment Our Vision for the Catchment Our Shared Vision for The Idle Catchment To conserve and enhance the Rivers Idle, Ryton, Poulter, Meden, Maun, their tributaries and surrounding land, to create a healthy and wildlife- rich water environment for the benefit of both people and biodiversity. Foreword ‘Fed by the Rivers Ryton, Poulter, Meden, Maun and Rainworth Water, the River Idle flows in the shape of an inverted question mark north through Retford, under the Chesterfield Canal, nudging the old port of Bawtry, negotiating the hill at Gringley and encircling Everton, Gringley and Misterton Carrs before discharging into the Trent at West Stockwith. With the entire catchment covering 340 square miles and a population of over 250,000 dependent on the water courses, it is clear that there are considerable pressures on the water resource. The reputation of the River Idle is bound up in its name – it is Idle both by name and nature, flowing gently over its last five mile section so flat there is a fall of less than 1:1,000. Prior to reaching its heavily engineered pumped outfall the river and its tributaries navigate a path from and through many urban areas, historic ducal houses and important wetland areas, as well as the last remaining area of the ancient Sherwood Forest, providing a natural boundary to several traditional village settlements and draining swathes of productive agricultural land. It is important to protect and enhance the health of the rivers, including their surrounding habitats, biodiversity, water quality, productive capacity and the welfare of those who live within its embrace. Predictable and moody as the rivers are, people are not always inclined to treat them with respect – intensive land management and pollution have taken their toll on the catchment’s well being, although the decline in ecological status and water quality in relatively recent times is being addressed and in some ways effectively reversed. The Idle Catchment Action Plan has been established to achieve this, and to raise the awareness of the rivers and their environment amongst those who live and work in the catchment and whose lives are affected by their closeness to them. It is designed to make the most of the role of the local communities to deliver environmental, agricultural and social improvements through collaboration, education and ground work. There is much more to do, so please read on.....’ Tim Farr, Chair of the Regional Flood and Coastal Commitee River Idle Sub-Catchment Action Plan 2 Background Image: P David Background to the Idle Catchment The Idle and Torne catchment covers a wide geographic area, spanning multiple districts, 4 Counties and 2 regions. Due to the range of complex issues and competing priorities in the area, it seemed appropriate to split the catchment into two sub-catchments based on the two rivers. A separate steering group has been set up for the Torne, hosted by Yorkshire Wildlife Trust. The sub-catchment includes the following rivers and their tributaries; Meden, Maun, Poulter, Rainworth Water, Vicar Water, Ryton and of course the River Idle itself. These drain over 879km2 (1) of the surrounding land. Much of this area is rural, although it does cover some major urban areas including Mansfield (pop c.100,000), Worksop (pop. c.40,000), Sutton in Ashfield (pop. c.42,000) and Retford (pop. c.21,000). The large area and the mix of urban and rural land uses create a diverse range of pressures on the water catchment, including: • Urban point source pollution from areas of industry and housing, misconnections etc • Phosphate and nitrate inputs from waste water treatment works Image: Sean Browne • Rural point source and diffuse pollution • Heavily modified channels • Low flows in some watercourses • Flooding risk from many watercourses • Over-abstracted aquifers • Groundwater pollution • Widespread loss of riparian marginal habitats • Degraded riverine fauna • Presence of invasive non-native species Point Source/Diffuse Pollution Point source pollution is where the contaminants are coming from a single point – such as a waste treatment works (WTW), or from a factory. Diffuse pollution is from a much wider source, such as an area of farmland or from a housing estate. 3 What is the Catchment Based Approach? Image: Thornypup A shift in thinking led the UK government to realise that looking at smaller water catchment areas rather than large river basins was a positive step in achieving improvements to water bodies and their associated environment, and towards achieving the targets of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). This led to the introduction of the ‘catchment based approach’ by DEFRA (Department for Environment Farming and Rural Affairs) to enable local stakeholder groups to promote the protection and improvement of the water environment. On World Water Day (22 March 2011), Richard Benyon, Minister for Natural Environment and Fisheries, announced that to bring about genuine improvements to the water environment we should: ‘Provide a clear understanding of the issues in the catchment, involve local communities in decision- making by sharing evidence, listening to their ideas, working out priorities for action and seeking to deliver integrated actions that address local issues in a cost effective way and protect local resources.’( 2) The objectives for the Catchment Based Approach are(3): 1. To deliver positive and sustained outcomes for the water environment by promoting a better understanding of the environment at a local level; and 2. To encourage local collaboration and more transparent decision-making when planning and delivering activities in order to improve the water environment. What is the Water Framework Directive? The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is a piece of EU legislation which was adopted in 2000. Its main purpose is to protect inland, coastal and groundwater’s and to ensure that all waterways reach either good ecological status, or where this is not possible, good ecological potential, by 2027. The status of the water is assessed using the following criteria • Biological quality (fish, invertebrates and aquatic flora) • Hydromorphological structure (river bank and bed structure, continuity) • Physio-chemical quality (dissolved oxygen, temperature, nutrients) • Chemical quality (phosphates and other pollutant levels) If a water body is found to fail on just one aspect of this, then it will fail to meet the required standards. A large part of the Catchment Based Approach is the promotion of ownership of the water on a local level, with communities and landowners being involved in decision making and project leadership. River Idle Sub-Catchment Action Plan 4 What are the problems facing the Sub-Catchment? Under the WFD, problems that are identified as causing the failures as described are called “Reasons for River Trent Failure”. The principal Reasons for Failure (RFF) A631 currently facing the Idle sub-catchment are M18 as follows: A1(M) River Idle Oldcotes Dyke 1. Pollution from waste water, particularly discharges from sewage treatment works and mines. A57 River Ryton Chesterfield Worksop Retford 2. Pollution from rural areas, Canal A1 predominantly, mixed agricultural run- M1 off. Millwood Brook 3. Physical modification of the river, mainly A616 Great Lake River Poulter historically for land drainage. A614 In addition, the catchment has serious River Meden Ollerton problems to resolve with regard to Sookholme Brook groundwater over-abstraction and pollution, River Maun urban run-off, barriers to eel, coarse fish and salmonid passage, and tensions around Vicar Water flood defences and the protection of Mansfield Rainworth Water N farmland. Cauldwell Brook A617 Main Roads Rivers Kirkby in Ashfield Canals Urban Area Catchment Boundary Phosphates Phosphates are a group of inorganic compounds which contain phosphorus. They are found within fertilisers and detergents and contribute greatly to pollution levels in water. They quickly contribute to increased nutrient levels, which in turn cause algal blooms in rivers and lakes which drastically reduces the amount of dissolved water, and therefore prevents other aquatic life from surviving. 5 The Action Plan Image: Rob Pettifer The aim of this document is to look at 5 different areas, which were identified through stakeholder engagement, where we would like to make a positive difference to the water environment. 1. Farming 2. Nature 3. Community 4. Industrial and Urban 5. Water Management This plan should be read in conjunction with the catchment priorities map which details priorities identified during two stakeholder workshops held in December 2013, and from follow up consultation. The map is a working document which will be updated as and when new projects are identified and current projects are Image: Jeff Smith River Idle Sub-Catchment Action Plan 6 Farming In recent years, many farmers have made Livestock Drinking Bays serious efforts to reduce pollution into The aim of a livestock drinking bay is to allow livestock to watercourses from their farms, not least drink from a watercourse, while preventing them from because it makes good business sense not to standing in the water. They consist of an access ramp excavated into the bank with a three sided perimeter waste valuable resources such as fertilisers. post and rail fence. The size of the drinking bay depends There are however, several water quality issues on the type, size and number of livestock involved. which can be associated with agriculture and To construct an access ramp, soil should be excavated to many of these can be lessened through simple a depth of not less than 150 mm or down to a naturally measures. occurring hard surface, the depth of which will vary according to the type of ground. The excavated soil There are 511 farms within the sub-catchment boundary, should be spread and profiled in the immediate area. all of which have the potential to impact on the water environment.
Recommended publications
  • Nottinghamshire's Sustainable Community Strategy

    Nottinghamshire's Sustainable Community Strategy

    Nottinghamshire’s Sustainable Community Strategy the nottinghamshire partnership all together better 2010-2020 Contents 1 Foreword 5 2 Introduction 7 3 Nottinghamshire - our vision for 2020 9 4 How we put this strategy together What is this document based on? 11 How this document links with other important documents 11 Our evidence base 12 5 Nottinghamshire - the timeline 13 6 Nottinghamshire today 15 7 Key background issues 17 8 Nottinghamshire’s economy - recession and recovery 19 9 Key strategic challenges 21 10 Our priorities for the future A greener Nottinghamshire 23 A place where Nottinghamshire’s children achieve their full potential 27 A safer Nottinghamshire 33 Health and well-being for all 37 A more prosperous Nottinghamshire 43 Making Nottinghamshire’s communities stronger 47 11 Borough/District community strategies 51 12 Next steps and contacts 57 Nottinghamshire’s Sustainable Community Strategy 2010-2020 l p.3 Appendices I The Nottinghamshire Partnership 59 II Underpinning principles 61 III Our evidence base 63 IV Consultation 65 V Nottinghamshire - the timeline 67 VI Borough/District chapters Ashfield 69 Bassetlaw 74 Broxtowe 79 Gedling 83 Mansfield 87 Newark and Sherwood 92 Rushcliffe 94 VII Case studies 99 VIII Other relevant strategies and action plans 105 IX Performance management - how will we know that we have achieved our targets? 107 X List of acronyms 109 XI Glossary of terms 111 XII Equality impact assessment 117 p.4 l Nottinghamshire’s Sustainable Community Strategy 2010-2020 1 l Foreword This document, the second community strategy for Nottinghamshire, outlines the key priorities for the county over the next ten years.
  • Advisory Visit Rivers Meden and Maun, Thoresby Estate

    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.
  • Nottinghamshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2016 - 2021

    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
  • Nottinghamshire County Council Sherwood Living Legend Geo-Environmental Desk Study Report

    Nottinghamshire County Council Sherwood Living Legend Geo-Environmental Desk Study Report

    Nottinghamshire County Council Sherwood Living Legend Geo-environmental Desk Study Report This report is prepared by Atkins Limited for the sole and exclusive use of Nottinghamshire County Council in response to their particular instructions. No liability is accepted for any costs claims or losses arising from the use of this report or any part thereof for any purpose other than that for which it was specifically prepared or by any party other than Nottingham County Council. Nottinghamshire County Council Sherwood Forest Living Legend Geo-environmental Desk Study Report Nottinghamshire County Council Sherwood Living Legend Desk Study Report JOB NUMBER: 5048377 DOCUMENT REF: Sherwood Living Legend Desk Study v2.doc - Draft for Client approval TJC JPB MP NAW Dec-06 1 Final TJC JPB MP NAW Jan-06 Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date Revision Purpose Description Nottinghamshire County Council Sherwood Living Legend Geo-environmental Desk Study Report CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 General 1-1 1.2 Information Reviewed 1-1 1.3 Scope of Works 1-2 2. SITE AREA 2-1 2.1 Site Location 2-1 2.2 Site Description 2-1 2.3 Adjacent Areas 2-1 2.4 Historical Development 2-2 2.5 Archaeology 2-4 2.6 National Monument Records 2-4 3. PUBLISHED GEOLOGICAL INFORMATION 3-1 3.1 Solid and Drift Geology 3-1 3.2 BGS Borehole Logs 3-2 3.3 Hydrology 3-2 3.4 Hydrogeology 3-2 3.5 Mining 3-3 3.6 Radon 3-4 3.7 Additional Geo-environmental Information. 3-4 4.
  • Draft Recommendations on the Future Electoral Arrangements for Newark & Sherwood in Nottinghamshire

    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.
  • Notification of Seismic Surveys – INEOS Upstream Ltd Derbyshire County Council

    Notification of Seismic Surveys – INEOS Upstream Ltd Derbyshire County Council

    Notification of Seismic Surveys – INEOS Upstream Ltd Derbyshire County Council May 2017 Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Justification for Permitted Development 6 3. Environment of the Survey Area 11 4. Survey Methodology 20 5. Summary and Requirements for Proposed Seismic Survey 38 Appendix 1: List of Designations and Sensitivities Appendix 2: Seismic Source Safe Operating Distances and PPV Monitoring Appendix 3: Preliminary Environmental Method Statement Contact Matthew Sheppard [email protected] May 2017 1. Introduction 1.1 Summary 1.1 This report is submitted to Derbyshire County Council to outline INEOS Upstream Ltd.’s (hereafter INEOS) proposed geophysical (seismic) survey operations in the area shown in Map 1. In total the survey area covers 250.7 km2 (approximately 25,000 ha). Derbyshire County Council is the Mineral Planning Authority (MPA) for 90.8 km2 of the whole survey area. 1.2 This report should be read with the accompanying document “INEOS Shale Seismic Surveying Methodology: East Midlands Seismic Survey 2017” – hereafter termed the Method Statement, which outlines the survey methods to be used and embedded environmental operative measures in place. Environmental operative measures for site specific environmental considerations are outlined in Section 4.6 and Appendices 1-3 of this report. The 3D seismic survey that INEOS proposed is described in Section 4.2 of this report. Map 1: Boundary and Location of Seismic Survey Area 1.3 The proposed survey area is located within INEOS’s Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence areas (PEDLs) 299, 300, 304, 307, 308 and 309 which were awarded to INEOS in July 2016.
  • Idle Catchment Partnership Newsletter June 2019

    Idle Catchment Partnership Newsletter June 2019

    Catchment Partnership Newsletter June 2019 Firstly, a very big thank you to everyone who responded so promptly and enthusiastically to our request for confirmation of your continued support for Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust to continue as Catchment Hosts for 2019/20. We have submitted our application and are confident that we will soon have our agreement confirmed. It is fantastic to have such a great response reflecting the value of the River Idle Catchment Partnership to the organisations and individuals involved. Run-off; spotting the A spotlight on……Soil signs and reporting Did you know that soil holds 3 times as much carbon as the atmosphere, reduces the risk of the problem... flooding by absorbing water, is a wildlife habitat, A sunny May has given way to a wet and delivers 95% of global food supplies1? Keeping June providing plenty of soils on the land where they belong and not in our opportunity to get out and about in river systems is a key issue for the catchment your local patch to see if you can partnership and good soil health can be vital in spot signs of run off which could achieving this. We are fortunate to have number of impact our watercourses where farming advisors working in our region to sediment and other pollutants are champion good soil health which depends on a involved. If you are particularly range of chemical, physical and biological factors. concerned, we would encourage A recent EA report outlines current and future you to take photos and report any pressures on soil health and highlights that the incidents to the EA’s hotline on government's 25 Year Environment Plan states that 0800 80 70 60.
  • The Protection of Public Rights of Navigation

    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”.
  • Nottinghamshire. 59

    Nottinghamshire. 59

    DIRECTORY.) NOTTINGHAMSHIRE. EDWINSTOWE • 59 • of the Bishop of Manchester, and held since 1884 by the Sexton, George Markham. Rev. William John Sparrow H.A. of University College, Durham, who resides at Gamston. Lieut.-Col. Henry Letters through Retford, which is the nearest telegraph office, arrive at 8 a.m.; the nearest money order office is Denison R.E., J".P. of Eaton Hall, is lord of the manor and principal landowner. The soil is clayey and sandy loam ; London road, Retford. Wall Letter Box cleared at 5.3() subsoil, marl and limestone. The land is chiefly arable, p.m. on week days only principally growing wheat and barley. The area is 1,519 Public Elementary School, built by the late H. Bridgeman­ acres of land and 7 of water ; assessable value, £2,961 ; the Simpson esq. for 60 children; average attendance, 50; population in 1901 was 144. Mrs. Whitesmith. mistress Denison Lieut.-Col. Henry R.E., ;r.P. Andersen Charles, farmer Spooner William, farmer Eaton hall Booth John, farmer • Tinker Charles, farmer, Eaton grange COMMERCIAL. Cole William, farmer Wheeldon Robert, farmer Allen Henry 'Villiam, cowkeeper Curtis Edwin & John, fanners EDINGLEY is a pleasant village and parish, near the chapel, erected in 1838, was re-seated and a new porch river Greet, on the road between Southwell and Mans- added in 1898, and affords sittings for 80 persons. The field, with a station called Kirklington and Edingley on charities amount to £7 8s. yearly. The Manor House is. the Mansfield and Newark line of the Midland railway, one an old building, now occupied as a farmhouse.
  • A Topographic Earthwork Survey of Thynghowe. Hanger Hill, Nottinghamshire

    A Topographic Earthwork Survey of Thynghowe. Hanger Hill, Nottinghamshire

    A topographic earthwork survey of Thynghowe. Hanger Hill, Nottinghamshire. NCA-016 Andy Gaunt Nottinghamshire Community Archaeology Nottinghamshire County Council Contributors The survey was undertaken by Andy Gaunt, Emily Gillott and Lorraine Horsley of Nottinghamshire County Council Community Archaeology along with members of the Friends of Thynghowe group. The surveyors: Stuart Reddish, Lynda Mallett, Steve Horne and Paul Walsh The Friends of Thynghowe group: http://www.thynghowe.org.uk/ Acknowledgements • Andy Norman and the Forestry Commission for access to the site. • Nottinghamshire County Council Local Improvement Scheme for funding the project • The Friends of Thynghowe group Photograph front cover: Nottinghamshire Community Archaeologists surveying the top of Thynghowe reproduced with permission from Lynda Mallett ©. From http://www.flickr.com/photos/lyndamallett/ (at time of report). Archive Location Nottinghamshire Historic Environment Record, Nottinghamshire County Council, Trent Bridge House, Fox Road, West Bridgford, Nottinghamshire, NG29BJ. Contact Details Nottinghamshire Community Archaeology, Nottinghamshire County Council, Trent Bridge House, Fox Road, West Bridgford, Nottinghamshire, NG29BJ. [email protected] 2 Contents Page 1. Introduction 4 2. Site location, geology and topography 5 3. Historical background 5 4. Aims and purposes of the evaluation 6 5. Methodology 7 5.1. Topographic survey methodology 7 5.1.1. Equipment 7 5.1.2. Control of survey 8 5.1.3. Topographic survey methodology 8 5.1.4. Objective survey 8 5.1.5. Subjective Survey 9 5.1.6. Data preparation and analysis 9 5.2. Level 1 walkover survey methodology 10 6. Results 10 6.1. Topographic survey 10 6.1.1. Hachure Plan 10 6.1 2.
  • Nether Langwith Parish Council

    Nether Langwith Parish Council

    NETHER LANGWITH PARISH COUNCIL MINUTES of the Meeting of the Parish Council held at the Village Hall on Thursday 8 October 2015 Present : Cllr M Middleton in the chair, Cllr W Bryan, Cllr L Malkan, Cllr G Staniforth, Cllr A Stevenson, Cllr R Stockton and Cllr J Ogle. 1. Apologies Apologies were received from Cllr K Dukes. 2. Minutes of the meeting held on 10 September 2015. The minutes of the Parish Council Meeting held on the 10 September 2015 were taken as read and accepted as a true record. The Chair signed them accordingly. 3. Matters Arising From the Minutes The roof of the village hall is still leaking into the toilet. Cllr Bryan will take a look at it. The problem with the Stagecoach service 82 has now eased. 4. Correspondence 4.1 BDC - notice of disposal of several electricity sub-station sites by Eon, including the one in Fairfield Close – noted.. 5. County Councillor’s Report Cllr Ogle reported that although the Site Allocations Plan had not been adopted, there was a new 3 year plan. 6. District Councillor’s Report. In the absence of Cllr Dukes there was no report. 7. Accounts for Payment. The Clerk reported that the following payments had been made or were due for payment by direct bank transfer or by cheque since the last meeting. It was resolved to approve the payments. mins-oct-15.doc / 1 Payee Reason Amount £ R Busby Aug/Sep Wages 87.32 Eon Electricity 16.01 Eon Gas 8.44 Acer Grounds Maint. Grass Cutting 2015 1976.00 B Woodcock Sal Sept 2015 201.12 HMRC Tax Jul/Sep 15 174.80 Mrs D Wakeling Wages Sept 15 65.00 8.
  • River Basin Management Plan Humber River Basin District Annex C

    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.