1. INTRODUCTION The principles of integrated catchment management and sustainable agriculture are intimately linked. River catchments have been recognised as the most practical and logical units for the study, protection and enhancement of water resources. Water resource quantity and quality are closely linked to land use and land management. However, there are many technical, financial and institutional reasons why the interests of water resource planners and farmers have often been in conflict. Traditionally, the cause and effect of water contamination has been researched and investigated independently. Legislation, advisory services and demonstration activity have all focussed their efforts on individual activities or contaminants to seek a solution. The result is a plethora of legal or voluntary measures, information, advice and stewardship which are all presented separately to a farmer or land manager. Integration of the information is left to the capability and interest of individuals who have land management responsibilities. In many cases there is little incentive for compliance and certainly minimal proactive ‘policing’ by agencies. This is unfortunate, since rural communities, amenity provision and the maintenance of wildlife habitats are influenced and dependent on the land management and agriculture within a catchment.
This scoping study aimed to examine these issues in preparation of the development of a practical framework of options which may be applied to provide an integrated solution to resolve the conflicts between agriculture, environmental, biodiversity, rural and social needs. A rural, semi-upland catchment has been identified in the north east of England, which is impacted by a range of pollutants. The source of these pollutants is yet to be investigated but is thought to be largely from agriculture and forestry, with an undetermined contribution from roads, ditches and small communities. Though it is technically possible to treat potable water resources to the required high standard, it is preferable to tackle problems at source. This approach is a key feature under the Water Framework Directive, (2000/60/EC) which makes provisions to protect strategic water resources.
Agriculture and associated industries are important in the rural economy of the area. The farms have traditionally been run as small, mixed enterprises but in recent years falling incomes have precipitated a shift to arable production where possible. However, local characteristics, soil and climate are not generally suitable to such enterprises. Unless the land is carefully managed there is potential to cause pollution of watercourses and damage the local environment. In recent years there has been a general increase in contamination of watercourses feeding local water features by pesticides. However, there are also farm and land management issues relating to pathogens from farm animals and manure (including Cryptosporidium parvum) and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus).
Amongst the objectives of the recently adopted Water Framework Directive is the achievement of “good water status by defining and implementing the necessary measures within integrated programmes of measures”. Another core objective is the initiation of dialogue to promote “integration of protection and sustainable management of water into other Community policy areas such as energy, transport, agriculture, fisheries, regional policy and tourism”. These approaches will be key elements of the proposed work. However, such a programme will inevitably highlight potential conflicts between stakeholders, and this study will help to understand and
1 address them. Further, there are likely to be conflicts between land management strategies to achieve specific water quality targets. For example, the establishment of a fine tilth in autumn may be effective in sorbing key herbicides to soil particles, which in turn may reduce pesticide losses to surface waters. Balanced against this, the fine tilth may encourage soil erosion during rainfall of high intensity, which may in turn increase losses of sediment to which herbicides and phosphorus have sorbed.
This scoping study identifies and develops, in stages, a number of milestones which will lead to a proposal for an integrated catchment management strategy. The future work will aim to protect, conserve and enhance the land and water environment in a semi-upland area of Northumberland, the Whittle Dene catchment, while encouraging sustainable use of natural and agricultural resources to provide both economic and environmental good. The work will ensure that agriculture and other land-based industries operate in such a manner that is sympathetic to a healthy freshwater system, which can ultimately be utilised for potable water with the minimum of treatment. The study will provide a balanced framework in which the respective water quality parameters can be placed in relation to land use and socio-economic factors which influence their respective variables. In this way, the resultant studies will provide a unique and pertinent set of data which may benefit the implementation of the Water Framework Directive, and other distinct water quality drivers (eutrophication, pesticide and pathogen measures) to other catchments.
The objectives of the scoping study programme were:
Objectives 1. Collection of information on the impact of present land management practices on water quality in the Whittle Dene Catchment. To include regulatory agencies, statutory bodies and landowners (via ADAS farm advisors). 2. Review of present regulatory framework and possible impact of imminent regulatory developments. Assess likely impact of legislation on the suitability and practicality of the Western Reservoir to supply drinking water under current catchment management. 3. Characterisation of the catchment via published information (e.g. maps, technical literature/reports) and reservoir management (from the relevant water company). To include: ·Physical characteristics (e.g. geology, soil type(s), topography, climate) ·Chemical characteristics (e.g. soil and water nutrient status, pH, pesticide concentrations, seasonal cycles and effects) ·Hydrology (e.g. runoff pathways, soil water regimes, streams and field drainage) ·Land use area and relationship to surface water ·Socioeconomy and industry (e.g. fishing, tourism, water sports) 4. Collation of data and prioritisation of monitoring needs. Examine land use categories and highlight possible locations for instrumentation in conjunction with field technical team. If necessary, conduct basic soil or water sampling for selected parameters. 5. Review of catchment management approaches and future needs at an EU scale to maximise the probability of a ‘future proof’ project. 6. Identification of possible financial impacts of actions on landowners and the Water Company. A simple cost – benefit approach may include an assessment of the implementation of appropriate Agri-Environmental schemes such as wetland creation or restoration, buffer zones or reduced inputs. 7. Identification of likely causes of pollution of the reservoirs and selection of the most appropriate actions to mitigate the problems.
Similarly the scientific objectives of the proposal to be addressed by this report were:
1. Initiation of dialogue with landowners and other interested parties. 2. Evaluation of the relevant EU regulatory framework and existing policy instruments.
2 3. Assessment of the suitability of selected experimental catchments (e.g. the western reservoir) to a large-scale research programme. 4. Collation of information on catchment characteristics and water quality parameters. 5. Evaluation of environmental performance indicators and feasibility of targets. 6. The likely costs, benefits, timescales and practicality of any proposed actions. 7. The priority and focus of research activity and the extent and timing of advisory measures.
This report first outlines the background to the work and covers key areas of the Water Framework Directive, next the key features of the Whittle Dene Catchment and its environs are described, with sections on specific research topics, before a general discussion concerning knowledge transfer and knowledge management. Finally, a number of recommendations are made for a research programme to address the issues that have been discussed.
During the course of this project the immediate area around Whittle Dene suffered confirmed cases of Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD). In the light of this, no fieldwork was conducted. This was both in response to persistent risks of transmission of FMD across the catchment and from farm to farm, and in anticipation of farmer reaction to such work. Some objectives of the project (catchment characterisation, field drainage and hydrology) were therefore not fully conducted. However, effort was made to collect information wherever possible. Limited farm liaison work was conducted in September and October 2001 with co-operation from farms and landowners.
3 1.1 Whittle Dene and the Water Framework Directive The EC Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) has been developed to provide an integrated basis for managing the water environment. A key feature of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is that it seeks to provide a common framework to protect groundwater and all surface water within 1 mile of the shore within the European Community. Environmental objectives are also set for these waterbodies.
The WFD specifies how the particular environmental objectives must be set, and this includes both chemical and ecological water quality objectives for the first time. In doing this, the WFD integrates several earlier pieces of Community water legislation. More recent legislation such as the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, the Nitrates Directive, and the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive will not be repealed and will complement the new legislation.
Strategic catchment management plans (CMPs) are required which must state how specific objectives are to be met. In drafting these objectives, a thorough analysis of the catchment must be made, including an assessment of any adverse impacts caused by features within the catchment. In this way, an integrated programme of measures that are specific to the catchment and to the problems can be drafted.
The primary requirements of the Water Framework Directive were listed by the DETR (2001):
• Require objectives to be set for all water bodies rather than only those that the member state chooses to designate, and in most cases for these objectives to be met within 15 years • Provide for a new system of classifying surface water according to its ecological quality status • Require quantitative and chemical quality objectives to be set for groundwater • Promote sustainable water use based on long term protection of available water resources • Require comprehensive river basin management plans to manage surface waters and groundwater, with arrangements for providing information and public consultation • Give member states explicit requirements to take account of pressures on water quality from point and diffuse sources and ensure that necessary measures to meet quality objectives are selected, including the management of water quantity where appropriate to meet quality objectives • Require member states to ensure that there is no deterioration in the ecological status of water bodies • Place on a statutory basis much of the Environment Agency’s existing good practice • In meeting the Directive’s obligations, contribute to achieving the objectives of international agreements, including those which aim to prevent and eliminate pollution of the marine environment such as OSPAR • Establish a framework for the protection of water which conserves aquatic ecosystems, and with regard to their water needs, wetlands directly depending on them.
4 It is beyond the scope of this report to comment on the full text covered under the respective articles of the WFD. However, a brief summary of particularly relevant sections is relevant.
The WFD uses a tiered approach to water management. Under Article 3 of the WFD river catchments must be allocated to ‘river basin districts’. It is likely that there will be 11 such districts in the UK, and these are explained in DETR (2001). Within each district a thorough analyses of physical, chemical and economic characteristics must be undertaken. Within each catchment, rivers and watercourses can be broken down into reaches for management purposes. Specific features, such as lakes and reservoirs will also be characterised and management plans may be drafted.
Under Article 7 of the WFD Member States shall ensure the necessary protection for the bodies of water identified with the aim of avoiding deterioration in their quality in order to reduce the level of purification treatment required in the production of drinking water. Member States may also establish safeguard zones for those bodies of water. Thus, a higher level of protection may be set to meet standards set for these features.
Nationally, the total costs of compliance with the WFD has been estimated at between £2.0 and £9.2 billion, at 1998 prices, of which reduction in water pollution from diffuse sources comprised £0.6 – £2.9 billion (DETR, 2001). The major cost was identified as the cost of making improvements to water status (£1.9–9.0 billion). This latter cost was broken down into improvements to point source discharges by sewerage undertakers (£0.9–4.2 billion), improvements to point source discharges by industry (£0.3–1.2 billion), reductions in pollution from diffuse sources (£0.6–2.9 billion), improvements to river habitats (£90–440 million), and alleviation of low flows (up to £240 million), (DETR, 2001)
In terms of costs to UK agriculture to control diffuse pollution, the average cost per farm was estimated to be £175 and £117 per ha per annum for arable land and grassland respectively. However, the costs may vary significantly between areas at risk from diffuse pollution and those in low risk areas, as shown in Table 1.1. Further, these costs may also vary significantly across individual farms. The challenge may therefore be re-written as to devise management for individual farms that minimise these costs, maximise value and provide positive benefits in terms of wildlife.
Table 1.1 Estimated costs of compliance with the Water Framework Directive at 1998 prices Cost for an Cost for an Cost for an average farm average farm average farm Average farm assuming total assuming 60% of assuming 10% of size (ha) area of holding is holding is affected holding is affected affected £ thousand per annum England 64 11 7 1 Wales 53 9 6 1 (DETR, 2001)
5 However, the figures above can be compared with the estimated water treatment costs plus monitoring and administrative costs incurred by society as a result of water pollution by agriculture. For example, the contamination of drinking water by pesticides is estimated to cost £120m/year; nitrate £16m; Cryptosporidium £23m; and phosphate and soil £55m (Pretty et al, 2000). It should also be noted that relatively few studies have attempted to measure the positive externalities of farming. These positive benefits include landscape and aesthetic value; recreation and amenity; water accumulation and supply; nutrient recycling and fixation;; soil formation; wildlife (including agriculturally beneficial organisms); storm protection and flood control; and carbon sequestration by trees and soil (Pretty, et al 2000).
Though there are other legislative aspects to the proposed work, it is suggested that the gradual introduction of the Water Framework Directive represents an opportunity to explore some of the practical aspects of this important new piece of legislation so that potential opportunities and difficulties may be understood.
The potential benefits of the WFD were assessed by UK Government as improved informal recreation, angling, general amenity, non use values and low flow alleviation. On this basis, the overall findings of the benefits evaluation for England and Wales were in the range £1.6–£6.2 billion. The following list provides an overview of potential benefits:
• An improvement in the quality of raw water, and greater availability of water as a resource.
• Protection and enhancement of aquatic wildlife. The Directive aims to ensure that native aquatic life such as plants and fish can survive and reproduce. This in turn will support animals and birds higher up the food chain. Physical improvements in certain water habitats may also be required where this is necessary for the native biology to survive and reproduce. Such improvements in conservation of habitats and species will increase the amenity value of watercourses.
• Introduction of a new definition of water status which is concerned with the ecological health of water bodies as well as chemical standards, and reflects the interactions between groundwater and surface water and the relationship between physical elements such as the structure and flows in the watercourse and the chemical and biological quality.
• More coherent Community water legislation gathering together all of the measures that are necessary to manage river catchments and groundwaters and removing unnecessary and outdated requirements.
• More coherent management of river basins, enabling more cost effective strategies to be developed. The Directive requires member states for the first time to put in place a system of river basin management, with co-ordinated river basin management plans, recognising the links between all waters in a river basin, including groundwaters.
• Better targeting of water protection measures. The analyses of each river basin will provide better information, allowing better planning and targeting of measures to areas where there are clear environmental benefits.
6 • Transparency and accountability. The Directive will require transparency in the river basin management planning process. This will benefit water users as well as government and competent authorities. Moreover, this greater degree of transparency has allowed accountability at member state level to take the place of prescription at EC level. Detailed objective-setting and monitoring strategies can therefore be decided at member state level, enabling a more targeted use of resources and allowing measures to be set at a level appropriate to the circumstances at national and local level.
1.2 Project background Many reservoirs and lakes are found in the uplands or border uplands. The altitude, topography, geology and climate have made these regions particularly suited for water supply reservoirs. Historically, the uplands and border uplands have supplied clean water to the urban areas of England and Wales. However, more recently agricultural intensification of both livestock and crop production has placed an increasing pressure on the security of these supplies.
It is within this background that the proposed work falls. In common with many semi-upland areas there is a need to conserve and enhance the natural and socio- economic environment in the Northumberland region. This is reflected in the designation of the Northumberland National Park in 1956. However, a common argument is that the valuable hinterland around protected areas can often suffer as a result. The proposed study area falls outside the Northumberland National park, but as discussed in this document, contains a number of habitats, species and characteristics that should be protected and enhanced as part of a catchment – based programme.
The need for stewardship of the area is recognised by Northumbrian Water Ltd (NWL). As both a landowner and operator, NWL is uniquely placed to work in the area for the benefit of many diverse groups, and ultimately water customers. Under the United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) a number of regional BAPS have been drafted. NWL has strong partnerships with regional wildlife groups, and also has its own BAP with targets for key species and habitats (NWL, 1998). This work is supported by the Group Chairman, Sir Frederick Holiday (president of the British Trust for Ornothology and Freshwater Biological Association), and by Dr Chris Spray, Environment Director (council member of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, and the Durham Wildlife Trust).
The analysis of costs and benefits of options to provide a safe and reliable water supply to customers are at the heart of Water Company business, but a more comprehensive economic analysis of water use and treatment may be necessary under the WFD. When the Water Companies of England and Wales are considered as a whole, investment under AMP3 will make a substantial contribution to meeting a number of water quality objectives under the WFD. However, the cost-benefit analysis with regards to planning strategic investment to tackle diffuse pollution, especially from agriculture, is not straightforward and this was recognised by the DETR (2001). A key principle of the WFD is to reduce dependence on new or improved capital works to tackle such problems, and instead seek to introduce measures to mitigate problems at source. Such measures, by definition are likely to be source-specific, and a framework of integrated options, as advocated by the proposed work, will assist their development.
7 The reservoirs, and associated water supply features of the Whittle Dene Complex have been subject to a perceived threat of diffuse pollution, largely from pesticides, and it is generally viewed that this threat has increased over recent years. Though a recent project by ADAS on behalf of NWL has successfully brokered agreements with landowners and farmers to protect strategic stretches of watercourses in the region, it is evident that this system, largely based on short term measures, is not sustainable, or in keeping with likely initiatives under the WFD. Instead, a more thorough understanding of catchment issues, which might be responsible for the problems, is necessary.
Many local, national and international initiatives have been identified which should be integrated with the work proposed, and this will require co-operation with a number of organisations, individuals and landowners. For example, on a local level, the Environment Agency has worked with farmers and landowners to understand and mitigate diffuse pollution by pesticides. This has included initial attempts to collect information on farm practices, and catchment monitoring of burns and watercourses.
On a National level, the UK Government has recently accepted a voluntary package put forward by the Crop Protection Association, the National Farmers Union and other agricultural and farming organisations (CPA 2001) which replaces the proposed pesticide tax (DETR 1999). It was estimated that the proposed tax would have cost farmers and growers £125 million a year and much of the evidence indicated that environmental benefits would have been minimal. The NFU has committed to a alternative to the tax and believes it will make a material difference to the environment whilst allowing farmers to continue to produce safe, affordable food. Three key goals have been proposed:
• To reduce the potential environmental effects of pesticide use; • To improve farmland biodiversity; • To prevent water contamination by pesticides.
Under this initiative catchments will be identified covering a diverse range of characteristics to develop strategies to reduce pesticides in watercourses and other waterbodies. A key feature of this work will be the development of Crop Protection Management Plans (CPMPs). These will be voluntary, modular and proportional to the risks from the enterprise. It was anticipated that they would include:
• An assessment of the likely pest, disease and weed risks for each crop; • Input programmes; • An assessment of the farm’s environmentally sensitive features; • Special requirements to safeguard water and farmland biodiversity.
However, recent recommendations by the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food (2002) may need to be considered in relation to these proposals to avoid duplication of objectives and to minimise administration for farmers.
It is possible that the work undertaken at Whittle Dene may be included as part of this programme. Such an integrated approach between key organisations will be beneficial when undertaking complex work of this nature, and is in line with current principles and recommendations by a number of organisations.
8 There is a need to integrate programmes which are designed to reduce diffuse or point pollution from agriculture with wider environmental benefits. This has also been recognised under the voluntary programme of measures designed by the CPA. Recent projects such as SAFFIE (Sustainable Arable Farming For an Improved Environment) have been developed which aim to enhance farmland biodiversity by integrating novel habitat management approaches in the crop and non-cropped margins, to develop more sustainable farming. Improved understanding of interactions may lead to increases in invertebrate and weed seed abundance and their availability would be of particular benefit to farmland birds.
However, there are opportunities inherent in the proposed work to develop established practices designed to protect water resources to fully benefit objectives covered under regional BAPs and other wildlife initiatives. When applied appropriately options such as buffer strips, constructed wetlands or farm woodland schemes have all been shown to have positive effects on wildlife, and environmental protection. This work aims to build on these findings.
Work within the Whittle Dene Catchment would benefit a range of stakeholders. The integration of initiatives would enhance and protect landscape and water characteristics that are currently under threat from either intensification, or potential prescriptive regulations on land use and management. Therefore, the overall objective may be to encourage sustainable agricultural production with environmental benefits, and this is a core feature of DEFRA objectives.
Recent initiatives in integrated catchment management in rural areas has shown how effective stakeholder involvement at grass-roots level can be effective in achieving environmental goals. This process may be thought of as a number of stages. In stage one, the objective is to gain acceptance of the issues. Stage two may be to ask for advice on the solution to the issues. Stage three will be to build on this advice, and establish trials or demonstration areas. Stage four may then be to disseminate the results and learn from mistakes. This model is enshrined in rhetoric, but nevertheless represents the idealised goal within catchment planning schemes.
Given that the catchment area of the proposed study is essentially rural and agricultural, it is apparent that the work focuses heavily on landowners, foresters and farmers. However, it would be politically injudicious to focus entirely on these groups without examining the potential impact other activities in the area may have on water quality and the wider environment. Small villages and settlements may have an impact on water quality when chemicals are accidentally or purposely discharged to drains or watercourses. In particular, the household use of plant protection products is an area that is overlooked and understudied. Septic tanks may also be significant sources of nutrients and pathogens, especially in rural areas which are not connected to mains drainage. It is therefore apparent that the study must not harbour any preconceived ideas where they are not justified, but seek to examine the causes of any problems in the catchment in a fair and reasoned manner.
9 2. METHODS
2.1 Project Steering Group A project steering group was established and three formal meetings were attended in July, September and November 2001. Membership of the Steering group comprised representatives of the project funders and main stakeholders, together with invited experts on occasions (Appendix 1.).
2.2 Whittle Dene Workshop An internal workshop was held in September 2001 for ADAS experts with national and international experience to cover the range of specialist topics which will be part of the project. The group comprised representatives of ecology, economics, agricultural science, soil and hydrology, farm nutrients, farm pathogens and pesticides.
2.3 Farm liaison Farm liaison began during September 2001 in a period while risks of spreading FMD were considered low. However, this was suspended during the additional outbreaks which occurred close to the area later the same month. There was further communication with the farmers in the catchment in October. On both occasions, the meetings were conducted by ADAS Senior Consultant, Stuart Cartmell. The intention of this exercise was to introduce the concept of the project and make introductions. It was not the intention to pass detailed information or outline plans for the proposed work.
On-farm hygiene was followed at all times, and vehicles did not enter the premises. Farmers were contacted by telephone prior to each visit, and any visit that occurred was with the full consent of the farmer.
2.4 Hydrological survey Reconnaissance of the hydrological characteristics of the Western Catchment were made subject to the conditions imposed by FMD. Local advice was sought from NWL employees and physical information was collected from public roads and maps.
2.5 Technical data Data on relevant water quality parameters were made available by NWL. This comprised archived data on concentrations of isoproturon in the Whittle Dene system from 1995 onwards. Data on pesticides and nutrients in the Western Reservoir for the period 2000 - 2001 was also supplied.
The data have been summarised and presented wherever possible.
10 3. CATCHMENT CHARACTERISTICS
3.1 Physical and chemical characteristics 3.1.1 General description The Whittle Dene Reservoir Complex consists of 5 interconnected reservoirs at GR NZ 065683, approximately 18km west of Newcastle upon Tyne. The reservoir complex consists of the Great Northern, Northern, Western, Lower and Great Southern Reservoirs, as seen in Figure 3.1. The Whittle Dene Reservoirs represent the lowest in a complex which includes the Catcleugh (NY 7403), Colt Crag (NY9378), and Hallington Reservoirs (NY7697). The reservoirs can be seen in Figure 3.2 and schematically in Figure 3.3.
The Whittle Dene Reservoirs were constructed in the period 1848 to 1857 and are central to the water supply for Newcastle and surrounding areas. They currently supply drinking water to approximately 600,000 consumers. The total direct catchment area to these reservoirs is approximately 32 km2.
A number of watercourses enter the complex. Amongst these, the Whittle Dene Watercourse flows from the Hallington Reservoirs to the northern boundary of the Whittle Dene Complex, where it is joined by the Sparrow Letch and Welton Burn from the west. The Whittle Dene then follows the eastern edge of the complex, before branching on the eastern side of the Great Southern Reservoir. The Whittle Burn and its associated small tributaries fill the Western Reservoir (Plate 3.1), which can be isolated from the remainder of the complex. The Whittle Burn (Western Reservoir Bypass Channel; Plate 3.2) flows along the southern boundary of the complex, before joining a branch of the Whittle Dene to the south of the Great Southern Reservoir. The River Pont is a significant watercourse and has a catchment area to the north of the Whittle Dene Reservoir complex. The Pont supplies water to the complex as an aquaduct prior to exiting the area.
The catchment areas of the major reservoirs have been assessed by Northumbrian Water Ltd for risk from diffuse pollution (Figure 3.3). The large upland reservoirs (Catcleugh – Hallington) are considered to be relatively low risk. The land between the Hallington Reservoirs and the Whittle Dene Reservoir Complex is border uplands, and primarily consists of mixed agriculture. Thus, the Whittle Dene Catchment is considered to be at relatively high risk of contamination subject to local characteristics and conditions, adverse farm management, or accidents.
Data was made available by NWL from both routine and supplementary monitoring for pesticides and nutrients in raw water from sampling points across the Whittle Dene Catchment and the Western Reservoir. Data was also included from water sampling conducted by the Environment Agency. The origin and interpretation of the datasets was problematic in the absence of supporting information. In the full study a full monitoring database will be established containing validated information deriving from all stakeholders.
The Western Reservoir is fed from a small catchment (3.5km2) and is hydrologically isolated from the remainder of the Whittle Dene complex. Agriculture in the catchment is mainly mixed livestock and arable, with a recent conversion of a mixed
11 farm to a dedicated arable unit. The Western catchment also contains a number of small woodland plantations. The discrete size and nature of the Western Catchment makes it particularly suited as a unit to undertake detailed monitoring and field experiments. The larger Whittle Dene to Hallington catchments (approximately 30 km2) offers potential to apply principles learned from detailed work conducted in the Western catchment, and to transfer information to a larger scale. This could be particularly important if the general trend to larger farm units with more arable land continues northward into this area.
12 Figure 3.1 Map of the Whittle Dene Reservoirs
(1:25,000)
13 Figure 3.2 Map of Whittle Dene, Hallington and Colt Crag Reservoirs
Hallington and Colt Crag
Whittle Dene
(1:200,000)
14 Plate 3.1 The Western Reservoir
Plate 3.2 Whittle burn and Western Reservoir bypass channel
15 Direct Catchment (Low risk)
Direct Catchment Northern Reservoirs (High risk) Catcleugh Colt Crag Great Northern Little Swinburn Capacity-104.4Mg East Hallington West Hallington Total Capacity-4,832Mg Direct Catchment (High risk)
Northern Sub
Direct Catchment Northern (High risk) Capacity-30.7Mg
Western Lower Capacity-62.1Mg Capacity-98.5Mg
Great Southern Capacity-233.2Mg
Whittle Dene WTW
Horsley Tyne at WTW Direct Ovingham Catchment (High risk)
Henderson WTW = Water abstraction points
Figure 3.3 Schematic diagram of the reservoir network
16 3.1.2 Weather and climate The areal averages for the southern border uplands of Northumberland have been compiled by Smith (1984), and pertinent information is presented in Table 3.1. The rainfall across north-east England increases with altitude and also from east to west. The average annual rainfall is between 600 and 700mm (Smith, 1984). The mean accumulated potential soil moisture deficit was estimated as 100mm in the years 1961-1975 (75mm by mid July under winter wheat).
Table 3.1 Selected agroclimatic parameters for the Northumberland Border Uplands
Grazing Season 203 days Apr 7 - Oct27 Growing Season 238 days Apr 2 – Nov 26 Grass drought factor 21 days Degree days >10oC May – Oct 515 days Winter degree days < 0oC 155 days Total annual rainfall 670 mm Effective transpiration 339 mm Potential Transpiration 404 mm
Median Quartile range Max Summer SMD 80 mm 62 – 98 mm Return to capacity Oct 27 Sept 14 – Nov 29 Excess winter rain 240 mm 165 – 340 mm End of capacity Apr 14 Mar 23 – May 9 (Smith, 1984)
3.1.3 Soil In the absence of field reconnaissance due to FMD, information on soils within the Whittle Dene Catchments were compiled from Jarvis (1984). This information was obtained from small pits or soil cores at an average frequency of 250 per 100km2 and hence is at a relatively large scale.
The soil of the Whittle Dene Reservoir Complex are predominantly of the Brickfield 3 Association (Jarvis, 1984). However, Enborne Association has also been mapped within the Western Catchment and Foggathorpe 1 Association has been mapped in the area north of the Whittle Dene Reservoirs. The parent material is derived from Paleozoic sandstones and shales. These soil series are discussed further in the following paragraphs.
The soil series of the Brickfield 3 Association represent the largest land area in the Pennines and Northumberland (2657km2, 8.6% of all land area). The soils are predominantly loamy and clayey surface water gleys.
The soils of the Brickfield 3 Association are Wetness Class IV (profile waterlogged within 70cm for >180 days but <180 days to 40cm in most years). Brickfield soils benefit from underdrainage, but remain seasonally waterlogged due to slowly permeable subsoil. Excess winter rainfall will therefore tend to move laterally at
17 shallow depth. Underdrainage is considered essential. Slurry disposal may be considered to be a moderate risk due to potential damage of soils, and rapid runoff under inappropriate conditions.
The number of machinery work days (MWD’s) at Stamfordham (GR NZ080720), approximately 5km north of the Western Catchment are very few (Figure 3.4). In a ‘normal’ year, of average rainfall, there is estimated to be 6 days when soil conditions are suitable to conduct field operations in September and little further opportunity until summer. In a ‘wet’ year, there are no suitable days to conduct field operations and soil structure under Brickfield soil series is easily damaged by livestock or machinery.
18 Figure 3.4 The effects of soil and climate on landwork, Brickfield 3 Soil Association at Stamfordham, Northumberland
Soil Series Type of Aut Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Spring year MWDs MWDs Normal 6 0 Brickfield Stamfordham (750mm annual rainfall) Wet 0 0
Little opportunities for landwork Frequent opportunities for landwork MWDs: Number of good machinery work days for the period indicated
The Enborne Association consists of fine loamy and clayey alluvial soils which are usually found on floodplains. It is moderately permeable, but typically suffers from seasonal waterlogging and is Wetness class III or IV. There may be marginally more MWD’s under soils of the Enborne Association compared to the Brickfield 3 Association, especially with underdrainage, but the soils are easily damaged by poaching and compaction.
The Foggathorpe Association consists primarily of seasonally waterlogged clay and tends to be restricted to south east Northumberland, Tyne and Wear and Durham. The soils are slowly permeable and are seasonally waterlogged (Wetness Class IV). Drainage is considered essential if the soils are to be used in autumn or spring. The number of MWD’s in the district of Bedlington, (approximately 25 km north east of the catchment) has been estimated to be 24 days in September, and 5 days in late April under normal conditions.
3.1.3.1 Soil management and cultivation Jarvis (1984) considers that in this region timely autumn cultivations are essential, and that autumn subsoiling, under suitable conditions, will help to reduce wetness by breaking any subsurface compaction. It should be emphasised that it may be difficult to conduct autumn subsoiling in this region during years when there is a late harvest. Soils of the Foggarthorpe Association are however considered suitable for direct drilling of autumn sown crops in suitable years.
It is impossible to have good soil structure without good drainage, either natural or artificial. Drainage results in an increase in the depth and improved aeration of the root zone, the soil warms up more quickly, germination is better and spring cultivations can be carried out earlier in dry conditions; deep rooting is encouraged, and this results in stronger plants better able to withstand drought and compete with weeds. The soil in the Whittle Dene Catchment does not have the advantage of good natural drainage, and artificial drains have therefore been installed widely.
Farming involves the use of machinery, which runs on the land or works in the soil, affecting soils by compression, shear, slip, bounce and vibration. In large arable units the increased power of modern machines now make certain operations possible even when draught is very heavy. More specialisation leads to bigger areas of fewer crops which demand basic operations within a short time span.
19 Thus there is more pressure to achieve early seedbeds. Many operations are done under conditions which must inevitably lead to some damage to the land. Surface inspection may suggest that the topsoil is in suitable condition, but wetness underneath may lead to damage to soil structure. Farmers cannot always wait for perfect conditions before they take heavy machinery on to the land, desirable through this might be. Many have to go on the land when it is not suitable.
Machines are used on soils at different times of the year for many purposes. They may be used for applying animal manure, lime, fertilisers; preparing seedbeds, sowing, planting, managing and harvesting crops; controlling weeds and pests; and restoring or improving the physical condition of soils by ploughing, shallow cultivating, subsoiling and draining. Each time the machine goes on the land, the soil is affected by wheels of the tractor and of the machine. It does not require many passes on a different track before the greater part of the field has been run over by wheels.
Wheels have least effect when soils are dry or on the dry side and when their consistency is firm or slightly soft. Tillage implements work at their best and do least damage when soil consistency is soft or friable. When soils have more water in them and are plastic, wheels compress and deform soil structure and change soil porosity, sometimes sufficiently to slow down infiltration of water and impede development and extension of roots. When they are plastic, tillage implements work less effectively and can damage soil structures to the depth of working by compression, deformation and smear. When soils are wet and very plastic they may be deeply rutted by wheels and considerably damaged by tillage and lifting of root crops (Goodlass et al, 2001).
How often and how long soils remain in a favourable or unfavourable condition depends on the texture, structure, drainage and consistence of the soil, on the weather and on the amount of water the soil receives. The effect of damage to the soil on crop performance depends on the position and extent of the damage, on subsequent weather and changes in the soil, and on the tolerance of the crop to adverse soil conditions at different stages of its growth. Of these factors the most important is the weather and the next is the tolerance of the crop to adverse soil conditions.
If the structure of the surface layers of the soil is destroyed, then not only is water unable to move in these layers but it is also prevented from moving into the subsoil where there may still be good structure and therefore effective drainage. Thus not only does the surface soil hold a great deal of water because of its condition but it also prevents any subsoil drainage system from working.
Though a complete survey of cultivation practices and soil management was outside the scope of this report, observations suggest that traditional deep plough and cultivation were the predominant cultivation type associated with the mixed agriculture of the region. However, where possible, minimal cultivation techniques are used, and this was noted on land farmed by Welton Hall who farm 600ha of cereal in the region and have land in the Western catchment. It has been suggested that there is a preference to conduct subsoiling to break subsurface pans and compaction prior to cultivation.
20 For subsoiling to be effective there are a number of points to bear in mind. The most important is that subsoiling should only be done when the soil is dry enough to shatter. If done in wet conditions the tine will cut a slit through the soil, water will travel along it and an area of wetness may created at the lowest point. This means the farmer needs to start the work as soon as possible after harvest, before the soil wets up.
Secondly, the operation should not be done too deeply and this can only be checked by soil examination. Usually 30 to 38 cm will prove deep enough but a check must be made to be sure. To achieve maximum heave and shatter the subsoiler foot needs to travel only about 2 to 5 cm below the bottom of the compacted layer. If it is pulled much deeper than this it will be travelling in loose, well structured deeper subsoil and the upthrust energy from the foot is lost. The effect is that the leg pulls a slit through the compaction but little bursting and disruption is caused.
Clearly farm type and size, cropping and cultivation and soil type are interrelated factors which need to be studied in the catchment. Once detailed information on these factors are better understood, the project will be in a better position to identify the root causes of pollution to watercourses and reservoirs in the Whittle Dene area. Thus the results of the scoping study suggest that the soil resource should be studied intensively. This is in line with current DEFRA initiatives aimed at protecting the soil and minimising undesirable direct and indirect effects of soil deterioration.
3.1.4 Ecology A habitat survey of the Whittle Dene Reservoir Complex was carried out by Young (2000) on behalf of NWL. The complex is listed as a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI) for value as a wintering site for wildfowl and is frequented by local birdwatchers. There are freshwater habitats, coniferous plantations, neutral grassland and marshy grassland. The marshy vegetation on the margins of the Western Sub Reservoir is the most extensive within the complex. A high diversity of swamp and marginal aquatic plant species makes the site potentially valuable for aquatic invertebrates and birds.
Animal species noted by Young (2000) as being present at the sites and of conservation importance include otter, red squirrel roe deer and freshwater mussel. Incidental records of birds using the site included species of conservation concern, viz. linnet, greylag goose, pochard, reed bunting, swallow and sand martin.
Young cites a previous survey done in 1999, which highlighted extensive stands of species-rich aquatic vegetation in the Great Northern, Northern Sub and Western Sub Reservoirs. Evidence of otters and freshwater mussels was found around the margins of the Northern Sub and Great Southern Reservoirs, which are associated with the Whittle Dene Watercourse. Some of the watercourses connecting the reservoirs had species-rich vegetation, and were potentially valuable as wildlife corridors. It was considered that otters may frequent these.
Young (2000) considered that part of Whittle Dene and Whittle Burn were becoming silted and choked. This may be important in relation to land use and soil management (Section 3.2.1 and Section 6). The species diversity of some of the neutral grassland
21 surrounding the reservoirs was also thought to be declining as a result of frequent mowing and trampling.
A number of species highlighted above are designated as priority species under the North East Region Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), as seen in Table 3.2.
The RSPB have defined seven bird species – grey partridge, skylark, linnet, reed bunting, corn bunting, tree sparrow and turtle dove - as Widespread [declining?] Arable Bird Species and recent data indicates there are now only seven 10 km squares in the region where these species all occur. The Tyne Valley near Hexham is one of these areas and is relatively close to the Whittle Dene Complex.
MAFF (2000) recognise the importance of freshwater habitats such as storage reservoirs in the region. The otter, water vole, fresh water pearl mussel and crayfish are all identified as species that should be encouraged. However, these species are dependant on suitable freshwater and environmental characteristics, and these characteristics will be threatened by eutrophication, alterations to catchment hydrology, water quality and quantity.
Table 3.2 Priority Species Under the NE Region BAP BAP Bird Species Other BAP Species Black grouse Water vole Bittern Otter Skylark Dormouse Linnet Pipistrelle bat Grey partridge Brown hare Tree sparrow Red squirrel Corn bunting Great crested newt Spotted flycatcher Young’s Helleborine Song thrush Yellow marsh saxifrage Bullfinch Freshwater white-clawed crayfish Roseate tern Freshwater pearl mussel Corncrake Vertigo genesii (a snail) Nightjar Gyalecta ulmi (a lichen) Reed bunting Northern brown argus Lichens, inverts, bryophytes, fungi,moths MAFF, 2000
3.2 Agriculture The total agricultural land area of the North East region is 567,808 hectares (excluding common rough grazing). Grassland is the major agricultural land use in the region; currently 42% of the agricultural land is in grassland (leys and permanent pasture (>5 years), with an additional 24% in rough grazing. Arable cropping accounts for 27% of the agricultural land in the region. Land in arable cropping/set- aside has increased by about 17,370 hectares over the last 10 years with a corresponding reduction in the area of temporary grassland and rough grazing.
22 There is evidence to support this trend in the Whittle Dene area, where there is a move away from traditional mixed agriculture, towards arable farming. Some long –term grass fields in the catchment were put down to cereal from the mid 1990’s (pers comm, Northumbrian Water Ltd).
The main drivers for these changes are increasing price pressures, resulting from globalisation of trade and buyer concentration. Farmers react to these pressures by becoming more specialist, to gain economies of scale. Land registered for the Arable Area Payments Scheme (AAPS) in the early 1990’s attracts an annual subsidy payment where sown to harvestable crops or set aside. This made cropping financially more attractive than livestock, which suffered badly from the impact of BSE.
Arable returns have been extremely low in recent years but livestock returns are also poor. The recent incidence of Food and Mouth Disease (FMD) in the region is also unlikely to encourage a resurgence in livestock farming.
The western areas of the north east of England are mainly upland and hill grassland, moorland and coniferous forestry. However, the south, the eastern coastal plain and the far north are mainly arable areas. The land surrounding the Whittle Dene Reservoirs is predominantly Agricultural Land Class (ALC) 3 or 4.
There are some extensive areas of forestry plantation in the north east region, but the area around Whittle Dene is characterised by relatively small and fragmented units. The private sector and other woodland owners such as the collectively manage around 48,300 ha of the region’s woodland. The main woodland protection and management initiative is known as the Northwoods project and is a new partnership which has obtained support from the Northern Uplands Objective 5b Programme and MAFF. This aims to improve management of smaller, farm woodlands and provide marketing and training assistance to help with small-scale economic production. Northwoods applies across the Northumberland and Durham 5b areas. The programme does not extend to the Whittle Dene Catchment.
In terms of economic size 31% (1625) of the agricultural holdings in the region are classed as being too small to support one full-time worker. A further 30% (1564) are classed as small. This means that 61.6% of the agricultural holdings in the region are considered small in terms of their economic size. The main loss of farms over the period 1987 – 1997 was in the 20-50 and 50-100 hectare bands. This reflects a trend away from small, family run farms, to larger units.
3.2.1 Agriculture in the Western Catchment Cropping in the Western Catchment is a mix of Winter cereals, Spring cereals, Oilseed rape, set aside, temporary grass for grazing or conservation (some in the Countryside Stewardship Scheme), permanent grass for grazing or conservation, and woodland planting (type unknown) at Shildonhill (NZ 034674) and Carrs Fell (NZ 034678).
A variety of stock are reared, housed and grazed in the Western Catchment, including sheep, beef, and dairy replacements.
23 3.2.2 Farm liaison and information All farmers managing land in the Western catchment were visited during the course of the scoping study. The background to the project was talked through, as an introduction to possible work in 2002. A future meeting was then suggested to present more detailed information, discuss the proposals and seek their approval and co-operation. This should be arranged soon after the scoping study, during the relatively quiet winter period.
It is encouraging to report that all participants expressed interest and approval in the proposed work in the Western Catchment.
Identification and liaison with current decision-makers on each parcel of land will be fundamental to any future work programme.
Previous work by ADAS funded by Northumbrian Water on the aqueduct East of Whittle Dean demonstrated very clearly that identification of materials and activities on the land parcels under scrutiny needs innovative development to ensure confidence in results. The project should therefore not rely only on hearsay evidence from farmers or contractors about what products they are using and when they have applied them. A more robust procedure to collect information on product use should therefore be considered.
3.3 Pesticides Historically concerns over the presence of pesticides in surface or groundwater are based on the risk of drinking water contamination and the ecotoxicological impact of residues on non-target aquatic organisms. In 1998, 15% of freshwater sites monitored by the Environment Agency for England and Wales failed at least one environmental quality standard (EQS) with at least 32 pesticides failing at least once. Approximately 70 incidents were due to pollution related incidents, of which 44% were attributed to agricultural activities, many of which were related to use and/or disposal of synthetic pyrethroid sheep dips. Increasingly there is also concern for the impact of pesticides on soil quality, associated terrestrial organisms and its long-term sustainability. Even though scientific evidence suggests that general agricultural practices have a greater impact on biodiversity than crop protection itself, e.g. Furse et al (1995), people continue to be concerned about the effect of crop protection chemicals on wildlife and the environment. In the UK, initial investment in water treatment costs for pesticides was estimated to be £1 billion with annual running costs of £100 million (Clarke 2001). Pretty (2000) calculated that in 1996 the external costs of pesticide use, in a range of countries, was between £2.20 and £8.60 per kilogramme of active substance used. This was considered to be a substantial burden on non-agricultural sectors of economies.
In common with nitrates and phosphates, the pathways associated with pesticide movement to watercourses can be divided into point source, or diffuse. Traditionally, diffuse pollution of watercourses has been seen as the dominant pathway. The active substance and /or its metabolites may have the opportunity for soil/sediment accumulation, or uptake by the crop, other plants or non-target biota before moving through the soil layers in solution or absorbed to soil particles. Solutes or absorbed
24 material can then enter water via artificial drainage systems, surface or subsurface flow, leaching or by-pass flow.
However, recent research has indicated that point sources may be more important that previously thought. Rose et al (2001) reviewed current pesticide handling and washdown practices in the UK and identified that farmers had a restricted awareness of the water quality problems which might arise when pesticide is spilt or incorrectly disposed of in the farmyard. A number of surveys were identified concerning current practices and key issues that were identified included the lack of clear advice concerning disposal of waste and spill clean up materials. Recent data suggest that point sources might be responsible for a major portion (possibly as high as 50%) of contamination and some research underpins validity of this hypothesis (Spiteller et al., 1999; Mason et al., 1999).
The magnitude and frequency of pesticide concentrations (>0.1µg L-1) in raw (untreated) water from the Whittle Dene complex has increased since the mid 1990’s (pers comm NWL). Several pesticides have been found at concentrations exceeding the 0.1µg L-1 standard for individual pesticides in water, and in common with other UK watercourses Isoproturon (IPU) is a particular problem. IPU is a residual urea herbicide for use in cereals against annual grasses, blackgrass, wild oats, rough meadow grass, and annual dicotyledons and is applied in autumn or spring to cereals.
Data was obtained for 21 April, 11 and 20 May 1999 showing concentrations of IPU at various points along drains and burns that flow into the reservoirs (Figure 3.5). The locations of these sampling points are shown in Figures 3.6. The highest concentration (9.6µg IPU L-1) was observed entering the reservoir complex at point ‘A’ and this can be contrasted against the relatively low concentrations at the headwater of the same stream at point ‘J’. All samples taken on 21 April and 11 May contained IPU at concentrations above the 0.1µg L-1 limit, and particularly high concentrations were observed in samples taken from sampling points F and H in the Western catchment.
Data was also made available for concentrations of IPU in the Western, Lower and Northern Reservoirs in the Whittle Dene Reservoir Complex for the period March 1999 – May 2000, and for the Western over the period June 2000 – May 2001. This data is shown in Figures 3.7 – 3.10. For the year in question, there are peaks in concentration of IPU in late winter and spring. The peaks are of similar magnitude in all three reservoirs, (1.7µg IPU L-1), though the highest concentration in the Northern occurred a year before those of the Lower and Western Reservoirs. It can also be seen that the frequency of high concentrations of IPU in the Western are greater than those of the Northern and Lower Reservoirs. In all cases, two distinct periods can be seen in December 1999 and March 2000 where concentrations increase suddenly. However, unlike the Northern and Lower, concentrations of IPU in the Western Reservoir decline slowly, and remain high throughout the summer.
The concentration of IPU in the Western Reservoir for the period May 2000 – May 2001 is shown in Figure 3.10. The concentration again remains high throughout the summer, but there is no winter increase. Instead there is a peak concentration of 3.7µg L-1 in March 2001. This period was characterised by an extremely wet autumn and spring across the country which restricted field operations significantly. A total
25 of 656mm of rainfall were recorded by the end of September at the Whittle Dene Water Treatment Works (WTW), and this is close to the normal yearly average rain. Between October and December 2000 there was an additional 328mm of rain. Thus, there was an estimated 40 – 64% above average rainfall in 2000.
The concentration of Propyzamide in the Western Reservoir in January 2001 can be seen in Figure 3.11. Propyzamide is a residual amide herbicide for use in a wide range of crops, but in arable use it is most frequently applied to winter field beans and oilseed rape (OSR) to control perennial and annual grasses. Winter sown OSR was grown in the north west of the catchment in this year. Propyzamide is also used to control annual dicots in forestry and farm woodland, which is also present in the Western catchment. It is known that propyzamide has been used for this purpose.
Other pesticides that were detected in the Western Reservoir in June 2001 are listed below:
- MCPA 0.24 µg L-1 - Mecoprop 0.22 µg L-1 - 2,4 - D 0.35 µg L-1
All the above are phenoxy acid s herbicides which can be used in cereals and grassland. .
26 Figure 3.5 Concentrations of IPU in the Whittle Dene Reservoir System and Catchment in 1999 (Sampling points shown on Fig 3.6, Page 29)
(Excel Chart with values for points A – J shown overleaf)
12
10
8 21-Apr 11-May 6 20-May IPU (ug/l) 4
2
0 A - B - C - D - E - F - H - Town J - Robin Welton Sparrow Welton Whittle Vallum Fm Stream Hood St Burn Letch Burn Burn Runner Drain @ Robin Hood
27 1:50,000
1:25,000
Figure 3.6 Maps of sampling points in the Whittle Dene Catchment 1999
28 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6
micrograms per litre 0.4 0.2 0 18/03/99 18/04/99 18/05/99 18/06/99 18/07/99 18/08/99 18/09/99 18/10/99 18/11/99 18/12/99 18/01/00 18/02/00 18/03/00 18/04/00 18/05/00
Figure 3.7 Concentrations of IPU in the Western Reservoir March 1999 – May 2000
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
micrograms per litre 0.4
0.2
0 19/03/99 19/04/99 19/05/99 19/06/99 19/07/99 19/08/99 19/09/99 19/10/99 19/11/99 19/12/99 19/01/00 19/02/00 19/03/00 19/04/00 19/05/00
Figure 3.8 Concentrations of IPU in the Lower Reservoir March 1999 – May 2000
1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6
micrograms per litre 0.4 0.2 0 17/03/99 17/04/99 17/05/99 17/06/99 17/07/99 17/08/99 17/09/99 17/10/99 17/11/99 17/12/99 17/01/00 17/02/00 17/03/00 17/04/00 17/05/00
Figure 3.9 Concentrations of IPU in the Northern Reservoir March 1999 – May 2000
29 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 micrograms per litre 0.5 0 29/05/00 29/06/00 29/07/00 29/08/00 29/09/00 29/10/00 29/11/00 29/12/00 29/01/01 28/02/01 29/03/01 29/04/01 29/05/01
Figure 3.10 Concentrations of IPU in the Western Reservoir March June 2000 – May 2001
3
2.5
2
1.5
1 micrograms per litre 0.5
0 29/01/01 05/02/01 12/02/01 19/02/01 26/02/01 05/03/01 12/03/01 19/03/01 26/03/01 02/04/01 09/04/01 16/04/01 23/04/01
Figure 3.11 Concentrations of Propyzamide in the Western Reservoir March Jan 2001
20 Nitrate (mg/l 18 as NO3-N) 16 MPL (11.3mg 14 NO3-N/l) 12 10 8
NO3-N (mg/l) 6 4 2 0
Jul-99 Jan-99 Mar-99 May-99 Sep-99 Nov-99 Jan-00 Mar-00 May-00
Figure 3.12 Concentration of NO3 –N in raw water at Whittle Dene WTW
30 3.3.1 Roadside spraying and other sources It is apparent that there are many potential sources and transport mechanisms for pollutants to watercourses within the catchment. One highly visible route is the network of roadside drains, ditches and verges which can be a source of a variety of chemicals.
Northumberland County Council were contacted and asked to give details on any vergside spraying programme. The exercise indicated that there are currently no applications of pesticides to the roadside verges within the catchment. However, the drains and ditches may contain chemicals from domestic sources for example. Though it is likely that the herbicides used will be similar to agricultural and amenity sectors, there is little published information on the active substances applied or how waste and rinsings are disposed of (Pepper and Carter, 2000).
It is therefore important to establish the source of pesticides within the catchment. Key drains from farms may provide a rapid route for pesticides to be transported during rainfall, and these events may potentially be some time after application. The relative contribution of diffuse (field and field drainage) compared to point sources, or road drainage has not been determined, and therefore this represents an important first objective within the research programme.
3.4 Nutrients There were limited data available on the concentrations of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) in the reservoir system and in the rivers, streams or burns which drain into the reservoirs.
Nitrate nitrogen is easily lost from the soil as it is soluble and is moved by water draining through the soil. This process is called leaching. Once the soil is fully wetted, nitrate may leach into field drains or sub-surface aquifers as drainage water moves through the soil. Leaching is more rapid on light sand soils compared to deep clay or silt soils which are less free draining and therefore more retentive of nitrogen. The amount of winter rainfall has an important influence on the proportion of soil- nitrate leached. In some circumstances organic forms of N may form an important part of the total load, for example bankside material and organic matter can be washed into the watercourse during heavy rain. Generally the source of organic forms of N is short lived as they are washed away, but in some circumstances they may be significant (e.g. runoff from a field of freshly applied cattle slurry). It is therefore important to identify the inorganic and organic loads of N to watercourses.
The pattern of nitrate loss is such that most is lost with the early drainage in the winter and the rate of N loss then declines as drainage continues. Clearly, the actual amounts of N and the rate of loss will depend on (a) the amount of nitrate in the soil in autumn and (b) soil type. However, this general pattern has an important consequence for nitrate concentrations: the more rain there is the smaller the flow-weighted average concentration of nitrate in the over winter drainage. Historically, this is why high nitrate concentrations in waters are found in the drier, eastern half of the country. Thus the consequences of a wetter than average autumn/winter are two fold: more N leached from fields (with an impact on subsequent soil N supply to the next crop), but an increased likelihood of a lower flow-weighted N concentration in streams and
31 moving water. The response of large bodies of standing water such as reservoirs to such inputs may be reduced due to dilution effects, however it is important to determine the loading of nutrients to reservoirs and lakes in relation to seasonal concentrations. Such information is needed to understand nutrient cycling in large water bodies, and to control possible eutrophication which can ultimately lead to sedimentation and management problems.
The concentration of nitrate (as NO3-N) at the WTW over the period Jan 1999 – June 2000 is shown in Figure 3.12. The concentration of NO3-N shows a typical seasonal pattern as NO3 is leached from the soil profile at the start of autumn field drainage, and falls through spring and summer as soil nitrogen reserves are used by the growing crop. The concentrations may not be considered high in relation to the Maximum -1 -1 Permissible Limit of 11.3mg NO3-N l (50mg NO3 l ) imposed by EU legislation (80/778/EEC).
Although losses of P from soils to watercourses are usually small in comparison with N, the concentrations at which P may adversely affect riverine ecology are low. Natural concentrations of soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) in lowland rivers of England have been estimated to be approximately 30 µg L-1, while concentrations may become problematical above 200µg L-1 depending on the characteristics and sensitivity of the system.
In common with nitrogen, losses of P to watercourses can be divided into point-source and diffuse. Point sources of P include discharges from sewage works or from industry, while diffuse sources can include road run-off, urban drains, and forestry. However, agriculture is a dominant source of diffuse P to watercourses. Mainstone et al (2000) reviewed studies of P budgets to 4 rivers and showed that inorganic fertilisers and livestock both typically contributed 20% of the total loading of P to rivers. Agriculture therefore has the potential to have a large impact on P loads to watercourses and research is continuing to address this issue.
It is very important to study the forms of phosphorus, the mechanisms of phosphorus loss, and the loading of phosphorus to watercourses. A large input of P which is tightly bound to soil particulates may not cause problems if it is transported through the river. However, if the soil and sediment is retained in the channel it may become a source of slowly available P. Traditionally, P has been considered to be relatively immobile in the soil. Phosphorus is strongly sorbed to soil particles and sediment, and under Good Agricultural Practice losses of P should be minimised. Because P is strongly sorbed by soil particles, it can be lost via soil erosion as described earlier. It is also recognised that P is lost from the soil when enriched beyond a certain level (P Sorption Capacity; PSC) and DEFRA therefore recommend a target soil P index of 2 for arable, forage crops and grassland, and P index 3 for vegetable crops (MAFF, 2000). These recommendations are a useful guide for preventing diffuse losses of P from agricultural land, but actual losses will depend on site-specific factors such as soil type and texture, topography, crop type and health, drainage, cultivation practices and rainfall.
Phosphorus can also exist in many forms which are important when sources of P to watercourses are described, and when the effects of seasonal weather conditions on losses are discussed. P can exist as inorganic soluble, organic bioavailable or non-
32 bioavailable, or attached to soil/sediment particulates and these can be treated as separate components during environmental analysis. The most common determinands are:
Total Phosphorus (TP) includes all phosphorus determined during analysis of an unfiltered water sample. It therefore includes labile and non-labile forms, including P which is not readily bioavailable.
Total Reactive Phosphorus (TRP) includes phosphorus which is determined from an unfiltered water sample, but is only loosely adsorbed to particles. It therefore includes all P which may be bioavailable in the short term.
Soluble Reactive Phosphorus (SRP) is a combination of inorganic and organic forms of P determined from a filtered water sample. It represents the most immediately bioavailable form of P. It is also known as Molybdate Reactive P (MRP), Soluble Reactive P (SRP) or ‘orthophosphate’.
Total Particulate Phosphorus (TPP) is obtained by difference between Total P and Total Dissolved P (TP – TDP)
The main losses from agricultural land are from: • Surface run-off from recently spread manure • Erosion of soil particles containing Phosphorus • Particulate and soluble phosphorus in drain outflows
UK agricultural land can be split into categories of P loss risk based for both surface runoff/erosion and drainflow. The categories for surface flow are based on farming type (uplands, permanent grass >5years, tillage and ley grass <5years), erosion potential, rainfall (runoff risk based on rainfall events >10 mm), landuse (winter cereals/vegetables: high; reseeded grass, potatoes, sugarbeet and maize: medium; set- aside, peas/beans oilseed crops and spring cereals: low) and soil total P content. Those for drainflow are classified according to soil type (stability as indicated by clay content), soil total P content and excess winter rainfall.
Annual chemical budgets are difficult to compare directly. Unlike meteorological data, which is collected daily over many years, specific chemical analyses is rarely available for more than a few seasons. It is therefore often difficult to make specific comparisons and draw meaningful conclusions from datasets collected over relatively short time periods. Further, temporal site characteristics, land use or management practices will also change adding an obvious, but important element of complication which may be worth highlighting. Thus, direct cause and effect between high rainfall and high rates of P loss from fields cannot be assumed and investigations will be necessary to elucidate the mechanisms and processes ‘in the field’.
There were limited data on the concentrations of P in the reservoir complex. However, the Soluble Reactive Phosphorus (SRP; filtered sample) in raw water at the WTW were relatively low (Table 3.3). Natural concentrations of SRP in lowland rivers of England have been estimated to be approximately 30 µg L-1, while concentrations may become problematical above 200 µg L-1 depending on the characteristics and sensitivity of the system. The peak concentrations of 29 and 32 µg
33 L-1 both occurred during winter when wet soils and heavy rainfall is likely to have leached soluble forms of P from the surrounding soils. Conversely, the lowest concentration occurred in August 1999 when summer flow was likely to be low. However, the concentrations of SRP in the samples taken at the WTW are unlikely to be useful when consideration is given to the reservoir complex as a whole. The reservoirs are likely to retain significant quantities of sediment bound P, while plant available forms of P may be utilised by the reservoir biomass. To be useful in environmental studies it is desirable to collect water samples under a variety of flow conditions from running water entering the reservoirs and conduct analyses on both particulate and soluble determinands of phosphorus.
Grazing of cattle can be a significant source of water pollution if Codes of Good Agricultural Practice are not followed. Where stock are allowed uncontrolled access to rivers and streams there is the direct risk of defecation into water, bank erosion, and resultant stream sedimentation. The watercourse will therefore be at risk of pollution from excessive nutrients (N and P), pathogens, and from sediment. Observations suggest that there may be occasions where livestock (sheep and cattle) are watered at burns within the catchment and therefore the watercourses are at risk. Thus, a number of issues need to be addressed.
Table 3.3 Concentration of SRP at Whittle Dene WTW 1999-00
Sample date MRP (µg l-1) 16-Feb-99 29 18-May-99 17 17-Aug-99 11 16-Nov-99 32 15-Feb-00 14 16-May-00 20 MRP or SRP
3.4.1 Urban sources of nutrients There are a number of small settlements, farms and houses within the Whittle Dene Catchment, and within the Western Catchment. The level of nutrients created from a population is determined by many factors. Where mains sewers exist, and excreta is treated centrally in a Sewage Treatment Plant, the nutrients will typically be recycled to suitable agricultural land after rigorous treatment. However, the population within the catchment are not on mains drainage, and will therefore contribute to the total loads of N and P within the catchment through discharge from septic tanks and soakaways. Estimates have been made of the contribution of N and P from these sources (Johnes et al 1996), and they should be accounted for in the project.
3.5 Pathogen transfer to watercourses from livestock and farm manures Large quantities of animal manure are applied annually to agricultural land throughout Britain. In 1997, approximately 68 million tonnes (wet weight) of manure were produced by housed livestock in England and Wales, of which 77% was from cattle, 15% from pigs, 6% from poultry and 2% from sheep (Nicholson et al 2000) In addition excreta from grazed and extensively reared livestock are deposited on land subsequently used for food production.
34 A proportion of these manure and excreta will contain pathogenic microorganisms which have the potential to enter food production systems, although there are relatively few data on typical levels.
• Cattle. Salmonella, Listeria, E. coli O157, Campylobacter, Cryptosporidium and Giardia have all been found in cattle manure. Data from one study of faecal swabs taken from cattle at an abattoir in North Yorkshire found that around 13% of beef cattle and 16% of dairy cattle produced faeces containing E. coli O157.
• Pigs. Salmonella, Listeria, E. coli O157, Campylobacter, Cryptosporidium and Giardia have all been isolated from pig manures. Salmonella is of particular concern, with 323 reported isolations in pigs in the UK in 1998 and 37% of all isolates typing as multi-drug resistant S. typhimurium DT104. Data from one study of faecal swabs taken from pigs at an abattoir in North Yorkshire found that less than 1% of pigs had faeces containing E. coli O157.
• Poultry. The most commonly found pathogens in poultry manure are Salmonella and Campylobacter. Whilst Listeria may be present, it is not generally thought to be a widespread problem. To date, a number of studies have reported no incidence of verotoxin-producing E. coli O157 in UK poultry manures.
• Sheep. Salmonella, E. coli O157, Campylobacter and Cryptosporidium have all been isolated from sheep manure. Data from one study of faecal swabs taken from sheep at an abattoir in North Yorkshire found E. coli O157 in the faeces of 2% of sheep.
Pathogen prevalence and levels are affected by animal age, diet and management, as well as regional and seasonal factors. Shedding of some pathogens appears to be triggered by birth and levels are often higher in the faeces of young animals. Dietary changes may be linked to apparent increases in faecal pathogen levels during spring and autumn when cattle are moved between housing and grazing. Increased shedding of pathogens has also been linked with raising the fibre content of ruminant diets, and with fasting or other forms of stress.
The two protozoans which are most commonly associated with diarrhoeal disease in humans are Giardia and Cryptosporidium (Pell 1997). Although the symptoms of protozoan infection are unpleasant, they are usually self-limiting and cause little long term damage to healthy individuals. As a consequence, until recently, little research was performed on either Giardia or Cryptosporidium. In 1993 however, there was a outbreak of cryptosporidiosis in Wisconsin, USA which affected over 400,000 people (MacKenzie et al. 1994). The outbreak was caused by Cryptosporidium oocysts carried in the public water supply, and over the past 5 years research has been undertaken largely to prevent similar outbreaks, while large investment has been made in monitoring and water treatment filtration technology.
Cryptosporidium oocysts can remain viable for about 18 months in a cool damp or wet environment (IFST, 1999). They are quite common in rivers and lakes, especially where there has been sewage or animal contamination. The pathogen has been demonstrated to be susceptible to high concentrations of ammonia at alkaline pH in
35 laboratory studies (Jenkins et al. 1998) and a temperature of 65°C inactivates oocysts in 5-10 minutes (IFST, 1999).
Robertson et al. (1992) quantified the survival of various isolates of C. parvum oocysts under a range of environmental stresses. Viable C. parvum oocysts were preserved by aqueous environments, and could resist a variety of water treatment processes including liming and alum flocculation, if the pH was buffered.
Oocysts are remarkably resistant to many common disinfectants, including chlorine- based compounds. The inherent resistance both to antimicrobial compounds and environmental stress has increased the prevalence of cryptosporidiosis in the UK, which rose nearly 10-fold in cattle and 5-fold in sheep between 1983 and 1994 (Svoboda et al. 1997). A later study by Sturdee et al. (1998) determined that incidence was high for all tested mammals on a farm located in the English Midlands (Table 3.4) and finally concluded that Cryptosporidium is now ubiquitous amongst mammals in the UK. It appears likely that there is now an irreducible, minimum background level of the organism in UK wildlife and this reservoir would act as a continual source of reinfection of domestic livestock (Sturdee et al 1998).
The presence of significant numbers of livestock in the Whittle Dene catchment area therefore represents a potential risk of transfer of pathogenic organisms to watercourses and reservoirs. Cattle, calves, ewes and lambs are all grazed or housed in the catchments, but at this stage in the study animal numbers are uncertain. The north east of England has traditionally been associated with beef cattle, and these are present in the catchments in significant numbers.
Beef cattle reared indoors are generally kept in pens in houses which are naturally ventilated. Animals are usually reared on compound feeds based on cereals, grass silage or maize silage. The houses are commonly fully bedded with straw (FYM based systems) or less often have slatted floors (slurry based systems).
Solid FYM storage for at least 1 month is probably sufficient to ensure elimination of most pathogens, provided that elevated temperatures (at least 55°C) have been reached within the main body of the heap. However, there is a small risk that some pathogens may still survive in cooler exterior or drier parts of manure heaps. The turning and composting of manures to thoroughly mix and promote higher temperatures should ensure effective pathogen kill.
36 Table 3.4 Average prevalence of Cryptosporidium shedding for mammals on a research estate farm in the UK Midlands.
Animal type Prevalence (%)
Calves (cattle) 48 House mice 39 Wood mice 39 Bank voles 28 Rats 26 Lambs 19 Ewes 9 Bull (beef cattle) 9 Horses 6 Cows (dairy cattle) 6
Source: Sturdee et al. 1998.
Typically in England and Wales beef cattle generally graze outside for around 180 days a year (during late spring, summer and early autumn), although the proportion of time spent outdoors depends on soil conditions and weather patterns. Many areas of grass are grazed non-systematically and extensively, although a number of the more successful farmers are adopting grazing strategies similar to those used for dairy systems. There are some ‘zero graze’ systems where the animals are permanently housed. During grazing, faeces and urine will be deposited directly onto the sward surface and will remain there until it breaks down and becomes incorporated into the soil.
Observed from the roadside most heaps in and around the catchment generally appeared to be well managed, with little obvious cause for concern. However, previous work conducted by ADAS in the area identified a number of locations where fresh manure heaps were stored close to watercourses and aquaducts. There was a clear risk of runoff which could cause several water quality problems. An agreement was brokered with the farmer concerned to relocate the manure heap to a less sensitive site.
Anecdotal evidence has revealed cases of Cryptosporosis within the catchment, leading to the loss of livestock. Clearly this is an area which merits particular attention from a number of perspectives. The study should therefore pay special attention to this issue.
3.6 Agriculture and the Rural Economy
A recent analysis of the significance of agriculture and the rural economy in the North East was undertaken as part of the England Rural Development Plan (MAFF, 2000). This sets out the context for support in the region and the objectives and priorities for
37 investment of Rural Development Regulation (RDR) funds over the period 2000 – 2006. It tries to balance the economic, environmental and social needs of the region by encouraging agricultural activity which is sympathetic to and consistent with the needs of the wider rural economy.
It is anticipated that any catchment initiative will have supporting objectives to those found within the North East Region Rural Development Programme.
The rural areas of the North East region range from large areas of agricultural land with small, isolated settlements and a continuing reliance on agriculture, forestry, fishing and quarrying, through small settlements, to the urban fringe areas and communities which mining, extraction and heavy industries once supported. A survey of farm types in north east England was conducted by MAFF (2000) and is shown in Figure 3.13. This shows the most productive land to the east is typically in cereal production. There is cereal production in other areas, most notably along the Tyne Valley to the south of the Whittle Dene Catchment area. This map shows the Whittle Dene area to be on the fringes of mixed, arable and livestock production.
In the rural wards of the North East, agriculture, forestry and fishing account for over 9% of rural employment which is 5 times higher than for England as a whole. Agriculture accounts for 1.2% of the regions total employment (including the industrial areas to the east); when ancillary industries are included, it is estimated that 2.6% of regional employment is directly dependent on agriculture.
However, employment in agriculture has been in decline for some time as technology and globalisation of trade require ongoing efficiencies. In the 10 year period 1987- 1997 there has been a 14% reduction in the total agricultural workforce and an 18% decline in the full-time agricultural workforce in the North East. A shift away from full-time, and especially hired labour, is evident, along with a corresponding increase in the number of part-time farmers, partners and directors.
Agricultural and rural policy recognises the need for change to build a competitive farming industry, which also contributes to environmental and social goals (DEFRA, 2000). This places emphasis on supporting farmers to diversify and participate in agri-environment schemes as well as marketing farm produce. In the North East there are opportunities for many farmers to take advantage of valuable natural and cultural assets, including Hadrian’s Wall, a World Heritage site which crosses the Whittle Dene Catchment.
3.7 Rural tourism
Rural tourism in the North East was estimated to be worth £266 million in 1998 (Geoff Broom Associates, 2000). The North East is now one of England’s tourism growth regions. The region’s high quality environment will be central to tourism’s competitive advantage. The region’s rivers and still waters are also important to the rural economy through tourism and the links with cultural heritage, environment and landscape. The Hadrian’s Wall National Trail which is due for completion in 2002 will add to the region’s National Trail network.
38 The outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease had a profound effect on the region and emphasised the strong links between agriculture and the rural environment. It has been estimated that 67,000 jobs are directly or indirectly dependent on tourism in the north east compared to approximately 26,000 for agriculture and ancillary industries (Countryside Agency, 2001). Rural recreation and tourism are heavily dependent on a high quality environment and the importance of a healthy agricultural industry in maintaining this is clearly high and merits particular attention.
Figure 3.13 Dominant farm types in the north east of England
Whittle Dene
39 4. EXISTING PRACTICAL CONTROL MEASURES AND INITIATIVES
4.1 Existing catchment initiatives A number of catchment based projects exist in the UK. The objective of these projects is typically to apply best management practices to restore or conserve riparian areas and rivers. The driver is often the restoration or enhancement of wildlife habitats. Agriculture or land management is usually targeted as a major mechanism with which to apply change. Alternatively, a number of projects have identified specific problems in catchments, such as eutrophication, and have sought to address them. There have been significant successes and some of these are outlined below.
It should be noted that a range of other options will be considered and, where practical, evaluated within the work. These include best management practices, product stewardship, and where applicable, general agronomic recommendations. An important part of the work will be the integration of voluntary measures put forward by the CPA as an alternative to the proposed pesticide tax. The following sections therefore outline some of the catchment work being conducted in the UK, and highlight a range of the practical measures that may be used in the Whittle Dene.
4.1.1 Westcountry Rivers Trust The Westcountry Rivers Trust is an environmental charitable Trust formed in 1995 “to conserve, maintain and restore the natural beauty and ecological integrity of rivers and streams in Devon, Cornwall and West Somerset”. The Trust conducts research, provides practical advice and develops catchment initiatives. The work is in close co-operation with farmers, riparian owners and anglers, in addition to the local and wider community.
The Trust has delivered a number of projects via various funding routes including European Objective 5B, ENTRUST, National Lotteries Charities Board and private grant-giving trusts.
It is stated that the Trust employs a “Ecosystem Approach” to land management. The Ecosystem Approach is defined as “a strategy for management of land, water and living resources that permits conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way”. To implement this approach, land managers are provided with individual holistic management plans that identify opportunities for both economic and environmental improvements.
A number of project are run concurrently by the Westcountry Rivers Trust. Though there are objectives specific to each project, the methods of delivery are similar and the Tamar 2000 Project provides a useful summary as to the general aims and approaches employed by the Westcountry Rivers Trust.
The Tamar 2000 Support Project was delivered in two phases over a four-year period from 1996 to 2000 within the 5b area of the Southwest. With a total budget of £1.6 million part-sourced from MAFF and the European Union, 300 land managers received detailed site-specific advice that identified economic opportunities with significant environmental benefits. The Phase 1 economic analysis demonstrated a
40 return on investment equal to £474,786 over a 10-year period and for Phase 2 the return is £491,532.
The project aimed to conserve and restore environmental quality for both people and wildlife while delivering economic gains. This was achieved by: • Optimising farm inputs • Employing best management practices • Advising upon the optimum management and restoration methods for key river and wetland habitats with benefits to water quality, fisheries, and other wildlife, linked to tourism and development
The objectives were: • Erosion reduction • Reduced sedimentation of Salmonid spawning gravels • Reduced diffuse pollution • Improved river water quality • Restoration and conservation of wetlands and their functions • Restoration of river corridor habitats
To achieve the above environmental and economic improvements, the following methods were recommended: • Replanting along river corridors • The provision of appropriate stock watering access • Fencing of vulnerable river bank • Woodlands re-planted or regenerated along the river corridor • Restoration and improvement of wetlands • Reducing or controlling the accelerated rates of erosion at selected sites • The establishment of demonstration sites • The identification and improvement of Salmonid spawning areas • Stream clearance and the reduction of overshading • Direct habitat improvements
4.1.2 Water in Hampshire The ‘Water in Hampshire’ project was established by Hampshire County Council’s Planning Department. The project aims to raise the profile of water issues; develop a better understanding of the environmental, planning and management issues associated with the county’s water environment, and to develop sustainable solutions. The project’s primary focus is on freshwater issues, particularly rivers and groundwater.
The first phase was completed in February 2000, with the publication of Water in Hampshire: A Comprehensive Review. This document, compiled with much assistance from the Environment Agency and the water companies, represents the first attempt at putting together a picture of the complex water situation in the county.
The issues covered in this initiative are comprehensive, and broadly fall into the following categories:
• Land-use and Planning Issues
41 • Environment Issues • Water Supply and Demand Management Issues • Organisational Issues and Legislation • Water Quality Issues • Land Drainage and Flood Defence Issues
The second phase is to devise a comprehensive water strategy for Hampshire County Council, and for Hampshire as a county. The agricultural use of water, and the effect of land management on point and diffuse pollution is flagged as an area for attention under this project, though no clear objectives are defined. This area of work could be regarded as being beyond the remit of a County Council. However, it appears likely that any work in this area will be in conjunction with the Environment Agency.
4.1.3 Tarland Catchment Initiative The Tarland Catchment is the most westerly tributary of the River Dee, N.E. Scotland in which intensive land management dominates the land-use. Water quality, aquatic and riparian habitats in the catchment are degraded. Of particular concern is the concentration of suspended sediments, associated phosphorus, nitrate, bacterial coliforms, restricted and poor habitats. Deterioration of these parameters is largely the result of the historical legacy of land improvement, the intensification of land management and the enlargement of the village of Tarland and outlying communities.
The aim of the Tarland Catchment Initiative (TCI) is to advise and implement an objective strategy for the sustainable use of the catchment and to improve the quality of the catchment's water resources, their adjacent banks and the habitats that they can support. The initial focus of the TCI is to reduce the impact of high concentrations of suspended soil sediments and coliform bacteria in the selected streams and to improve the diversity of the catchments habitats.
The Tarland Catchment Initiative aims to bring scientists, regulators and the local community together to understand the relationship between land management and water issues.
To achieve the aims of the TCI there are two elements of work. Firstly, monitoring and assessment to provide objective data and information on the status and quality of water and habitats across the catchment prior to, during and after improvements have been made. The second element of the work programme is the implementation of simple pragmatic measures that should lead to an improvement in water quality and habitat.
The work is being jointly led by the Macaulay Institute and the MacRobert Trust Estate, the wider membership of the consortium consists of Aberdeenshire Council, Scottish Natural Heritage, Dess and Aboyne Water Project, Dee District Salmon Fishery Board, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Tarland Development Group and the North East Rivers Project.
4.1.4 Northumbrian Rivers Project The Northumbrian Rivers Project is a rural partnership working for Northumberland. The project supports farmers and landowners in undertaking active management of
42 their rivers and riparian areas. This includes establishing trees and shrubs, restricting grazing, reducing shading and opening up spawning grounds by improving the passage of fish past man made obstacles. The project has worked mainly in the uplands of Northern Northumberland and has the additional objectives of supporting rural tourism and sport fishing. This is a strong feature of the work.
The objectives funding and operation of the Northumbrian Rivers Project are similar to that of the Westcountry Rivers Trust. The Project has historically been partly funded by the European Union and MAFF as part of the Northern Uplands Objective 5B Programme.
Partners of the Northumbrian Rivers Project include Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group (FWAG), Northumberland Estates, Tyne Riparian Owners and Occupiers Association, Environment Agency, Forest Enterprise, Ministry of Defence OtterburnTraining Area, Northumberland Tourist Board and Northumberland National Park.
Work includes habitat improvements, fencing, riverbank protection, tree planting, livestock watering points, wetland creation, regeneration clearance, instream work and bankside vegetation management.
The overall project was completed in September 2001 and the individual projects included: 8 kilometres of fencing in place on river banks, two major fish passes, instream habitat improvement, and headwater fencing to protect spawning and nursery areas. The Project works with Northumberland Farm Tourism Initiative’s ‘Stay on a Farm’ for increased tourism using farm based accommodation.
In promoting healthy riparian and instream habitats the work of the Northumbrian Rivers Project offers some synergy with the Whittle Dene Project. The remit and overall objectives of the two projects are different however. Practical project management discussions should take place at an early opportunity to identify opportunities for co-operation to the benefit of all concerned.
4.1.6 Summary In this overview of some current UK catchment management projects it can be seen that there is a particular emphasis on habitat restoration. However, where specific pollutants are a particular problem, they have been addressed in an integrated manner that is sympathetic to the overall objectives of the project concerned. Some of the control measures employed will be discussed further in Section 4.2, but projects have tended to use practical advice and techniques such as zoning of vulnerable land, wetland areas and a variety of buffer strips. Where these have been incorporated into a strategy for the farm concerned then they have been effective. However, on farm assessments have tended to be conducted and a farm plan initiated to achieve specific objectives. This requires co-operation from farmers, and poor co-operation from only one landowner can often jeopardise the success of a project in a small catchment.
The control of eutrophication is often a target for catchment based projects. While there is an obvious need for a detailed water quality monitoring programme, with the exception of the Tarland Catchment Initiative, the projects highlighted have not tended to examine the effectiveness of measures employed to control the loss of N
43 and P to watercourses. Instead, the monitoring programme has tended to operate on a large scale, typically in conjunction with the Environment Agency. Though this approach may be able to identify the effectiveness of measures at a catchment scale or river reach, it may lack the definition to enable comparisons between locations or techniques. There is therefore a need for such work so that recommendations can be refined.
4.2 Practical measures A number of practical measures for reducing point and diffuse pollution have been presented and promoted in a variety of ways. Good examples include Codes of Best Practice and product stewardship. Clearly those which represent a Statutory Defence against a charge of water pollution (e.g. the Water Code) should be rigorously encouraged, and the measures adopted. However, a multitude of practical measures to control point and diffuse pollution of water exist and are promoted by the environmental literature. Some may be considered to be specific to a particular pollutant, while others may offer potential to control multiple pollutants. Many of these are also capable of providing secondary benefits in terms of encouraging wildlife, habitat creation and improving the aesthetic characteristics of an environment. Within a catchment based project such as that proposed for Whittle Dene it is essential to know the source of pollution (point or diffuse) and to understand the environmental processes and pathways operating in order to determine the magnitude and frequency of contamination events. Successful remedial measures can only be taken when these facts are known, usually as a result of intensive research programmes. A targeted monitoring programme will help facilitate the selection of appropriate measures in conjunction with local information.
In addition to the monitoring programme, a full assessment of catchment activity is recommended (Section 6). This may take the form of ‘integrated farm planning’, following recent research initiatives in the United States.
A full review of measures is therefore outside the scope of this report. However, a full review of measures to control diffuse pollution has recently been commissioned by DEFRA, and it is anticipated that the results of this study will be available for use within the work proposed for Whittle Dene. Similarly, an overview of measures that may be considered in the Whittle Dene Catchment would be inappropriate given that a full assessment of catchment characteristics should be a component of the proposed study, and a catchment monitoring programme to cover pesticides, N, P and pathogens is one of the first recommendations of this report. Indeed, one of the objectives of the work is to facilitate the appropriate selection of measures in the catchment.
A conceptual way to view control measures may be to categorise them into different ‘zones’ in the environment. This approach is advocated in the US by the New York Watershed Agricultural Council, who have been highly successful in keeping water free from contamination and eutrophication at source, while maintaining a viable farming community. The landscape ‘zones’ can be a useful way to view practical control measures without the need to compartmentalise pollutants into different categories. Accordingly, the basic ‘zones’ can be categorised as farm and pointsource, landscape and stream corridor.
44 Any investigation into the movement of contaminants to watercourses must consider the transport pathway. These can be divided simply into:
• Point source (farms, drains, spillages, slurry store failures, isolated stream bank failure, stock watering etc) • Diffuse • Surface (soil erosion and sediment transport, runoff from recently applied slurry, • Subsurface • Shallow subsurface throughflow in the unsaturated zone (generally parallel to soil surface) • Groundwater flow to rivers in the saturated zone
Shallow subsurface and surface flow are likely to be the predominant transport routes of diffuse pollution in the Whittle Dene Catchment. However, there are a variety of possible throughflow routes. These will be investigated further as part of the catchment characterisation exercise.
The general condition favouring the generation of throughflow is where the lateral hydraulic conductivity in the soil is greater than the vertical hydraulic conductivity. This may be natural (e.g. an iron pan, or marked textural changes in the soil profile from light topsoil to heavy clay), or it can be artificial (e.g. plough pan, subsurface soil compaction by machinery). Water can also pass quickly downslope through natural or induced channels (root holes, animal burrows, other subsurface channels). Sometimes soil water in situ can be displaced relatively quickly downslope, or to the stream channel by further rainfall. Clearly the chemical characteristics will also effect the degree of transport, but an understanding of general characteristics of the catchment will be important in the selection of appropriate measures.
4.2.1 Farm and point source Previous studies (e.g. Mason et al 1999) have shown that point source pollution of pesticides from farms may be more significant that previously thought. However, it is apparent that there are more potential point sources of pollutants in the catchment other than farms. Road drains, for example, represent a source of a wide range of pollutants and therefore represent an important avenue of investigation when a main drain is discharged to a watercourse.
Farm and point source pollution are potentially wide and varied. Examples include pesticide losses during handling, mixing and washing of equipment, dirty water runoff from livestock farm buildings, inadequate storage of slurry and silage liquor. DEFRA currently funds some advisory work concerning these sources of pollution and a review of the effectiveness and integration into a whole farm/catchment plan needs to be considered. There are a range of options to control such factors, and recommendations will be specific to each farm in the catchment when farm assessments have been made (Section 6).
4.2.2 Examples of hydrological risk assessment and management (Landscape) Surface and subsurface pollutant pathways may be important over a currently un- defined proportion of the catchment area. It is important to identify the areas that are likely to be responsible for the greatest proportion of pollution to watercourses, and
45 these may be termed ‘Hydrologically Active Areas’ (HAA’s). Where a HAA has an unacceptable risk of transport of pollutants, it may be designated a ‘Hydrologically Sensitive Area’ (HSA). It is likely that unless there is detailed understanding of the transport of a particular pollutant, any HAA will be managed as a HSA.
Fields may be assessed for risk of causing pollution. This assessment will require a ranking of characteristics according to pre-defined criteria. This is the approach adopted in many countries, and is in keeping with the UK system for farm waste management planning e.g. The Water Code (MAFF, 1998). Some examples are given in Table 4.1
Table 4.1 Example of risk assessment for slurry spreading Risk Level 1 Risk Level 2 Risk Level 3 Risk Level 4 Slope gradient (%) - arable 0 - 5 6 - 10 > 10 N/A - grassland 0 - 8 9 - 15 > 15 N/A
Slope length (ft) 0 - 300 300 - 500 > 500 N/A
Flood frequency None occasional frequent N/A
Drainage class well moderate poor N/A
Hydrologically receiving no no yes N/A
Seasonal accessibility good moderate poor N/A
Risk of nuisance low low moderate high
This approach could be employed for a range of land uses. Given suitable chemical parameters, land that is vulnerable to runoff could be assessed for suitability for a given use. This approach could then zone catchment areas into risk classes, where suitable mitigation options could be used. In reality, this approach has been used by ADAS to reduce pollution of the Henderson Aqueduct by pesticides and other potential contaminants. Agreements were then brokered between NWL and the farmer by ADAS. The intention of the work proposed will be to examine sources of funding for any measures that are considered necessary (e.g. Countryside Stewardship). Alternatively, different farm management practices may be recommended (tillage, crop type, variety choice, soil management, crop establishment, plant protection) . The economic impact of such recommendations on farm profitability will be assessed.
4.2.2 Buffer strips (Stream Corridor, landscape and farm) Where diffuse pollution is identified as a major determinant in water quality with the catchment, a range of buffer strips are available for selection and evaluation as part of a plan for an area, or for a farm. These have been highlighted by the Environment Agency (1996). Buffer strips are widely used to minimise water pollution. When applied appropriately, they also have the potential to create wildlife habitats, improve fisheries and stabilise river banks. The visual quality and amenity of stream corridors may also be improved.
46 The range of landscape features loosely defined under the generic term of ‘buffer strip’ are large, and will not be expanded on here, but a summary is presented below which outlines the measures that may be considered.
BUFFER STRIPS (Stream Corridor) • Riparian buffer strips: 5-50 m wide vegetated strip along watercourse, permanent or temporary • Riparian zone: semi-natural vegetation, wooded species and waterside plants • River retirement: removal of bankside land from agricultural use to protect riparian and aquatic habitats. • Conservation headlands: Outer 6 m of cereal crops treated only to encourage broadleaved weed density and associated insects needed for game birds, and other species. • Vegetated ‘filter’ strips / grassed waterways (Farm): planted or indigenous vegetation next to watercourse, or more usually near buildings to filter run-off in conditions of low water velocity. Common in the USA.
STREAMBANK STABILISATION BUFFERS • Livestock exclusion zones: fencing of bankside to protect and encourage existing vegetation to stabilise banks and reduce erosion. Less direct defecation into watercourses. Livestock restricted to specific water access.
WETLAND BUFFERS (Stream Corridor) • Riverine wetlands: semi-natural ecosystem of plants associated with river bank and bed. • Floodplain wetlands: lowland features of plants tolerant, or dependent, on inundation. • Ponds and lakes: instream ponds and lakes can act as silt traps and reduce pollution downstream.
NO SPRAY / SPREADING AREAS (Landscape/Stream Corridor) • No-spray zone: areas next to water features where pesticides should not be sprayed to reduce risk of overspray, or spray drift. (e.g. Local Environmental Risk Assessment Plans (LERAP) MAFF/PSD, 1999). • Non-spreading area: a 10 m wide strip adjacent to all watercourses where livestock manure, slurry and organic wastes should not be spread (MAFF, 1998).
47 5. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND MECHANISMS
5.1 Knowledge Transfer (KT) Archer, (2001) reviewed a number of knowledge transfer (KT) activities in relation to environmental protection in agriculture. This report contains a number of important messages in relation to the proposed work at Whittle Dene. On a practical level, many of the possible outcomes that are likely to be recommended will require changes in catchment management, and this is likely to require action by stakeholders. Given that farmers and landowners are the majority stakeholders by land area, the study should carefully consider KT, and methods to encourage delivery of any recommended actions by farms. Selected paragraphs from Archer (2001) are particularly relevant to the project, and these are presented below in italics.
“It is essential to understand a farmer’s objectives and drivers. The communicator can vary the message, the messenger and the method of communication but cannot change the farmer recipient. Unless the farmer perceives the message to have personal consequences for him or her, or their business, action is unlikely to result. Simply presenting information does not necessarily effect adoption of change. Belief in the issue is crucial to getting adoption of environmental messages. Any barriers in the communication process need to be identified and overcome. Barriers may be mechanical where the message is not received, semantic where the message is not understood or psychological where the message is not accepted.
It is clear from liaison with farmers in the Western Catchment that there is awareness of the presence of some pesticides in reservoirs, but apparently little understanding of the scientific processed involved (loss mechanisms, transport mechansims), or the possible strategic impact that this may have. Though there is acceptance of the general problem, there may be denial of the potential causes. The project, however, will cover much wider issues than pesticides and therefore communication may be difficult. Care should be taken to ensure that any priorities the project identifies are not lost, and therefore careful distillation and dissemination of information may be crucial. This process may be termed knowledge management. It is an item for discussion what messages the project wants to present. However, it is anticipated that information will be released in discrete phases concurrent with likely phases of the project as illustrated in Table 4.1.
Peer influence is very important in achieving persuasion in all groups of individuals. For any topic, innovators can be identified who are the first to change. They are watched carefully by the next group, the early adopters, who are the leaders of the population. If they adopt the change it is more likely that the main group will follow. This leaves the laggards who, for their own reasons, are unlikely to change however great the benefits seem to the majority.
Given the role of the project is to identify issues at the catchment level, it would appear that early identification of co-operative landowners, farmers and stakeholders is important. It may be possible to establish demonstration farms or areas within the catchment. Indeed, this approach may be eminently sensible given that catchment based work often identifies discrete areas, or even sub-catchments, that require priority action to mitigate a problem. In semi-upland areas, the watershed, or interfluve is often a key feature within the topography which separates farm units, and
48 therefore demonstration farms may be effective at this level. On a practical level, demonstration farms may be identified early on in the project, first to develop any plot or field experiments, then to up-scale ideas, potentially to a farm level.
Most farms are small (micro) businesses. The total management resource of the business will typically be part of the farmer’s time. Hence the whole range of topics that have to be dealt with in running a successful business has to be covered by one person. This means that the farmer is unlikely to devote significant time to issues that are not critical to the success of the business, unless he or she has a particular personal interest in the topic. Few will have environmental protection as a particular interest. More are likely to be interested in wildlife and conservation on the farm.
49 Table 5.1. Suggested knowledge transfer phases over life of project
PROJECT PHASE MESSAGE
YEAR 1. Baseline data and • Introduction to project/team. (winter/spring monitoring • Sticks (restrictions in absence of 2002 – 2003) project) Project dedicated • Carrots (way forward including website project) • Suggestions and advice from local landowners/stakeholders • Publicity for launch of project (national and local) • Year 1 report and recommendations YEAR 2. (2003 – 2004) Field trials and • Field demonstrations (local). monitoring • Popular press • Initial advice from Yr 1 • Feedback from stakeholders • Scientific – posters and platform • National catchment liaison • International liaison (EU and USA) • Year 2 report and progress YEAR 3. (2004 – 2005) Upscaling of field trials • Model farms. Wider audience. (Western – Whittle • Implementation framework Dene) and monitoring workshop • Field demonstrations • Continued feedback/liaison • Practical advice on measures • Scientific community • Catchment issues + general public. • National catchment liaison • International liaison (EU and USA) • Year 3 report and project break point for review
YEAR 4. (2005 – 2006) Review and revise • Revise message? New work? where necessary • Model farms • Field demonstrations • Continued advice • Feedback from stakeholders • Scientific – posters and platform • National catchment liaison • International liaison (EU and USA)
YEAR 5 Onwards. Full scale catchment • Full report (2006 - review and progress • Stakeholder reports on project • Transfer of advice to similar catchments • Transfer of decision framework to dissimilar catchments?
50 The current financial plight of many farm businesses means that they have to change to keep afloat. Thus it is a good time to get any message across that will save money in the short term but a bad time to get adoption of change that is cost negative or even cost positive at the end of say 5 years. The farmer will often receive a range of messages on the same topic from different sources. Conflicting messages on environmental topics are common and may confuse the farmer. The credibility of both the message and the messenger are crucial in determining the farmer’s response.”
Though environmental protection is an integral part of the proposed work, it is only part of a larger whole to deliver broader environmental and economic objectives. Clearly, a definition of ‘sustainable agriculture’ could be construed as being wide enough to cover these objectives. The difficulty may be to promote this concept as an all encompassing idea to provide for farm profitability, environmental protection and wildlife/conservation. Clearly, there is potential to confuse here, and this should be considered in relation to the proceeding paragraphs.
Time may be made available where relatively small sums of money are offered to discuss the project, or where legislation or restriction on farm practices are offered as potential alternatives. From there onwards, the direction of any messages and discussion with farmers/stakeholders may depend on many factors. Not least of these will be the effect any proposed change in farm management, habitat creation or ‘zoning’ of high risk areas, will have on farm profitability. It is not unreasonable to assume that advice offered on, for example, soil cultivation and crop establishment, may offer both environmental protection and profitability. It is these messages which will need to emphasised, and demonstrated.
From the proceeding paragraphs a number of points could be highlighted.
A. The first stage in achieving change in farming practice is to get farmer acceptance of the issue. This has been difficult when dealing with a single topic (eg nitrate), and may be more so when dealing with many interdisciplinary issues. B. The project should test the financial impact of any desired changes on the farm business to determine whether advice is likely to be effective before launching any new KT activity to promote change in farming practices. (Plot/field demonstrations and science). C. Help and advice on large – scale implementation of actions.
In the case of the Whittle Dene Project, there may therefore be several objectives of KT. These may be listed as follows:
• Awareness of the problems to be addressed in the catchment. • Awareness of the project, aims, objectives, personnel and contacts. • Change in any farm practice, management issues
5.1.1 Awareness of the problems It was suggested at a steering group meeting that a newsletter (A4 sheet) could be sent to stakeholders in the catchment. This might be effective in raising awareness of the
51 problems in the catchment, of the project, and soliciting feedback. By agreement with relevant parties, the news-sheet could present results from the monitoring exercise direct to landowners and farmers in a ‘diary’ format. In this way, where rapid pollutant pathways exist, a link may be established in the mind of the farmer between agrochemical or nutrient application, field operations, season, rainfall and water pollution. This may make farmers accept responsibility for local problems whereas it appears that currently landowners are told there is a water quality problem with little explanation or evidence to the same effect.
Clearly, any water quality information may have sensitivities, and wide dissemination may not be considered appropriate. However, a diary/news-sheet would be relatively inexpensive, quick and easy. It may also be possible to include information which is pertinent to any farmer, such as monthly rainfall and weather summaries. It is uncertain how successfully this exercise could be scaled to larger catchments, where local definition of problems may need to be broken down into discrete areas or reaches of watercourses.
5.1.2 Awareness of the project The Whittle Dene Project aims to tackle a range of interdisciplinary issues. A newsletter of the sort described in Section 5.1.1 may serve to raise awareness of the programme, but may be too specific for many groups. A series of options may be available here, including a website, local press, informal meetings and presentations. As ever, the difficulty will not be promoting the project to those who want to listen, but to those who have no interest.
5.1.2 Changes in farm practice, management issues Any recommended under this heading will need the support of detailed proposals, financial and management implications. Given that these have previously been prepared, they must be presented in a form the farmer will understand. ADAS has several benefits in this area, including a track record in agricultural consultancy. This role will require clear lines of communication between the research scientists and stakeholders. Where these are other scientists (water, ecology etc) this may not be a problem. However, the role of farm consultant will be crucial when relaying technical information to farmers from the project team, and vice-versa. The role of ADAS and of the NFU may be utilised here.
5.2 Sticks, Carrots and advice The mechanisms by which farmers and growers are influenced to make changes vary widely but they can be considered as ‘carrots’ (incentives) or ‘sticks’ (penalties). The pressure to make the ‘polluter pay’ was highlighted by the UK Government’s proposal to introduce a pesticides tax (DETR 1999). However, complex interactions in the natural world mean that it is very difficult to separate out cause and effect and as a consequence it is often impossible to identify the required measures or provide the necessary evidence to assist the implementation of changes and therefore ensure compliance (Brightman and Carter, 2001).
A list of EC Directives that might be used to implement water and environmental objectives via national legislation under the WFD is given below.
i. The Bathing Water Directive 76/160/EEC
52 ii. The Birds Directive 79/409/EEC iii. The Drinking Water Directive 80/778/EEC as amended by Directive 98/83/EC iv. The Major Accidents (Seveso) Directive 96/82/EC v. The Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 85/337/EEC vi. The Sewage Sludge Directive 86/278/EEC vii. The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 91/271/EEC viii. The Plant Protection Products Directive 91/414/EEC ix. The Nitrates Directive 91/676/EEC x. The Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC xi. The Integrated Pollution Prevention Control Directive 96/61/EC
A number of these clearly will not be relevant to the work proposed at Whittle Dene, but the Statutory Instruments responsible for the implementation of these Directives nevertheless represent the ultimate mechanism for change where suitable conditions apply. A second list of ‘supplementary measures’ also provides a useful summary of tools that may be considered.
i. legislative instruments ii. administrative instruments iii. economic or fiscal instruments iv. negotiated environmental agreements v. emission controls vi. codes of good practice vii. re-creation and restoration of wetlands areas viii. abstraction controls ix. demand management measures, inter alia promotion of adapted agricultural production such as low water requiring crops in areas affected by drought x. efficiency and re-use measures, inter alia promotion of water efficient technologies in industry and water saving irrigation techniques xi. construction projects xii. desalination plants xiii. rehabilitation projects xiv. artificial recharge of aquifers xv. educational projects xvi. research, development and demonstration projects xvii.other relevant measures
A range of codes of best practice and guidance literature have been published by many organisations. The MAFF Codes of Good Agricultural Practice series are amongst the best known and have the widest distribution.
The Code of Good Agricultural Practice for the protection of Water (MAFF / WOAD, 1998) and the Code of Good Agricultural Practice for the protection of Soil (MAFF / WOAD 1998) are practical guides to help farmers and growers prevent water and soil pollution. A similar booklet has been written on aerial pollution. The Water Code is a Statutory Code under Section 21 of the Water Resources Act (SI, 1991), but the Soil Code is not a Statutory Code since there is currently no similar Act of Parliament to protect soil. The Code of Practice for the Safe Use of Pesticides on
53 Farms and Holdings(MAFF, 1998) is also a Statutory Code under the Food and Environment Protection Act (FEPA) (SI, 1985) and the Health and Safety at Work Act (SI, 1974). Following these Codes will help defend against any legal action concerning water or soil.
The information contained in the Codes is generally agreed to be effective in controlling water pollution and protecting the environment if it is correctly followed. However, the Codes have not been taken up widely by farmers and landowners and it may be fair to say that the farmers and landowners with a previous interest in the wellbeing of soil and watercourses may have been more enthusiastic than those with little interest. In this respect, the target audience may have generally been missed. The Better Regulation Task Force (BRTF) is an independent body, appointed in September 1997 to advise Government on improving the quality of its regulation. On the issue of environmental advice to farmers, the BRTF considered:
“The information in the Codes of Good Agricultural Practice is widely respected but it is also agreed that few farmers actually use them. One problem is that MAFF has different readerships for the Codes. Professionals working in agriculture such as Environment Agency inspectors and agronomists see them as a “bible”, an essential reference work. But they are incomprehensible to many farmers. MAFF have produced simple, one page summaries of the vital information from the Codes in non- technical language.” BTRF (2000)
One page leaflets were subsequently produced, however, it is still apparent that farmers and landowners can be overwhelmed by ‘Best Advice’ and information and further, this information is often conflicting. The situation regarding the management of field margins are a good example.
Three schemes affect farm use and management of field edges: the headland set-aside strips; the arable margins in the Countryside Stewardship Schemes; and the pesticide buffer or no-spray zones under the Local Environment Risk Assessment Plans (LERAP). Each measure is intended either to protect the farm environment or to control production. Each scheme requires that strips of land are left untouched. However, the areas which have to be set aside vary from 20 metres to one metre which can complicate farming operations unnecessarily. Furthermore, each strip is enforced by a different authority. The BRTF considered that there is merit in working towards a standard width of field margin and co-ordinating enforcement. This should benefit the environment by encouraging more farmers to participate, as they will not have to adjust their equipment for the different schemes.
The work proposed is ideally placed to draw together this type of information in various forms, and begin to condense the advice into a coherent programme of measures. At the moment, it could be considered that the sheer volume of material and sometimes contradictory advice is a ‘stick’ to better farm management. On a practical level, the farmer may not pick the best range of farm management options for the particular farm unit, and on a different level, may be put off from trying to implement agrienvironmental measures altogether.
54 There has been a general movement away from subsidies for production towards payments to farmers to promote good environmental practices. There can be little doubt that the over-production stimulated by the unreformed Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has damaged the environment and the Agenda 2000 reforms are a first step towards setting that right. However, the dual aims of environmental protection while remaining competitive and productive are not an easy balance. Integrated agri- environment and rural policies are now established as the second pillar of CAP and this shift from production to environmental support (modulation) is likely to continue. It is important that this does not impede the competitiveness of British farming.
While discussing ‘sticks and carrots’, the Environment Agency often contact farms in the context of enforcement or a pollution incident. This means that it can be difficult to establish the trust which is necessary to advise farmers effectively. To reinforce this opinion, discussion with local Environment Agency staff has revealed that communication between ADAS and the local landowners or farmers has been more effective, even when talking about water pollution incidents or diffuse pollution. It has become clear that a visit by ADAS staff shortly after a visit from the EA can be an effective mechanism to engage dialogue.
Recent Environment Agency initiatives have sought to establish trust with the agricultural community. The publication of Best Farming Practices: Profiting from a good environment (EA, 2001) represents an important step in this direction. By incorporating key messages from the Codes of Good Agricultural Practice into a single booklet, an effective overview of farm management for environmental gain and to protect the environment is drawn together. The booklet emphasises practical measures that can be implemented on farms to improve profitability, and also summarises current agrienvironmental schemes. This principle is in-keeping with the principles of ‘whole farm planning’ advocated in the USA and could potentially be used as a starting point for developing this scheme in the UK.
5.3 Catchment twinning The concept of Whole Farm Management with regards to catchment management has been operating successfully in the USA for a number of years (eg Porter, 1997). There is potential for similar initiatives in the UK, and many features of the schemes which have been implemented in the USA may be advocated as part of the work proposed in the Whittle Dene area. There is therefore a need to share ideas and explore solutions to common problems in an international context. A recent initiative aims to develop a scheme of Catchment Twinning to encourage this.
The objective of the scheme is to develop a program of twinning watershed (river catchment) areas, initially between North America, Australia and the UK in order to improve practice through shared professional experience. The basic objectives of the programme are listed in Table 4.2.
This initiative is currently being developed jointly by the New York State Water Resources Institute and Imperial College at Wye, Kent. It has been suggested that three catchment projects in the UK could be twinned with similar projects in either the USA or Australia. To achieve a balance between different aims and objectives, these are likely to be divided into urban or rural catchments.
55 The work proposed in the Whittle Dene area bears many similarities to that currently running in the rural areas of New York State. With regards to catchment twinning, the ‘Whole Farm Planning’ approach advocated by the New York Watershed Agricultural Program offers many lessons for the UK. Conversely, in recent years the UK has developed agri environmental schemes which have been relatively successful. The work within the Whittle Dene project will examine the features of these schemes and their effectiveness in controlling diffuse agricultural pollution while delivering environmental benefits. Both schemes can therefore offer each other significant practical guidance. Thus, it appears highly desirable to identify a suitable overseas subcatchment to explore the possibility of ‘twinning’ the work in the Whittle Dene area.
56 Table 5.2 The objectives of the New York State Water Resources Institute Catchment Twinning Programme Specific objectives: • Identify and facilitate candidate watersheds for twinning • Assist in water management issue definition • Promote best practice in watershed management through exchange of technical ideas and policy prescriptions • Promote awareness of watershed issues through schools and university courses • Assist in the professional development of personnel through shared experiences and exchanges involving professional bodies • Promote conferences through professional bodies and academic institutions • Sponsor and promote publications relevant to watershed management • Promote research programmes of mutual interest • Seek funding opportunities in pursuit of the above
Mechanisms: Levels of contact may be identified as:
• Industry (water companies). • Academic institutions (e.g. Imperial College and Cornell). • Regulators / agencies/ special programmes (e.g. USEPA/Corps of Engineers/EA/NYCWP). • Professional bodies (American Waterworks Association/Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management). • Voluntary conservation groupings. • Watershed groups, UK local government.
57 6. DISCUSSION and RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Overview and Summary The results of the scoping study suggest that the Whittle Dene reservoir complex and its associated catchment area would benefit from a detailed and comprehensive research programme. Such a programme would be pertinent for a number of reasons. The semi uplands represents a unique location in terms of its geography and represents the interface between relatively clean upland water, and water of the lowlands which is subject to many anthropogenic pressures.
A number of key areas for research have been identified. At the highest level these can be described as:
1. Scientific (direct work at plot, field, farm and catchment levels) 2. Knowledge-based (information transfer and information management) 3. Project management (stakeholders, funders and deliverers) 4. Strategic (integration of 1-3 into national framework)
The overall project is by necessity relatively long term. Initial work should commence as soon as the project is agreed and funding is in place. Winter is a good time to engage farmers and landowners, and other relevant stakeholders in preparation for the installation of field monitoring equipment and commencement of spring monitoring. Additionally, stakeholder meetings can be arranged and surveys can be devised and drafted during this period.
The full project should aim to collate detailed catchment information (some of which was not possible in this report due to FMD). The detailed assessment of the Western Reservoir Catchment in readiness for potential field experiments and monitoring is overdue, and should ideally begin as soon as the risk of transmission of FMD has passed. Indications are that this will be early in the New Year of 2002. Continuing into through the project, the full Whittle catchment will be assessed and characterised for threats and opportunities in a similar manner to the Western. In subsequent years, lessons learned within the Western may be employed further north.
6.2 Scientific A number of scientific research topics have been identified, and though some initial data and results have been reported, it is clear that a thorough study of water, environmental and agricultural issues within the Whittle Dene area needs to be conducted. Within this programme, there also needs to be a comprehensive assessment of farms and farm practices. This needs to be conducted early in the study, and should be initiated as soon as possible.
In terms of the scientific programme, it is considered that there is a clear idea of the issues that need to be addressed in the catchment. These can largely be divided under the headings of wildlife/biodiversity, nutrient management, pesticides, pathogens amenity and other categories that may become important, as shown in Figure 5.1. This study aims to integrate a number of solutions to stated objectives. The approach requires an assessment of issues within the catchment, and for clarity these should be assessed individually by established methods. Once a survey of the catchment issues has been conducted under the headings suggested in Figure 5.1, then priorities for
58 action can be devised. These actions will require the selection of appropriate measures under current scientific findings. This stage is where most studies would implement management strategies to tackle individual problems. The next step within the proposed work would then be to evaluate, as far as possible from available sources, how to best integrate measures for the benefit of the catchment area as a whole. Any potential synergies should be identified, and built on, while any counterproductive relationships should be avoided as far as possible. In this way, it is anticipated that a ‘framework’ or decision tree can be devised.
During the first year of the study, it will be necessary to conduct work concurrently. For example, it has been noted that a survey of farm management will be required to identify current and potential future practices. During this time, it will also be necessary to install water monitoring equipment and survey catchment characteristics. This is illustrated in Figure 5.2.
It is suggested that the Western Catchment could be used for detailed work and studies. As discussed previously, the Western is small, hydrological isolated, yet contains mixed agriculture, arable systems, 5 representative farm units, roads and forestry. Initially, work should be focussed in this area. As the project develops, an assessment of the larger Whittle Dene Catchment area should be conducted alongside the field programme. In this way, the scale of the project can increase seamlessly.
6.2.1 Soils management and soil nutrients From the soil mapping and descriptions given in Jarvis (1984) the Brickfield soil association which is found in and around the Whittle Dene Catchment appears representative of wide areas of the Northumbrian region. This homogeneity is likely to ease extrapolation of scientific results across large areas, and certainly more so than if the soil association were of minor importance to the region.
In terms of the proposed work, the full study should investigate more thoroughly not only individual soil series within the Western Catchment and within the Whittle Dene Complex, but also the condition of the soil in key areas of the catchment. A more detailed knowledge of the soil series will allow better planning of experiments and interpretation of results. Further, an examination of soil conditions (e.g. soil structure, waterlogging, capping) may aid interpretation of potential pollutant transport mechanisms. The methods of soil management and cultivation are critical to maintain good soil structure. The possible trend to minimal cultivation within the larger farm units that have converted to arable cereal rotations is cause for further study. Recent initiatives by the Soil Management Initiative (SMI, 2001) have highlighted how careful consideration when deciding a cultivation and crop establishment system can help prevent diffuse losses of potential pollutants, improve long term soil health, and often improve profits. The National Soil Resources Institute (NSRI) have recently produced a booklet on soil structure aimed at farmers (NSRI, 2001) and these could also be targeted at farmers within the catchment.
This is an area of work which should be started within the first year of the study and should be monitored at regular intervals. The status of the soil resource is paramount if the principle of sustainable agriculture is to be upheld. The suitability of the Whittle Dene area for arable production appears questionable (Section 3). Physical damage to the soil may exacerbate surface and shallow subsurface runoff to
59 watercourses. Additionally, timely autumn and spring cultivation are important in weed management. Where unsuitable cultivation techniques are used, a weed problem can be caused or increased, which will then place increased importance on the success of herbicide programmes. Clearly the issue of soil management is a vital element to the proposed study. Work should address the issue of ‘best practice’ within the farm systems associated with the area.
The nutrient status of soils within the catchment should also be assessed. Significant applications of both organic (Crop residues, FYM and slurry) and inorganic fertilisers have been applied as part of normal farm management over several decades. Given that pesticide transport to watercourses appears to be significant and rapid in many parts of the catchment, it is of interest why relatively low concentrations of both NO3 and SRP were found at the Water Treament Works. The presence of algal blooms in the reservoir complex (pers comm, NWL), suggests that the concentration of nutrients may be higher than reported from initial ad hoc sampling in 2000. Additionally, the total concentration of P (in unfiltered samples) has not been determined. The sediment bound P fraction is usually most significant in terms of surface and shallow subsurface runoff, and can represent a form of slowly available P when deposited in lakes, reservoirs and watercourses during and after rainfall events. Conversely, SRP is a readily available fraction of P, but is usually found at low concentrations.
The silting of Whittle Dene and Whittle Burn may be of concern with regards to the ecology of the watercourses. Species will be affected by changes in water quality and siltation of the burns is undesirable. A number of factors may cause sedimentation of watercourses, and these will include soil erosion from fields due to field operations being conducted in inappropriate conditions. Another factor may include excessive growth of bankside and in-channel species. However, these factors may be interrelated. For example, excessive fertiliser in inputs may alter the competitive balance of aquatic and bankside species and any excessive growth of herbage may trap suspended sediment, which will cause the channel to become silted.
60 Figure 6.1 Suggested framework for the scientific aspects of the study
Integration Feasibility of integrating solutions and harnessing potential - for discussion only
Yr 1 Biodiversity N+P Pesticides Pathogens Amenity Other? Survey Survey Survey Survey Survey Survey
Audit Audit Audit Audit Audit Audit
Prioritise Prioritise Prioritise Prioritise Prioritise Prioritise
PRIORITISE PLAN
IMPLEMENT
Monitor Monitor Monitor Monitor Monitor Monitor Yr 5
Figure 6.2 Flow diagram of practical and scientific work required in Year 1.
Farm survey (visits and talks) Catchment survey • current and future (fieldwork and monitoring) • soil management and cultivation • hydrology and drainage • stocking • water quality and quantity • manure • soil survey (physical) • pesticides • soil survey (chemical) • nutrients • wildlife/biodiversity • agri-environmental programmes
PRIORITISE PRIORITISE
FARM MANAGEMENT PLANS / CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PLANS
61 When a full survey of the Western Catchment has been conducted, it is suggested that a modelling exercise could be conducted to investigate the use of GIS and modelling software to predict if and when surges of key contaminants could be expected to occur. This may assist management of the reservoir complex, and allow water to be diverted at times of potential stress. The ADAS modelling group have experience in the implementation of this methodology, and therefore this avenue is an area which could be explored during the project. Other less sophisticated, but useful management tools could also be employed after the collection of suitable information and data. For example, a nutrient budget for the Western Catchment could be constructed. After data on land use, animal and fertiliser inputs have been collected and collated, it may also be possible to construct a simple export coefficient model for nutrients. In this manner, any changes on nutrient loss from agricultural land as a result of and proposed changes in land cover and area could be assessed prior to the implementation of schemes.
Suggested programme • Soil survey of the Western catchment and reconnaissance of the Whittle Dene catchments. • Soil physical analyses of the Western and Whittle Dene catchments (PSD, BD). • Soil chemical analyses (N, P, K, Mg, pH) – Spring and autumn. • Stock and manure/survey (quantity, storage and use) • Nutrient use survey within the catchments to include details from stock and manure storage/use survey • Long-term trials on soil cultivation techniques and crop establishment onwards. • Review of programme of measures • Additional exercises, including modelling
6.2.2 Pesticides The intimate link between pesticide use and efficacy, pesticide losses and pathways and soil management was made in Section 3. A good soil structure combined with effective and sensible crop husbandry will result in improved crop health and vigour and competitive ability against weeds; therefore a decreased dependence on herbicides, and the possibility of a more strategic pesticide strategy. The results of the soil survey programme in Section 6.2.1 will therefore be integral to the work proposed for pesticides and for farm management generally.
A comprehensive monitoring programme across the Western Catchment, and selective monitoring in the Whittle Dene Catchment is required in Year 1 and throughout the project. Currently it is apparent that there are strong data to support the view that some areas of the catchment are responsible for a high proportion of the pesticides that are found in the watercourses in the area. This should be confirmed and quantified by baseline monitoring and by automated sampling at key locations during rainfall events, as outlined in Section 6.2.5. When high-risk areas have been identified both by a suitable water sampling regime, and mapping using Geographic Information System, then a suitable risk mitigation strategy can be drawn.
In practice any strategy to reduce the concentration of pesticides in watercourses will draw on a number of solutions for both point and diffuse sources. These may include engineering options (eg drain diversions to buffer zones) improved pesticide use and mixing practices, washdown areas, buffer strips and reduction of spray drift). It is
62 important to integrate these measures with others which may be advocated for control of N, P, pathogens and wildlife value.
Integral to any proposed work will be advice given under the CPA pesticide initiative. Farm specific Crop Protection Management Plans are inherent to the programme and these could be developed and trialed throughout the life of the project.
Suggested programme • Pesticide tracing and use. Farm – specific information on products used, mixing and application methods. • Application of Pesticide Stewardship programmes where applicable. • Trial of CPA Crop Protection Management Plans (CPMPs). • Mitigation strategies specific to problem areas after field visits and monitoring.
6.2.3 Pathogens As discussed in Section 3, the prevalence of potential pathogens from both livestock and domestic sources will be dependent on many factors. Stock type, stock husbandry, grazing management and manure management are all critical areas when assessing the risk of water pollution from animal pathogens. Recent concern about the contamination of water supplies by Cryposporidium have renewed the importance of studying the pathogen content of farm manure and slurries to devise best practice for their use and ADAS has considerable experience in this area. However, it should be remembered that there may also be risks of transmission of a variety of harmful organisms to watercourses that are used for amenity.
As with pesticides, the first stage in addressing this issue will be to consider current practices. However, this area has renewed importance with regard to restructuring and restocking following FMD. A number of farms may be looking to alter their stocking, or to abandon animal husbandry altogether in favour of arable (where possible). Alternatively, it is possible that farms may favour a venture into extensive grazing where practicable, and clearly this will also have implications for the study.
Suggested programme
• Survey Western Catchment for • Stock type and quantity • Housing • Manure type and use • Grazing management • Hydrologic assessment of risks including runoff from farmyards. • Land zoning • Riparian zones • Adequate fencing of watercourses
6.2.4 Farms It is evident that over the past decade there has been a general trend away from traditional mixed agriculture, towards arable rotations wherever possible in the semi- uplands of England and Wales. Falling farm incomes, especially small, family run
63 livestock units would suggest that this change will continue in the north east region, and more specifically in the Whittle Dene area.
Any practical measures advocated as part of this study must compliment the systems in place. For this reason, the study should include a survey of farm type and management to include future plans wherever possible. Clearly any major changes in farm type, size or structure will have large impacts on the objectives of this study.
In year 1 of the study the project should address as a matter of urgency • Review of farm type, size and structure • Review of farm units and study of potential changes in farm units and cropping • Review of land classes over past decade. May include years 1990, 1995 and 2000. Methods may include • Remote sensing (satellite and aerial photography) • Parish statistics
6.2.5 Water monitoring programme Water quality within the catchment area, drains, burns, watercourses and reservoirs is a major component of the study. The protection of freshwater resources underlies the programme of measures to enhance wildlife and the wider environment.
The current water quality sampling procedures in the Whittle Dene Catchment should be enhanced by an automated system strategically designed to highlight high risk areas or practices that can then be addressed. Currently, there is apparently little monitoring work within the catchment. Installation of a comprehensive monitoring network is therefore paramount to collect necessary data to trace water quality problems that are routinely observed at the WTW and to identify other potential risks.
Another requirement is that samples should be triggered automatically at a range of flow conditions. In this way background concentrations of selected determinands at baseflow can be contrasted against those at rising and falling limbs in the hydrograph after rainfall events.
It has not been possible to conduct a full hydrological survey of the Western Catchment as originally intended as this would have required full access to farmland within the proposed study area. Clearly this was not possible or desirable due to limitations imposed by FMD. In the absence of this, initial assessment of a monitoring network was made from published maps and from the roadside.
If research is initially conducted on the Western Catchment, there are a number of strategic locations where gauging stations and automated samplers could be located. The samplers can be stage related via ultrasound water depth monitors, and can be set to trigger samples at pre-determined intervals during baseflow, or rainfall events. A further option is the capability of automated data capture via a dedicated phone link to ADAS. In this manner key information such as flow rates, water depth and turbidity can be assessed remotely daily or in real time. This system also has the advantage that any problems in equipment is spotted quickly, and can be rectified. Additionally, field staff can be informed when sampling has been triggered and can respond promptly to events. This capability can be important when trace levels of pesticides need to be determined in a fresh water sample.
64 Suggested programme
Sites for discussion • Hydrologic and field drainage survey – to include roads and urban drainage • Small flume and automatic ‘Epic’ watersampler at Whittle Burn exit of Shildonhill plantation. • Flume and sampler prior to pond in Whittle Burn • Drainflow monitoring from Welton Hall Farm before ‘catch pit’ • Flume and sampler end of ‘Vallum Runner’. • Road drain monitoring (automated), one site by discussion. • Grab samples from catch pit each time samples are collected. • Grab samples from Western Reservoir
Sample determinands • Pesticide suite – IPU, Propyzamide others… • NO3-N • MRP, Total P, SRP, TRP, • Pathogens – for discussion where and how • Turbidity • Suspended sediment • pH • Conductivity
6.2.6 Wildlife and biodiversity The adoption of strategies to reduce diffuse agricultural pollution in the catchment should be evaluated at an early stage to consider what additional environmental benefits they may offer. These may be at many levels, and will therefore require significant expertise. For example, high-risk areas under arable management may be selected for alternative management. The land could then be managed in a manner that was sympathetic to specific wildlife objectives. Clearly this will require careful consideration with regards to farm profitability, and this will need to be discussed carefully at a number of levels. Options under Countryside Stewardship represent one route to balance these objectives, and a detailed assessment of the integration of this, and other schemes will be needed.
A number of options have been identified for further study:
Beneficial land management techniques: Suggested programme • Evaluation of alternative land management strategies, such as rotational and long- term set-aside, and establishment of low-input permanent grassland, and non- agricultural habitats such as woodland or wetlands. • Reduced herbicide applications in arable crops and grass leys, allowing low levels of annual weed populations to establish. • Evaluation of the effect of organic farming practices in the catchment. • Buffer strips and zones, including novel designs to meet multiple objectives of reducing pollution and making a positive contribution to biodiversity conservation.
65 • Vegetation management strategies in ditches and watercourses.
Suggested research strategy • Habitat inventory and assessment of the Western Catchment and remaining study area. • Small-scale experiments to test vegetation management techniques. • GIS-based analysis of a range of scenarios for the location and spatial distribution of different management activities at the whole-catchment scale.
The success of small-scale experiments and catchment-scale land management strategies could be assessed in relation to:
• Aquatic indicators of water quality, such as invertebrate populations. • Other aquatic biota. • Soil biota (incorporated into soil monitoring programme). • Terrestrial and aquatic vegetation. • Terrestrial invertebrates. • Habitat structure and food availability in relation to key taxa, for example granivorous passerines, dragonflies or water voles. • Surveys and GIS-based analysis of key data at the whole catchment scale.
6.3 Project management The steering group recognised the need for an agreed structure to project delivery to account for a wide project membership. For this reason, a project management structure was discussed and agreed (Appendices). This structure comprises a project steering group, and a project delivery team, together with external consultees, and internal experts.
The steering group comprises representatives of funding organisations (DEFRA, UKWIR, Environment Agency, Northumbrian Water Ltd, Crop Protection Association), project delivery, (ADAS) consultees (National Farmers Union) plus ad hoc members.
The project delivery team comprises representatives of funding organisations, key stakeholders and direct project members. Internal experts may feed into this group on a frequent basis.
Various other individuals, charities and specialist organisations will be consulted and will feed into the project on various levels.
Communication between groups was also addressed. The project delivery team will hold primary responsibility for stakeholder liaison after initial stakeholder engagement and dialogue. However, knowledge management in such a complicated project is crucial. Although day to day communication between groups and organisations must not be impeded in any way, the steering group has recognised the need for careful management of information. Section 5 outlined the need for clear and understandable messages for dissemination to stakeholders, and especially to farmers.
66 The project aims and objectives are multidisciplinary. Ultimately, the project aims to deliver numerous environmental benefits, and these are practical goals. However, at a conceptual level the project will offer a more complete understanding of the potential conflicts between multi-environmental goals, which are inherent objectives under the Water Framework Directive. This information is of a specialist nature and should therefore be offered to the scientific, political and socioeconomic experts.
Therefore, in common with other catchment projects, there is a need to offer clear and concise information to at least two separate groups (technical/socio-political and stakeholders). This aspect of the future work needs discussion and agreement at discreet stages of the project.
6.4 Communication and Knowledge Transfer Section 5 outlined possible approaches with regards to knowledge management and transfer. Any major initiatives in the catchment must be with the co-operation of local and regional stakeholders. Attention has focused primarily on the rural community and agriculture, though it is recognised that there are a number of other groups with an interest in the proposed work. Local and regional Government and planners should be consulted when the full project is agreed. Similarly, wildlife and environmental groups have interests that are integral to the proposed work. Again, consultation should begin at an early stage to ensure that any work is in agreement with local and regional in wildlife initiatives. Dialogue with these groups should begin at an early stage, such that opportunities under regional work programmes are not missed.
Given that the land area is predominantly agricultural, the first step in the engagement process will be with landowners, foresters, and farmers. The scoping study has established that local stakeholders in the Western Catchment are interested in the project, and are likely to be fully co-operative. Dialogue should commence early. Recent catchment programmes in the UK and USA have highlighted the potential for effective projects using local communities. However, there are institutional and cultural differences that should be explored. For example, in the USA a ‘bottom up’ approach to stakeholder integration is fundamental to any work. Typically landowners and communities are assisted by institutional frameworks to set up their own projects. Alternatively, in the UK, despite a shift towards stakeholder ‘engagement’ the regulatory authorities and experts still generally drive catchment initiatives. The participatory approach may therefore still be confrontational and time consuming. There is no point in making an effort to listen to participatory groups if the message from them is subsequently ignored.
Alternatively, key stakeholders could be asked for solutions to any agreed problems (‘agreement’ of the problems is an integral part of the process; Section 5). Clearly those that work the land in the Whittle Dene Catchment have local knowledge that should be fully utilised. If acceptance of a problem between groups is established, then answers may be forthcoming which will make any solutions ultimately self- generated.
To engage dialogue, a popular approach is to call a meeting of key stakeholders. This can be formal, or informal. Often a key figure is presented to draw attention to the importance of the project. It is suggested that scientific or technical professionals are
67 not best placed to lead such meetings, but are ideally placed to reinforce technical debate. A local prominent figure may be solicited to lead an initial meeting, and this may generate interest in the project. Additionally the project may gain support and be viewed as likely to succeed. Thus the message and the messenger should both be credible. This should be explored early in the project.
It was apparent that some members of the local community may welcome the project, and manage land that may disproportionately influence project objectives, but will not be comfortable in formal or social gatherings. This is not easy to reconcile with the project. Consideration should therefore be given to individual, one to one meetings with relevant project staff. These should not be members of regulatory organisations, research bodies or technical staff, but should be able to communicate and understand their audience.
Suggested programme
• Stakeholder engagement. • Stakeholder Workshop – led by invited guest / personality • Stakeholder Forum. • News sheet – regular and pertinent, 1 side A4. May contain: • Weather details • Cropping information and timing • Concentrations of key parameters (pesticides, N and P) in previous period with direct links made with farm management (eg pesticide applications) • Demonstration plots / farms • Local press and publicity • National popular press trade and technical magazines • Conferences and seminar presentations • Dedicated web site; tiered to provide different levels of access to the general public, stakeholders and project team • Other measures, as discussed in Section 5.
6.5 Short term measures The objectives of this project is necessarily long –term. As discussed in other sections, it is anticipated that a period of background monitoring, data collection and assessment will be conducted prior to assessment and consideration of priorities for attention. It is possible that a number of long - term measures will be recommended, and these are likely to require changes in farm management, practices or structure. Therefore, any recommendations of this nature will require careful consideration as to ways to encourage uptake and implementation.
It is also possible that some relatively quick, cheap and easy actions will have an immediate beneficial impact on environmental and water quality within the catchment. For example, the inappropriate storage of manure close to watercourses or aqueducts will be easy to identify, and relocation may not require complicated planning or administration. Similarly, it is possible that field drainage may require maintenance, or ditches cleared and again relatively simple advice could have immediate benefits without significant cost.
68 Clearly, any options to reduce water pollution can be divided into ‘quick fix’ and ‘slow burners’. During and after catchment evaluation, farm assessment and background monitoring, the potential to apply ‘quick fixes’ should be considered. If any actions are then considered to be appropriate by the project management committee, they can be recommended for implementation immediately after background monitoring.
6.5 Conclusion This report has outlined the current issues relating to land and water management. A unique area has been identified in the semi-uplands of Northumberland that would benefit from a research programme to devise an approach to tackle these issues. Many measures have been devised and promoted and each has a role to play when employed in a suitable manner. Unfortunately, the range of measures and advice can sometimes be counter-productive unless significant time can be spent to devise a coherent plan of action.
69 REFERENCES ADAS (1997) Survey of Animal Manure Practices in the Beef Industry. Report to MAFF.
Archer, J. (2001) Review of current and recent knowledge transfer activities in relation to environmental protection in agriculture. Final Report to MAFF, Contract: NT 1857.
Better Regulation Task Force (2000) Environmental Regulations and Farmers. Cabinet Office Publications & Publicity Team. November 2000
Brightman, D and Carter, (2001) Policy, practice and partnership: pragmatism or perfection in farming? British Crop Protection Council Symposium Proceedings No.78.
CEC (1986) Council Directive of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture (86/278/EEC). Official Journal of the European Communities No. L 181/6-12.
CEC (1991a) Council Directive of 21 May 1991 concerning urban wastewater treatment (91/271/EEC). Official Journal of the European Communities No. L 135/40-52.
CEC (1991b) Council Directive of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates of agricultural sources (91/676/EEC). Official Journal of the European Communities No. L 375/1-8.
CEC (2000) Council Directive of 22 December 2000 on the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Official Journal of the European Communities No. L 327/1- 73
Clarke B (2001). Keeping sources safe from pesticides. Water 131: 7. Crop Protection Association (2001). Minimising the environmental impacts of crop protection chemicals, revised proposals - February 2001, CPA: Peterborough. Crop Protection Association (2001). Minimising the environmental impacts of crop protection chemicals, revised proposals - February 2001, CPA: Peterborough.
Countryside Agency (2001) The State of the Countryside 2001: The North East. Countryside Agency Publications, Wetherby, W. Yorks
DEFRA (2001). June Census 2000.
DEFRA. (2000) A Fair Deal for Rural England. Government White Paper.
DETR (1999). Design of a tax or charge scheme for pesticides. DETR: London.
DETR (2001) First Consultation Paper on the Implementation of the EC Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions, March 2001.
70 Environment Agency (1996) Understanding Buffer Strips – an information booklet. EA, Bristol
EUREAU (2001) Keeping Raw Drinking Water Resources Safe From Pesticides. EUREAU Position Paper EU1-01-56
Furse M T; Symes K L; Winder J M; Clarke R T; Blackburn J H; Gunn R J M; Grieve N J; Hurley M (1995). The faunal richness of headwater streams: Stage 3 –impact of agricultural activity. National Rivers Authority R&D note 392, National Rivers Authority: Bristol.
Geoff Broom Associates (1998) The economic impacts of recreation and tourism in the English Countryside 1998. London: Rural Development Commission and Countryside Commission
Hardy, R. & Measdowcroft, S. 1986. Indoor Beef Production. The Camelot Press Ltd Southampton.
Hardy, R. & Measdowcroft, S. 1986. Indoor Beef Production. The Camelot Press Ltd Southampton.
Johnes, P., Moss B and Phillips, G. (1996) The determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations in freshwaters from land use, stock headage and population data: Testing of a model for use in conservation and water quality management Freshwater Biology 36: pp 451-473
MacKenzie WR, Hoxie NJ, Proctor ME, et al 1994. A massive outbreak in Milwaukee of Cryptosporidium infection transmitted through the public water supply. New.England.J.Med. 331:1252-1255.
MAFF/ PSD (1999) Local Environmental Risk Assessments for Pesticides – A Practical Guide. MAFF, 1999
MAFF (2000) England rural development programme 2000 – 2006. Appendix A1 North East Region
MAFF (2000) Fertiliser Recommendations for Agricultural and Horticultural Crops (RB209), Seventh Edition. HMSO, London
Mainstone CP, Parr W and Day M (2000) Phosphorus and River Ecology Tackling sewage inputs. Report prepared on behalf of English Nature and the Environment Agency by WRc Ltd. English Nature, Peterborough
Mason P J; Foster, I D L; Carter A D; Walker A; Higginbotham S; Jones R; Hardy I (1999). Relative importance of point source contamination of surface waters: River Cherwell catchment monitoring study. XI Symposium Pesticide Chemistry, Human and Environmental Exposure to Xenobiotics, 12-15 September 1999, Università Cattolica ‘Sacro Cuore’: Cremona, Italy.
71 Nicholson, F.A., Hutchison, M.L., Smith, K.A., Keevil, C.W., Chambers, B.J. and Moore A. (2000) A study on farm manure applications to agricultural land and an assessment of the risks of pathogen transfer into the food chain. Final Report to MAFF, project FS2526
Northumbrian Water (1998) Northumbrian Water Biodiversity Strategy. Northumbrian Water Ltd, Durham
Pell, A.N. 1997. Manure and microbes: Public and animal health problem. J.Dairy.Sci. 80:2673-2681.
Pepper, T and Carter, A. (2000) Monitoring of Pesticides in the Environment. Environment Agency, Bristol.
Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food (2002) Farming and Food a sustainable future
Porter, M.J. (1997) Pollution Prevention Through Effective Agricultural Management. Watershed Agricultural Council, Walton, New York.
Pretty J (2000). Changing agricultural practices and their impact on biodiversity. Allied Domecq Public Lecture Series, 16 March 2000, University of Cambridge Committee for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies. Cambridge.
Pretty J, Brett C, Gee D, Hine R, Mason C F, Morison J I L, Raven H, Rayment M and van der Bijl G. 2000. An Assessment of the External Costs of UK Agriculture. Agricultural Systems V65 pp113-136
Robertson LJ, Campbell AT, Smith HV 1992. Survival of Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts under various environmental pressures. Appl.Env.Microbiol. 58:3494-3500.
Rose S; Carter A D; Basford W (2001) Development of a design manual for agricultural pesticide handling and washdown areas, Stage 1 Desk study review report. Technical report P2-200/TR/1 Environment Agency: Bristol, UK.
SMI (2001) A guide to managing crop establishment. UK SMI, Chester
Smith LP (1984) The Agricultural Climate of England and Wales. HMSO, London. Spiteller M; Hartmann H; Burhenne J; Muller K; Bach M; Frede H G (1999). Reduction of pesticide pollution in surface water determined by LC/MS-MS. XI Symposium Pesticide Chemistry, Human and Environmental Exposure to Xenobiotics, 12-15 September 1999, Università Cattolica ‘Sacro Cuore’: Cremona, Italy.
Svoboda I, Read I, Kemp JS, et al. 1997, Cryptosporidium on cattle farms in Anonymous Cryptosporidium in water- the challenge to policy makers and water managers. Glasgow, The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management, pp 3-20.
72 Young, J. (2000) Whittle Dene Reservoirs Phase II Habitat Survey. Report No. NW54, Young Nature Ecological Consultancy, Liddisdale, Riding Mill, Northumberland.
73 Appendix 1.
Committee Membership, Project Structure and Meeting Attendees.
74 75 Appendix 2.
Suggested project management chart
76 77
2002 2003 2004
Task Name Duration Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3
Project meetings 353 days
Project Steering Group 353 days
Internal meet ings 353 days
Projec t Int roduc t ion 483 days
1. Farmer meeting 26 days
Organise agenda/sp 10 days Jon Hillman[50%]
Organise venue 5 days
Inv itations 21 days
Prepare materials 14 days
Meeting 5 days
Meeting held 0 days 5/6
2. Farmer meeting 2 45 days
Organise agenda/sp 5 days
Organise venue 5 days
Inv itations 35 days
Adapt materials 5 days
Meeting 5 days
Meeting held 0 days 12/7
3. 'Others' meeting 77 days
Organise agenda/sp 14 days
Organise venue 14 days
Inv itations 42 days
Adapt materials 10 days
Meeting 7 days
Meeting held 0 days 15/10
4. Project website 460 days
Purchase domain na 30 days
Maintain website 395 days
Farm data collection 169 days
D es ign/agree s urv ey 30 days
Permission granted 0 days 11/6
Soil s urv ey & as ses smen 70 days
Undertak e farm inv entory 60 days
Farm inventories c omplet 0 days 23/12
Biodiversity review 65 days
Data collation 141 days
identify data s ets 28 days
Pur chas e data s ets 21 days
GIS system 42 days
GIS system commissioned 0 days 18/9
Add detailed farm data 42 days
Hydrology 87 days
Farmer agreement 14 days
Surv ey c atc hment 14 days
Plan monitor ing 14 days
Purchase/manufacture 35 days
Ins tallation/tes ting 14 days
System commissioned 0 days 29/8
Water sampling/analysis 415 days
Nitrate/Phosphorus 410 days
Se di m en t 410 days
Pesticide 410 days
Pathogens 410 days
GIS entry 180 days
Data synthesis/Developing m 247 days
Modelling 180 days
Inter preting water data 56 days
Identify k ey iss ues /solutio 30 days
Reporting 233 days
Interim report 14 days
D raft final report 35 days
Circulate draft 14 days
Pres ent report to Steering 7 days
Editing 40 days
Final report submitted 0 days 22/3
CSG7 for next phase 30 days
Submit CSG7 0 days 22/3
Farmer meetings 43 days 78
Organise agenda/speake 10 days
Organise venue 5 days 79