Sewage discharges.

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Mike Sales
Posts: 7883
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Sewage discharges.

Post by Mike Sales »

The storm overflows taskforce set up by the government to tackle raw sewage discharges by water companies in England has only met once in the last year, a freedom of information request has revealed.

The group, which was promoted by ministers as evidence that they were taking the issue of raw sewage discharges by water companies seriously, is supposed to meet fortnightly, according to its mission statement.

But in response to a freedom of information request by the Good Law Project, officials from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said the taskforce had only met once in the last year.

The storm overflows taskforce was set up in August 2020 after the Guardian first uncovered the scale of raw sewage discharges into rivers by water companies.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -overflows
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by reohn2 »

It's only what we've come to expect with a failed state whose government under Tory deliberate mismanagement's primary concern is increasing profits for those fill their coffers with millions of £s whilst their selfserving government ministers fill their own pockets into the bargain!
Corrupt doesn't even begin to describe UK government over the past 13years
It was ever thus with a system design to be corrupt.

Why would such people give a damn about polluting our waterways and seas?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Bonefishblues »

reohn2 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 8:39am It's only what we've come to expect with a failed state whose government under Tory deliberate mismanagement's primary concern is increasing profits for those fill their coffers with millions of £s whilst their selfserving government ministers fill their own pockets into the bargain!
Corrupt doesn't even begin to describe UK government over the past 13years
It was ever thus with a system design to be corrupt.

Why would such people give a damn about polluting our waterways and seas?
What's worse than a corrupt government?

An incompetent corrupt one.

What's worse than an incompetent corrupt one?

An incompetent corrupt and dysfunctional one.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by reohn2 »

Bonefishblues wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 8:58am
reohn2 wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 8:39am It's only what we've come to expect with a failed state whose government under Tory deliberate mismanagement's primary concern is increasing profits for those fill their coffers with millions of £s whilst their selfserving government ministers fill their own pockets into the bargain!
Corrupt doesn't even begin to describe UK government over the past 13years
It was ever thus with a system design to be corrupt.

Why would such people give a damn about polluting our waterways and seas?
What's worse than a corrupt government?

An incompetent corrupt one.

What's worse than an incompetent corrupt one?

An incompetent corrupt and dysfunctional one.
Quite!
And they don't come more incompetent,corrupt and dysfunctional than the past 13years of Tory governments.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Mick F »

River Tamar.
Separates Cornwall and England.

https://top-of-the-poops.org/waterway/s ... iver-tamar

Southwest Water are holding a session in Gunnislake village hall on the 20th of this month. They want to install a fish ladder for the allis shad on the Cornwall side of the river near Gunnislake. They are asking local residents for their opinions.

From chatting to people over the last few days, we are all singing off the same hymn sheet. Fix the pollution FIRST and then maybe spend some money on the shad.

The allis shad is the only spawning ground for these fish in UK.

Me?
My opinion is that as well as sorting out the sewage pollution, they should open the river banks on BOTH sides of the river for recreational use. There is a fishing syndicate who "own" the river banks and we are forbidden to launch boats or fishing, let alone having ANY public access on the Devon bank. 30years ago, the public had access and we had freedom. Now, we are banned.

Southwest Water will get the sharp end of my tongue, and I won't be the only one.
Sort out the pollution first and clean up the river before any other demands on our water bills.
Second, allow unfettered public access.

Then, they can spend money on a fish ladder.
Mick F. Cornwall
Jdsk
Posts: 24639
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Jdsk »

Mick F wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 4:34pm ...
Sort out the pollution first and clean up the river before any other demands on our water bills.
Second, allow unfettered public access.

Then, they can spend money on a fish ladder.
That may be the order of importance. But why does it have to be the order of implementation?

Thanks

Jonathan
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Bonefishblues »

Jdsk wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 4:59pm
Mick F wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 4:34pm ...
Sort out the pollution first and clean up the river before any other demands on our water bills.
Second, allow unfettered public access.

Then, they can spend money on a fish ladder.
That may be the order of importance. But why does it have to be the order of implementation?

Thanks

Jonathan
Indeed Jonathan.

Always a terribly sensible move to encourage a highly endangered (in the UK) species into one's locale, especially if one was looking for leverage to improve access and reduce pollution.

I've even got a slogan "Think about the Shad, dad"

Bloody marketing genius me :D
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Mick F »

The order of implementation is the same as the order of importance from my point of view.
It may not be your point of view, but it is mine, and the same point of view as many people I have spoken to.

Sort out the pollution - sort out the public access - as well as fishing and launching boats - get rid of the fishing syndicate too - and then build a fish ladder.

All to be done ASAP but in that order.
Mick F. Cornwall
pwa
Posts: 17370
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by pwa »

Mick F wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 7:03pm The order of implementation is the same as the order of importance from my point of view.
It may not be your point of view, but it is mine, and the same point of view as many people I have spoken to.

Sort out the pollution - sort out the public access - as well as fishing and launching boats - get rid of the fishing syndicate too - and then build a fish ladder.

All to be done ASAP but in that order.
There is a good, common sense reason why the order of implementation is not always the same as the order of importance. And that is the ease with which implementation of a particular action can be commenced. If one action is easier to get sorted than another, it might happen sooner because of that. And as long as that doesn't delay the more important things, that doesn't matter.

Regarding pollution, sewage discharges account for a minority of that on many rivers, the majority coming from farms. And the water companies have no control over that. In Wales, the Wye would still be in a bad state if every sewage overflow was dealt with.

I agree that public access should be as full as is practicable.
Last edited by pwa on 10 Jun 2023, 7:51pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Bonefishblues »

pwa wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 7:24pm
Mick F wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 7:03pm The order of implementation is the same as the order of importance from my point of view.
It may not be your point of view, but it is mine, and the same point of view as many people I have spoken to.

Sort out the pollution - sort out the public access - as well as fishing and launching boats - get rid of the fishing syndicate too - and then build a fish ladder.

All to be done ASAP but in that order.
There is a good, common sense reason why the order of implementation is not always the same as the order of importance. And that is the ease with which implementation of a particular action can be commenced. If one action is easier to get sorted than another, it might happen sooner because of that. And as long as that doesn't delay the more important things, that doesn't matter.

Regarding pollution, sewage discharges account for a minority of that on many rivers, the majority coming from farms. And the water companies have no control over that.
It's all far from black & white (or brown and grey for that matter). Abstraction* on top of drought also concentrates the faecal-loaded nitrate and phosphate soup that represents many watercourses today.

England has over 90% of the world's chalk streams - truly special environments. Three quarters (77%) of them are failing in that their water quality falls below 'Good'. Lots more awfully depressing stats available. The Wye's a basket case**, and so on and so on.

*2018 10.4 billion cubic metres from ground & surface water in England alone.
**Widely attributed to intensive chicken farming along the Wye Valley, albeit other factors are at play too.
Last edited by Bonefishblues on 10 Jun 2023, 8:14pm, edited 1 time in total.
pwa
Posts: 17370
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by pwa »

I should add that in the case cited by Mick, the fish ladder project is likely to be from a different budget to polution reduction measures, and it could be that delaying spending on that on his river might just end up diverting that pot of money to a similar project on another river. If it is money earmarked for fish stocks, that's what it will be spent on, just somewhere else.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Mick F »

Good morning guys.

Here's the letter from Southwest Water. Note that they say that the existing fish pass is on the Cornish bank. WRONG it's on the Devon bank.
IMG_1774.png
Screenshot 2023-06-11 at 08.22.48.png
Mick F. Cornwall
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Mick F »

PS:

I know the difference between immediate and important.
Do the immediate stuff first before doing the important stuff.

My comment regarding implementation and importance being the same thing ......... I was talking about new fish pass and the forthcoming public consultation.

The immediate thing is the pollution, followed by public access like we used to have. Get rid of the fishing syndicate too.
Then, the important thing - the new fish pass.
Mick F. Cornwall
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Bonefishblues »

On the broader subject (albeit Twaite Shad are a close relative of the Allis) here's some fine work just completed on the Severn.

https://www.unlockingthesevern.co.uk/ou ... fish-pass/
Jdsk
Posts: 24639
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Sewage discharges.

Post by Jdsk »

pwa wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 7:24pm
Mick F wrote: 10 Jun 2023, 7:03pm The order of implementation is the same as the order of importance from my point of view.
It may not be your point of view, but it is mine, and the same point of view as many people I have spoken to.

Sort out the pollution - sort out the public access - as well as fishing and launching boats - get rid of the fishing syndicate too - and then build a fish ladder.

All to be done ASAP but in that order.
There is a good, common sense reason why the order of implementation is not always the same as the order of importance. And that is the ease with which implementation of a particular action can be commenced. If one action is easier to get sorted than another, it might happen sooner because of that. And as long as that doesn't delay the more important things, that doesn't matter.
Yes.

In this case are the different projects competing for the same resource (eg money)? Or does one depend on another having happened?

Jonathan

PS: Priorities is now very widely used, and can easily confuse importance and order of implementation.
Post Reply