Written evidence submitted by Natural
England
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The challenge for water management is to maintain
services to communities and ensure that environmental needs are
met. This challenge will grow as the impacts of climate change
intensify and as development pressures increase.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Natural England's purpose is to ensure
that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced and managed
for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing
to sustainable development.
1.2 Delivering flood and water management
in sustainable ways is in the best interests of both the public
and the natural environment and can help to ensure the most effective
use of public money.
1.3 Natural England provides help to land
and water managers, including water companies, farmers and public
bodies, through advice, agric-environment schemes and guidance
on the needs of protected sites for biodiversity.
2.0 ISSUES ARISING
FROM THE
DRAFT FLOOD
AND WATER
MANAGEMENT BILL
CONSULTATION AND
THE WALKER
AND CAVE
REVIEWS
2.1 The challenge for water management is
to ensure that good-value services to communities are maintained
while avoiding environmental degradation. As the Lawton Review
notes: "We need to embrace a new, restorative approach which
rebuilds nature and creates a more resilient natural environment
for the benefit of wildlife and ourselves." This challenge
will increase as the impacts of climate change intensify and as
development pressures grow.
2.2 In England 28,693 hectares of open water
are protected within Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs),
including 15,923 hectares also designated under the EC Birds and
Habitats Directives. A further 263,000 hectares of SSSIs support
water-dependent terrestrial habitats: fens, wet grassland and
upland and lowland bogs.
2.3 The target to secure 95% of England's
SSSIs by area in favourable or favourable recovering condition
by December 2010 is on course for achievement. This masks the
fact that only 71% of SSSI Rivers and standing open waters meet
this standard. Over 17,500 hectares of these habitats are degraded
by abstraction, pollution from point or diffuse sources (including
agriculture) and the impacts of invasive species.
2.4 The impact of abstraction could be exacerbated
by predicted changes in rainfall patterns as a result of climate
change and population growth creating increased demand for water.
By 2050 river flows in late summer and early autumn could reduce
by over 50% and by 80% in some places. These patterns would result
in a drop in total annual average river flow of up to 15%.
2.5 Greater water efficiency will help reduce
demand and hence help to alleviate environmental stresses. Domestic
per capita consumption of water in England is currently about
148 litres per person per day (l/p/d), much higher than in comparable
European states (Germany 125 l/p/d, the Netherlands 124 l/p/d
[2007/08 figures]). Future Water identified an objective
for per capita water consumption to be an average of 130 l/p/d
by 2030.
2.6 More sophisticated management of supply
will benefit water-stressed environments. Abstraction licensing
systems should allow for water resources to be re-allocated or
for an area to be protected from abstraction where there may be
an impact on the natural environment. Universal time limiting
of abstraction licences is one way of providing greater flexibility
to amend licences to accommodate climate change, manage changes
in demand and enable a more pro-active approach to the management
of water resources within and across catchments.
3.0 FLOOD AND
WATER MANAGEMENT
THAT DELIVERS
OPTIMUM SOCIAL,
ECONOMIC AND
ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES
3.1 Water and freshwater ecosystems provide
goods and services that support or protect human activities: food
production, flood risk management, clean water and carbon storage.
3.2 The current pricing of water is based
only on costs of supply and administration rather than the full
economic cost of water supply, which includes the full externalities
and user costs of supply. An environmental evaluation or monetisation
of costs and benefits as part of decision-making processes could
focus attention on the breadth of desired environmental outcomes.
3.4 Asset Management Programmes under the
five-yearly Water Industry Price Reviews have contributed to environmental
protection. Given the future stresses of climate change and development,
longer-term planning with delivery programmes spanning several
Price Review cycles would be helpful. Water companies have already
made a start with the adoption of Water Resource Management Plans.
Freshwater and floodplain ecosystems benefit from strategic water
plans, such as River Basin Management Plans and industry Asset
Management Programmes, where these take biodiversity requirements
into account. Further integration embracing flood risk and land
management could deliver multiple-benefits, such as schemes that
combine wetland creation, carbon improved water quality and reduction
of flood run-off. This integration could be:
— Sharing data more effectively for catchment
planning;
— Seeking greater alignment of planning
and priority-setting for catchment actions;
— Establishing more multi-benefit schemes;
and
— Joining up arrangements at the catchment
level to facilitate joint land and water solutions.
3.5 SSSIs are affected by run-off from septic
tanks and private sewage works. While discharges are usually controlled
by treatment works with phosphorous-stripping capabilities, in
rural areas, treatment is often via small, on-site systems. These
are less efficient at retaining phosphorous and are often sited
close to freshwater ecosystems. Natural England research suggests
that 60 to 80% of septic systems are improperly sited or discharge
direct to water. De-sludging systems more frequently, preventing
overflows of untreated sewage and ensuring existing tanks are
maintained or replaced would help reduce discharges to the environment.
3.6 These solutions are hampered by the
fact that less than 10% of septic tank systems have discharge
consents, making it difficult to locate potential problem discharges.
In addition, only local authorities can propose to water companies
that they install first-time sewerage schemes and only for addressing
health or amenity issues.
3.7 Freshwater habitats are susceptible
to invasive non-native species with over 3,000 hectares of SSSIs
in unfavourable condition due to their impact. Species such as
Australian swamp stonecrop Casual helms and North American
signal crayfish Pacifastacus leniusculus are having widespread
impacts. Recently a freshwater amphipod of Eastern European origin
Dikerogammarus villosus was discovered in England. This
voracious predator can displace native species and disrupt ecosystems
so its occurrence is under investigation.
3.8 Eradication is difficult and there are
risks of re-infestation from neighbouring areas. Co-ordinated
control and containment, supported by a wide range of partners,
has the best chance of success in the long term. Partnership working
is also the key to resolving aquatic non-native species problems
under the Water Framework Directive. Natural England has a lead
under the Directive in piloting River Basin Forums on Invasive
Species, but funding and appropriate regulatory powers are limited.
4.0 FLOOD AND
WATER MANAGEMENT
ACT 2010 ISSUES
4.1 Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS)
contribute to biodiversity, Green Infrastructure networks, and
improved access to green spaces for urban communities. While the
Act requires SUDS for new developments, some existing underground
drainage systems fail to deal with flood events (as witnessed
in the 2007 floods) and might therefore benefit from the retro-fitting
of SUDS technologies.
October 2010
| 
