The Cam and Ely Ouse Management Catchment Figure 1 - River Ouse looking towards Ely Cathedral, Cambridgeshire

Transcription

1 The Cam and Ely Ouse Management Catchment Figure 1 - River Ouse looking towards Ely Cathedral, Cambridgeshire A summary of information about the water environment in the Cam and Ely Ouse management catchment

2 We are the Environment Agency. We protect and improve the environment and make it a better place for people and wildlife. We operate at the place where environmental change has its greatest impact on people s lives. We reduce the risks to people and properties from flooding; make sure there is enough water for people and wildlife; protect and improve air, land and water quality and apply the environmental standards within which industry can operate. Acting to reduce climate change and helping people and wildlife adapt to its consequences are at the heart of all that we do. We cannot do this alone. We work closely with a wide range of partners including government, business, local councils, other agencies, civil society groups and the communities we serve. Published by: Environment Agency Horizon House, Deanery Road, Bristol BS1 5AH enquiries@environmentagency.gov.uk Environment Agency 2014 All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency. Further copies of this report are available on the e-consultation tool: and via our National Customer Contact Centre: T: enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk. 2

3 Contents The Cam and Ely Ouse Management Catchment... 1 Contents Your views count The Cam and Ely Ouse Management Catchment Protected areas Status of waters Improvements to how water bodies are assessed Investigating the water environment in the Cam and Ely Ouse management catchment Challenges and choices consultation Taking action in partnership Measures that could improve the water environment Economic appraisal and environmental assessment of measures to improve the water environment Proposed long term objectives Links to other management plans Operational catchments Cam, Rhee and Granta Operational Catchment Lark Operational Catchment Little Ouse and Thet Operational Catchment Lower Cam Operational Catchment South Level and Cut-off Channel Operational Catchment Wissey Operational Catchment Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk Groundwater body Cam and Ely Ouse Woburn Sands Groundwater body What do you think? How to respond What the Environment Agency will use the responses for How the Environment Agency will use your information

4 1 Your views count Water is essential for life. It allows the natural environment to flourish, and businesses, agriculture and the economy to grow and prosper. The water environment provides many different benefits to society - from supplying drinking water and supporting fisheries to providing an essential resource for business and agriculture, transport routes and a source of recreation that promotes wellbeing. It is critical that this precious resource is managed properly to ensure that the needs of society, the economy and wildlife can be met and maintained in the long-term. Building on years of progress, the Environment Agency has worked with a range of partners over the past two years to agree what the main problems are, that are stopping there being a healthy water environment in the Cam and Ely Ouse, and how it should work with others to address them. The consultations, Working Together and Challenges and choices, have helped inform this final step in updating the river basin management plan for the Anglian River Basin District. The Challenges and choices consultation set out what the Environment Agency had identified as the significant issues facing the water environment. The significant issues were identified using a broad range of information, including the results of investigations, the agreed reasons for not achieving good status (previously called reasons for failure) across each catchment and more. We asked if you agreed with these significant issues. The majority of you did but you also raised additional local issues, which will take time to work through with catchment partnerships, to help shape the final river basin management plan. This catchment summary is a support document for the consultation on the draft update to the river basin management plan and for the Catchment Partnerships. It will help you to understand progress with the river basin management planning process so far, at a more local scale. This includes some initial economic appraisal to identify what actions are most cost beneficial. By understanding this information and letting the Environment Agency know what you think, you have an opportunity to influence the decisions about what actions will be taken over the next six years, to improve the health of your water environment. The Catchment Based Approach (CaBA) is a Government policy framework that empowers local action to improve the water environment through community partnerships. A renewed focus on the catchment based approach has led to new Catchment Partnerships being set up to drive local delivery.. More information is available in the Taking action in partnership section or you can contact the CaBA National Support Group: info@catchmentbasedapproach.org The partnerships are working on a wide range of issues, including the water environment but also address other concerns that are not directly related to river basin management planning. The information in this document will inform the work of the Cam and Ely Ouse Catchment Partnership, known as CamEO, in developing their vision, aims and priorities; it is not intended to duplicate or overarch the important local work. To view the consultation on the update to the Anglian River Basin Management Plan, please visit 4

5 This is a public consultation and we, the Environment Agency, welcome everyone's views. Figure 2 shows the location of the Cam and Ely Ouse management catchment within the Anglian River Basin District. To help you get the most out of the information provided within this catchment summary, we have provided a glossary to explain some of the terms that are used. The glossary can be found on the e-consultation web pages. There are many ways to respond to this consultation (see How to respond for more details), but if you have any difficulties please call our National Customer Contact Centre on or AnglianRBD@environment-agency.gov.uk. This consultation runs from October 2014 to April We will issue a response document in summer This will summarise the comments we received and what will happen as a result. The updated Anglian River Basin Management Plan will be published in December 2015, following approval by the Secretary of State. 5

6 Figure 2 - Map of the Anglian river basin district and the management catchments within it 6

7 2 The Cam and Ely Ouse Management Catchment Figure 3 - Map of the Cam and Ely Ouse management catchment and the operational catchments within it Within the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment, the River Great Ouse drains an area of approximately 3,600 square kilometres. This area extends from Swaffham in the north to Royston and Saffron Walden in the south and from Potton in the west to Attleborough in the east. The River Great Ouse, in this catchment, is fed by four main tributaries: the River Cam, which receives water from the River Granta, the South Level Lodes, the River Rhee and Bourn Brook the River Lark the Little Ouse and its tributaries, which include the River Thet and the Sapiston/Black Bourn the River Wissey The area is characterised by the East Anglian Chalklands in the south, Brecklands in the north and the South Level fenland to the west. The catchment is predominantly rural and includes high grade agricultural land. The main urban areas within the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment are Cambridge, Royston, Saffron Walden, Newmarket, Bury St Edmunds, Ely and Swaffham. There is rapid growth and development in the area. The catchment also supports a number of nationally and internationally important water related sites that are of exceptional economic and environmental value. 7

8 The Cam and Ely Ouse management catchment has been divided into the following 6 operational catchments: Cam Rhee and Granta Lark Little Ouse and Thet Lower Cam South Level Wissey These operational catchments have distinct characteristics and pressures. They require a different mix of measures to achieve long term objectives for the water environment and to reduce the risks of flooding. In addition, groundwater in the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment has been split into the following 2 groundwater catchments: Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk Cam and Ely Ouse Woburn Sands The costs and benefits of the measures identified to improve the health of the groundwater bodies in this catchment are presented as separate economic appraisals in the operational catchment section. 2.1 Protected areas There are areas in the catchment where the water environment is recognised as being of particular importance because of the benefits they provide to society. These benefits include rare wildlife habitats, bathing waters or areas around drinking water sources. These areas are known collectively as Protected areas. Protected areas are a priority for action and protection to make sure we can all continue to enjoy the benefits they provide into the future, and that the investment that has already been made in protecting them is not wasted. Whether a particular part of the water environment is protected or not, we still assess its status every year to understand whether it is healthy or not and whether it s getting better or worse. Some areas require special protection under European legislation. These designations are designed to manage water, nutrients, chemicals, economically significant species and wildlife. The management of these areas has been integrated into the overall framework of river basin planning. The table shows the number of the different types of Protected Areas in the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment, and whether they are complying with the standards that are set out for their protection. In addition to the Protected Areas listed in the table, the catchment has Nitrate Vulnerable Zones and water dependant Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas for wild birds (Natura 2000) sites. Protected area type Numbers Number compliant Bathing Waters 0 0 Drinking Waters 2 1 Shellfish Waters 0 0 Urban Wastewater Treatment 6 6 8

9 The whole Cam and Ely Ouse catchment is designated a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (2013) for surface water and, in part, for groundwater under the EC Nitrates Directive. Surface water and groundwater bodies with abstractions where more than 10m³ per day is for human consumption, or serving more than 50 people, are designated as Drinking Water Protected Areas (DWPAs) under the Drinking Water Directive. The catchment contains 11 groundwater safeguard zones which are all at risk from rising nitrate levels. It is difficult to reduce leached nitrate in this catchment. We have less rainfall and the aquifer recharge is often half that of the rest of the country; nitrate leached from soil can enter the groundwater at up to twice the concentration it would do elsewhere. This means that current Nitrate Vulnerable Zone regulation measures aren t enough to protect our groundwater DWPAs. Within the Wissey operational catchment, the public water supply abstraction has been identified as at risk of failing the Drinking Water Directive. This is due to increasing pesticide concentrations. The pesticide associated with this failure is metaldehyde. To help manage the at risk status and improve water quality, a safeguard zone has been delineated upstream of the abstraction. The Wissey drinking water protected area and safeguard zone consists of 9 water bodies. The maintenance or improvement of the water environment is an important factor in the protection of many Protected Areas in this catchment. They comprise the aquatic parts of Natura 2000 sites designated under the Birds Directive and the Habitats Directive. The water dependant Natura 2000 sites in the catchment are: Norfolk Valley Fens Special Area of Conservation Beckland Special Protection Area, Special Area of Conservation Fenland Special Area of Conservation, Ramsar Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens Special Area of Conservation The Freshwater Fish Directive aims to protect and improve the quality of rivers and lakes to encourage healthy fish populations. This directive was revoked in December 2013 but previously designated waters continue to be Protected Areas under the Water Framework Directive. Protected areas are a priority for action and protection to make sure we can all continue to enjoy the benefits they provide into the future, and that the investment that has already been made in protecting them is not wasted. Whether a particular part of the water environment is protected or not, we still assess its status every year to understand whether it is healthy or not and whether it s getting better or worse. More information can be found about Protected Areas, including how compliance is assessed, in the river basin management planning annex: Status of waters In 2009 this catchment was divided up into 83 river water bodies, 5 lakes, 2 surface water transfers and 2 groundwater bodies. There are no estuaries or coastal waters. We are proposing some changes to the way the catchment is divided up, which are described in more detail. In 2009, 19% of water bodies were classified at Good Ecological Status (GES) or Good Ecological Potential (GEP) or better. Additional classification information by water body type can be found here: 9

10 Figure 4 shows the classification for the catchment s surface waters in 2009, when the first river basin management plan was published, and an interim classification based on available data in Figure 4 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment in cycle 1 Water bodies were given a baseline classification in 2009 using data and information from existing monitoring points within the water body. However, some generally smaller water bodies didn t have any monitoring points; these were classified either by using data from a water body with similar characteristics or by a judgement made by technical experts. The apparent change in status since 2009 may not be actual improvement or drop in status. It could be owing to new and improved knowledge of water bodies and data collection factors (for example, monitoring location changes to use new, more appropriate locations or not using others). Where water body monitoring has recently started the 2013 classification will not be based on a full dataset so should be regarded as indicative. This consultation is concerned with the health of all the water in the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment, both surface water and groundwater. There are 2 important aquifers in this catchment. The largest is the Chalk which underlies the eastern and central part of the area and primarily supports public water supply and spray irrigation. Groundwater from the Chalk aquifer generally comes either from discrete springs or gradually along the length of rivers providing valuable base flow. The other principal aquifer is Lower Greensand (Woburn Sands) which outcrops further west and is separated from the Chalk by a layer of Gault Clay and is locally important for water supply. 2.3 Improvements to how water bodies are assessed Improvements have been made to the way water bodies are defined and classified since the plans were published in Subject to consultation, the changes will be adopted when the 10

11 updated plans are published in You can find more information about these improvements in the River basin management planning Annex at: The table shows the status of the different kinds of water bodies in the management catchment based on these new approaches. Management Catchment Numbers of water bodies at each status or potential in 2013 Water body type High Good Moderate Poor Bad Rivers and Canals (including Surface Water Transfers) Lakes Estuaries and Coastal waters Ground waters For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( 2.4 Investigating the water environment in the Cam and Ely Ouse management catchment Since the initial assessment of status was made, the Environment Agency and its partners have been working to understand the reasons for not achieving good status. Since 2009, the Environment Agency has carried out 599 investigations in the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment. These have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are failing and the likely causes. A major reason for failure in the catchment is discharges from water recycling centres. Waste water can contain large amounts of damaging substances, such as nutrients (phosphates and nitrates) and ammonia. Phosphate is the most common water quality failure. Diffuse pollution from agricultural sources also contributes to phosphate failures and other pressures to ecology, such as sediment. Further investigation is required to confirm industrial and urban sources of phosphate. Many water bodies in this catchment are designated as Heavily Modified or Artificial for flood defence, land drainage, water storage or navigation needs. These physical modifications can have an impact on morphological diversity and hence ecological condition. Structures often act as barriers to fish movement. Opportunities will be sought with relevant authorities and land managers to improve the morphology and habitat, whilst maintaining watercourses for their principle functions. 11

12 Improvement to many water bodies is limited by the presence of invasive non-native American signal crayfish. These are the most significant pressure on biological elements such as invertebrates. Currently there are no techniques available for removing American signal crayfish; however, work has been commissioned to investigate technically feasible solutions. Figure 5 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status of water bodies in the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment by type and source sector All reasons for not achieving good status data are available on the catchment data explorer. 2.5 Challenges and choices consultation 2013 In 2013, through the Challenges and choices consultation, the Environment Agency asked for your views on: the significant issues that are limiting the benefits society obtains from the water environment (the challenges); and the best way to address these issues and what should be done first (the choices) An important issue raised, particularly for the Cam sub-catchment, was the pressure on water supplies. It was believed that future population growth and potential climate change would increase the requirement for water supply and recreation and irrigation for food production. It was also considered that development and housing growth puts further pressure on water quality. 12

13 Pollution was considered an important issue, from diffuse sources such as farming and from wastewater. Outdoor pig farming was mentioned as one possible source of silt and pollution in rivers, as well as physical channel modifications exacerbating slow flows. Responses also said it should be recognised that many water bodies are modified for a reason. One example of this was land drainage in the Fens which supports food production. Evidence was seen as vital when addressing invasive, non-native species, such as Himalayan balsam, and to ensure that work is focused on where it is needed and where there are effects on water quality and wildlife. It is very important to use an integrated approach to help balance the different uses of water and draw together all measures. Appropriate management of rivers was believed essential to manage flows and help prevent siltation and flooding. For further information on the responses submitted during the Challenges and choices consultation, please see the consultation response document here: Taking action in partnership In June 2013, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) published a policy framework to encourage the wider adoption of an integrated Catchment Based Approach to improving the quality of the water environment, which incorporated findings from the pilot phase. The objectives for the Catchment Based Approach are: to deliver positive and sustained outcomes for the water environment by promoting a better understanding of the environment at a local level; and to encourage local collaboration and more transparent decision-making when both planning and delivering activities to improve the water environment. Adopting the approach will promote the development of more appropriate river basin management plans (which underpin the delivery of the objectives of the Water Framework Directive. This) will also provide a platform for engagement, discussion and decisions of much wider benefits including tackling diffuse agricultural and urban pollution, and widespread, historical alterations to the natural form of channels. The Environment Agency is a member of CamEO, who are developing a plan to enhance the catchment. This summary has been informed by the Partnership, both formally through the Challenges and choices consultation and through the ongoing work to develop measures to protect and improve the water environment. As well as guiding the updates to the river basin management plan, the results of this consultation will be used to inform the work of the Partnership. Commentary from the catchment partnership: CamEO was established in 2013 to develop and deliver a more targeted, integrated approach to managing the natural environment at a catchment scale. The Partnership is cohosted by The Rivers Trust and Anglian Water. Its overarching approach is to identify areas in the catchment that provide, or have the potential to provide multiple environmental and societal benefits. Such areas are likely to be where targeted interventions will deliver the greatest returns and represent value for money. This approach goes beyond the scope of 13

14 Water Framework Directive and aims to provide a framework for the management of wider environmental objectives. Fundamental to this is supporting local level planning and decision-making and CamEO currently works with existing sub-catchment partnerships including: Cam Catchment Partnership, Wissey Partnership and Cambridgeshire ACRE and we re keen to develop similar partnership approaches in the Lark and Little Ouse & Thet sub-catchments. We currently meet with sub-catchment partnerships, Environment Agency and National Farmer Union (NFU) and work with other key catchment partners. More information about the partnership can be found at Over the coming months we intend to increase our wider public engagement and provide everyone with the opportunity to contribute to the development of an overall shared vision for the catchment. Water in the Cam and Ely Ouse catchment provides many benefits that we depend on and yet often take for granted, e.g. supply of clean drinking water, food production, supporting wildlife, recreational activities etc., and ensuring sufficient clean water is available to satisfy these demands is fundamental. CamEO is concerned that despite good intentions, current management practices are insufficiently joined-up to deliver appropriate environmental improvement and protection. The majority (~80%) of all water bodies in the catchment currently fail to reach the standards required to achieve good ecological status/potential. The main reasons considered responsible for Water Framework Directive failures are pollution from both rural and wastewater sources, and physical modifications that restrict the natural function and diversity of the catchment. However, this is an over-simplification and the challenges are far more complex. Impacts are generally cumulative and influenced by additional factors including planning & growth policies, land management practices, abstraction, climate change and even consumer choices (e.g. detergents containing high phosphate levels). Delivering sustainable solutions to these challenges will therefore require greater collaboration between public, private and third sector organisations than at present Projects have been undertaken by partners to improve river habitats through river restoration and enhancement, to tackle agricultural and non-agricultural diffuse pollution and address priority invasive non-native species (INNS). Projects have included addressing issues relating to nutrient rich run-off from rural roads, reducing the impacts from domestic septic tanks and adding diversity to habitats simplified by historic management. Increased river habitat diversity has been achieved by creating backwater habitats, installing woody debris and restoring in-channel habitats through river bank re-profiling and the use of flow deflectors. Many more projects are being delivered in partnership in the 2014 to2015 financial year and we are working closely with partners to develop projects that will be delivered in future financial years. 2.7 Measures that could improve the water environment Where a failure has been identified, a range of measures have been assessed that would be needed to improve the status of water bodies. The Environment Agency has made an assessment of the measures needed to achieve positive benefits for the water environment and society. The measures have been grouped together to ensure the cummulative catchment effect is considered. Where possible, climate resilient measures have been chosen. However it is considered unlikely that the measures will be sufficient to address all impacts of climate change and we will be assessing the likely gaps before the publication of the final river basin management 14

15 plans: As well as the measures needed to improve the status of water bodies, other measures are needed to: Protect or improve Protected Areas within the operational catchment Prevent water bodies deteriorating from their current status Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are: Improve modified physical habitats Removal or easement of barriers to fish migration Removal or modification of engineering structure Improvement to condition of channel/bed and/or banks/shoreline Improvement to condition of riparian zone and /or wetland habitats Changes to operation and maintenance Vegetation management Sediment management strategies Managing pollution from waste water Mitigate/remediate point source impacts on receptor Manage pollution from towns, cities and transport Reduce diffuse pollution at source Improve the natural flow and level of water * Control pattern/timing of abstraction Use alternative source/relocate abstraction or discharge Review time limited licences to make sure that any replacement licences fully support water body objectives including preventing any drop in status Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution at source Reduce diffuse pollution pathways (i.e. control entry to water environment) Mitigate/remediate diffuse pollution impacts on the receptor Manage invasive non-native species Early detection, monitoring and rapid response (to reduce the risk of establishment) Building awareness and understanding (to slow the spread) Mitigation, control and eradication (to reduce extent) *In order to avoid any drop in status, water used to provide groundwater support to surface water features will come from recently used/pumped quantities on existing licenses. This ensures no extra water will be abstracted to provide groundwater support. Some abstraction licences are time limited permissions. When these licences expire, licence holders need to apply for a replacement licence to continue to abstract. Before the Environment Agency grants a replacement licence, it will make sure that the abstraction is environmentally sustainable; and that the applicant can justify the quantity of water they 15

16 have applied for and will use the water efficiently. The Environment Agency will also take into account the objectives of the Water Framework Directive as part of the environmental sustainability test. This will ensure that the ecological habitats of our rivers, wetlands and estuaries are improved where damaged and do not deteriorate as a result of abstraction. 2.8 Economic appraisal and environmental assessment of measures to improve the water environment The benefits that measures will bring to society, along with the cost and any disbenefits (negative impacts) of implementing them, have been assessed in economic appraisals. The appraisals aim to identify whether the measures needed to improve the water environment are cost beneficial, in other words, the benefits are greater than the costs. The effects of the measures on the wider environment are also considered, which helps to inform the environmental assessment. The results of the appraisals will help to decide if it is economically, environmentally and socially worthwhile to implement the measures. Environmental and socio-economic benefits and disbenefits (negative impacts) are considered in the economic appraisals. A monetary value has been assigned to some benefits. For surface waters, this is based on society s willingness to pay for improvements in the water environment 1. For ground waters, values used have been transferred from other detailed economic studies 2. Other benefits and disbenefits which have not been monetised have been identified and form part of the overall appraisal results. The majority of the costs of measures, assessed in the economic appraisals carried out, are estimates. Costs are from local and national sources, and are based on previous experience of implementing similar measures. Where more accurate, local cost information is available, this has been used in place of national estimates. The economic appraisals have been carried out at the operational catchment scale. If the group of measures to improve all water bodies in the catchment to good status is not considered to be cost beneficial (so the cost outweighs the benefits), or would have significant adverse effects on the wider environment, an alternative group of measures to achieve the most for the water environment has been appraised. Assessing the costs and benefits of improving our water environment is an ongoing process and economic appraisals will need to be updated as new and better information becomes available. Your responses to this consultation will help us gather more and better information about the costs and benefits of the measures needed. The economic appraisals we ve carried out will be refined before the updated Anglian river basin management plan is published. For more information on the approach taken for catchment economic appraisals and environmental assessment, please see the draft update to the Anglian river basin management plan. 1 Willingness to pay values used are from The Environment Agency s National Water Environment Benefits Survey (2007, updated 2012). 2 Benefits transfer is a recognised way of using benefit values from existing academic studies and surveys. Other benefits which have not been monetised have been identified and form part of the overall economic appraisal results. 16

17 2.9 Proposed long term objectives In the consultation, we ask for your views on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing a drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile, based on economic appraisal. In the following operational catchment sections, we look at the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the second cycle, based on current knowledge of plans and actions Links to other management plans Achieving the long term objectives for the water environment will require a coordinated approach to making improvements across a number of different planning processes. The Strategic Environmental Assessment Environment Report considers the full range of plans that are relevant to the Anglian River Basin District and its catchments. To see this report go to: One of the most important links relates to the way flood risks are managed in the catchment. Over the next two years, the Environment Agency will be undertaking considerable planning work, culminating in the publication of the updated river basin management plans (RBMPs) and the Flood risk management plans (FRMPs). Together, these plans will shape important decisions, direct considerable investment and action, and deliver significant benefits to society and the environment. The two planning processes are working to common river basin district (RBD) boundaries and many key stakeholders have an interest in both. As the plans themselves and the supporting documents/data-sets are complex, we have decided not to integrate them into a single set of consultation documents. Instead, we will coordinate the engagement around the planning processes, promoting them together, cross-referencing, and explaining how they relate to each other. We believe this is the best way to make it easy for you to participate in either, or both, consultations. Slow reacting rivers, an inland position and protection from a network of dykes, drains and embankments, mean that flood risk to people and farmland within the area is relatively low. 4% of people within the catchment are at risk. Measures to manage risk include: improving our understanding of all sources of flooding emergency response plans improving flood mapping and hydrometry and telemetry assets, maintaining our flood warning systems strategic planning to reduce risk and improve flood resilience of assets partnership working to improve understanding and raising community preparedness sewerage and surface water management plans The flood risk management plan consultation coincides with the launch of this consultation. It includes the measures proposed to manage flood risk, and can be found at: 17

18 3 Operational catchments The following sections give an overview of the current state of the water environment in each of the operational catchments; the reasons for not achieving good status and the measures being proposed to protect and improve the health of the water. 3.1 Cam, Rhee and Granta Operational Catchment The Cam, Rhee and Granta catchment covers the region south of Cambridge. It comprises the upper reaches of the River Cam, flowing north from Saffron Waldon, and its major tributaries the River Rhee, which rises at Ashwell springs in Hertfordshire, and the River Granta between Saffron Waldon and Haverhill. Figure 6 - Impounded tributary of the River Rhee at Wimpole Hall, Cambridgeshire Rivers are characterised by their base flow from the underlying chalk geology. The catchment is predominantly rural with an agricultural land use. The catchment has important wetland Sites of Special Scientific Interest. The rivers and tributaries are important for priority biodiversity species including white-clawed crayfish, otter, water vole and brown trout. Figure 7 - Map of the Cam, Rhee and Granta operational catchment 18

19 There are 18 river water bodies in this catchment. There are no lakes, estuarine or coastal waters. The catchment lies on top of 2 groundwater bodies which are considered in their own sections later in this document. This section relates to the river water bodies only. The status (health) of the water environment in 2009 was assessed as being generally moderate. Our current analysis suggests that 61% of the water bodies in the Cam, Rhee and Granta catchment should have a long term objective of achieving good status/potential, as shown in Figure 9. Figure 8 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the Cam, Rhee and Granta catchment in cycle 1 For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( 19

20 Figure 9 - Chart showing the classification and long term objectives of all water bodies in the Cam, Rhee and Granta catchment in cycle 2 Since 2009, investigations in this catchment have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are not achieving good status/potential, and the likely causes. These are shown in Figure

21 Figure 10 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status/potential of water bodies in the Cam, Rhee and Granta catchment by type and source sector Measures to improve the water environment have been assessed. Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are shown in the table : Improve modified physical habitats Removal or easement of barriers to fish migration Removal or modification of engineering structure Improvement to condition of channel/bed and/or banks/shoreline Improvement to condition of riparian zone and /or wetland habitats Changes to operation and maintenance Sediment management strategies Managing pollution from waste water Mitigate/remediate point source impacts on receptor Improve the natural flow and level of water Control pattern/timing of abstraction Review time limited licences to make sure that any replacement licences fully support water body objectives including preventing any drop in status 21

22 Manage invasive non-native species Early detection, monitoring and rapid response (to reduce the risk of establishment) Building awareness and understanding (to slow the spread) Mitigation, control and eradication (to reduce extent) Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution at source Reduce diffuse pollution pathways (i.e. control entry to water environment) The most significant proposed measures in this catchment are for the water companies and private operators to improve to their sewage treatment infrastructure to remove phosphate. A combination of these actions, together with work to reduce agricultural diffuse pollution, will have a significant impact on water quality. However, such actions will rely on the goodwill and investment of local residents and businesses. Owing to the scale of the number of treatment works needing improvement, not all were found to be cost beneficial. It is therefore unlikely that they will be funded in the water company s next five year asset management plan. The second most significant proposed measures relate to improving the morphology (river function and form) and riparian habitats along the river. Measures in this catchment include: channel narrowing; bank re-profiling and other channel modifications to improve flow diversity; improved floodplain connectivity; sensitive management practices and the modification or removal of structures to enable fish to travel upstream. Some of these actions would require significant local consultation and landowner permission. In some cases the improvements would have an added benefit of reducing flood risk. Opportunities will be sought with relevant authorities and land managers to improve the morphology and habitat whilst maintaining water bodies for their various functions (for example to maintain land drainage). There are some proposed actions to tackle diffuse pollution by nutrients (phosphate and nitrate) in the rural areas and pollutants (such as oil and chemicals) from the urban areas. This catchment is in the Cam and Granta Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) Priority Area. This CSF project is a joint initiative between the Environment Agency and Natural England. It is funded by Defra and the Rural Development Programme for England. Natural England s CSF Officer has a programme of targeted farm visits and events covering the relevant water bodies in this catchment. We will use our own resources, where necessary and in a targeted approach, to give practical advice and support to enable farmers, property owners and businesses to take voluntary action to reduce diffuse water pollution. These actions will also be beneficial for the local groundwater bodies. Success depends on action being taken on the advice given. Flow and water levels are also an issue in this catchment. Abstraction reduces water available in river systems and affects flow. Groundwater abstraction lowers the water table which can reduce spring flow to rivers. The most water is abstracted by water companies for public supply. Other uses are for agriculture, such as crop irrigation and livestock watering. Measures to address this in this catchment include controlling abstractions to protect flows. The ability of invasive non-native species (INNS) to spread rapidly means that prevention is the most effective solution. It is critical that everyone should follow and promote the principles of good biosecurity as outlined in the Check, Clean, Dry campaign ( All actions to control and manage invasive non-native species should follow the national measures in the Anglian river basin management plan and fit within the GB Invasive Non- 22

23 Native Species Strategy ( There are actions in this catchment to monitor and control (where possible) the spread of Himalayan balsam, floating pennywort, giant hogweed, and signal crayfish. You can find out more detail on the status and long term objectives by using the Catchment Data Explorer tool at: Cam, Rhee and Granta catchment economic appraisal and environmental assessment An economic appraisal was carried out for technically feasible measures that will enable water bodies to reach good ecological status/potential. Measures to prevent any drop in status are not subject to economic appraisal. Groups ( bundles ) of measures that could improve the status of water bodies in the catchment were identified. The costs of the measures and the benefits they would result in were assessed. This process identified measures that were worthwhile to implement and water body objectives that are worthwhile to achieve. Worthwhile measures are those where the benefits to society from implementing the measures exceed the costs of putting the measures in place Results and recommendation The initial economic appraisal included all measures and was found to be not worthwhile. Different combinations of measures were subsequently appraised to find a worthwhile bundle for the catchment. Some additional benefits were valued and monetised to provide further justification that the benefits of implementing the measures are greater than the costs. These additional benefits are biodiversity benefits from agricultural schemes and benefits from measures that contribute to groundwater body improvement are included in the results. The results presented here are for a combination of measures which do improve some water bodies in the catchment and that are economically worthwhile. The number of phosphate removal schemes in the catchment was adjusted from 12 to 4, to find a worthwhile bundle of measures. The results of the economic appraisal are shown Monetised costs and benefits of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 3 Net present value Benefit cost ratio Present value benefits Present value costs 2.4 million million 68.8 million This means that for every pound that is spent towards improving the water environment in this catchment, you could expect to receive 1.03 of benefits. 3 The benefits and costs are shown in Present Value terms, which is a way of expressing the value of costs and benefits that will happen in the future in today s money. We apply a discount rate and benefits to reflect people s preference for receiving goods and services now rather than later. 23

24 3.1.4 Benefits and costs of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 4 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Ecosystem Service None Water regulation (timing and scale of run-off, flooding, etc.); Erosion regulation; Recreation and tourism; Aesthetic value; Existence Values; Provision of habitat None None Fresh water Positive or negative impact : very positive : positive o: neutral : negative : very negative o Fresh water is the ecosystem service with a major negative impact from the cost beneficial measures. Generally, the availability of fresh water for the provision of domestic, industrial and agricultural supply is an ecosystem service that greatly benefits from improvement measures to flow and nutrient removal. While the proposed changes may have a positive impact on the flow, this is counter balanced by the negative impact having no phosphate removal schemes. Point source discharges, primarily from water company water recycling centres, are the major contributor of phosphate within the catchment. Thus phosphate removal schemes will contribute significantly to the reduction in river phosphate concentration. Owing to the large number of treatment works needing improvement, it is reasonable to assume this work would be funded over a number of water company s five year asset management plans running up to It is hoped that innovation over this time will reduce the cost of treatment. The Final Appraisal Report and associated documents provide a more detailed summary of these results. This can be requested at AnglianRBD@environment-agency.gov.uk. Scenario 3 presents all technically feasible measures, with none ruled out on the basis of cost (see part 1, section 4.4, Table 18 of the draft river basin management plan document). Commentary from the catchment partnership: The catchment partnership s comments on the economic appraisal are that CamEO is working with the Cam Catchment Partnership in the Lower Cam and the Cam, Rhee and Granta operational catchments. The Cam Catchment partnership has reviewed the first draft 4 Improving the water environment has wider benefits than those we have been able to monetise in the appraisals. We have identified these using wider benefits. An ecosystem service is a service that the natural environment provides that improves our quality of life. 24

25 of the economic appraisal and agrees with the outputs. As such, the partnership supports the delivery of these cost beneficial measures. Further local measures have been identified from within the partnership that will compliment the delivery of Water Framework Directive and improvements to the water environment in and around Cambridge Possible scale of improvement for the Cam, Rhee and Granta operational catchment The information presented so far has focused on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing any drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile. This section focuses on the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the period to 2021, based on current knowledge of plans and actions. In this operational catchment: Have measures been implemented (or are secured for ) that will deliver improvements that have not yet been reflected in classification results? E.g. Catchment Sensitive Farming, Catchment Restoration Fund Projects Are there measures planned to deliver Protected Area objectives that will also contribute to improvements in water body status? Has this operational catchment been identified in water company draft business plans as an area for improvement? Has this operational catchment been identified as a priority for action under the new environmental land management scheme (NELMS)? Have the local catchment partnership identified measures they are likely to secure funding for, which will bring about improvement within the 2nd cycle? Are any additional improvement measures included in Environment Agency or other statutory plans? Yes or No Yes see 1 Yes see 2 Yes see 3 Yes see 4 Yes see 5 Yes see 6 1. Any classification data collected between 2009 and 2015 are interim data, which are subject to change. Improvements in data quality and assessment techniques mean that interim data are used as indicative information for decision making only and this is not as definitive as the next classification in Measures have been implemented that will make improvements that are not reflected in the interim data. Interim data reflects both background environmental changes causing both improvements and drop in status, and improvement from measures in place. 2. In most places all Protected Area objectives contribute to an improvement to background quality in a water body, not necessarily an improvement in status in all water bodies where those objectives apply. 3. We are working closely with water companies to support their investment in environmental improvement. All water company business plans identify all catchments as an area where their investment can improve water body status. Final plans won t be agreed until All operational catchments have targeted priority action areas within them as part of the draft NELMS. We have worked closely with Natural England to develop this. 5. Local catchment partnerships are at various stages of planning and agreeing what measures they will prioritise, identifying where the measures will be most effective and then seeking funding. 25

26 6. Improvement measures are included in our draft Flood risk management plans, Environment Agency plans for biodiversity, and various other statutory plans. Based on our understanding of the information above, and our catchment knowledge, we have medium confidence that this operational catchment will see an improvement towards the proposed long term objectives by In the Cam Catchment Partnership ( Cambridge Past Present and Future is working with other key organisations the Cam Valley Forum, the Cam Conservancy, local councils and the Environment Agency to develop a strategy to protect and improve the environment of the River Cam. This ambitious plan encompasses the whole river basin, stretching from the river's various sources to its confluence with the Great Ouse just south of Ely, with everyone councils, businesses, public agencies and voluntary organisations working together to improve the river and its environment. The Partnerships vision is a river system and riverside land that supports a flourishing and varied wildlife and provides an attractive environment for residents, visitors and businesses. Our partnership aims are to: provide a vision, aims and objectives, and an action plan, to help unlock funding influence management and maintenance feed into the local-plan process 26

27 3.2 Lark Operational Catchment Figure 11 - River Lark at Bury St Edmunds The River Lark rises as a chalk stream to the south of Bury St Edmunds and flows north west through Mildenhall to the South Level. Its tributaries include the River Linnet, Culford Stream; Cavenham Stream; Tuddenham Stream and the River Kennet. The area is mainly rural, with many small villages and the market towns of Bury St Edmunds and Mildenhall. Land use is diverse with tree belts and woodlands. In the Lark valley the dryness of the soils has limited their land use and historically there were extensive heaths. Cavenham Heath is the largest survivor and is now a nature reserve. Figure 12 - Map of the Lark operational catchment There are 12 rivers in this catchment. There are no lakes, estuarine or coastal waters. The catchment lies on top of 1 groundwater body which is considered in its own sections later in this document. This section relates to the river water bodies only. The status (health) of the water environment in 2009 was assessed as being generally moderate. Our current analysis suggests that 41% of the water bodies in the Lark catchment should have a long term objective of achieving good status/potential, as shown in Figure

28 Figure 13 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the Lark catchment in cycle 1 Figure 14 - Chart showing the classification and long term objectives of all water bodies in the Lark catchment in cycle 2 For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( 28

29 Since 2009, investigations in this catchment have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are not achieving good status, and the likely causes. These are shown in Figure 15. Figure 15 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status/potential of water bodies in the Lark catchment by type and source sector Measures to improve the water environment have been assessed. Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are shown in the table : Improve modified physical habitats Removal or easement of barriers to fish migration Removal or modification of engineering structure Improvement to condition of channel/bed and/or banks/shoreline Improvement to condition of riparian zone and /or wetland habitats Changes to operation and maintenance Vegetation management Managing pollution from waste water Mitigate/remediate point source impacts on receptor Improve the natural flow and level of water Control pattern/timing of abstraction Use alternative source/relocate abstraction or discharge 29

30 Review time limited licences to make sure that any replacement licences fully support water body objectives including preventing any drop in status Manage invasive non-native species Early detection, monitoring and rapid response (to reduce the risk of establishment) Building awareness and understanding (to slow the spread) Mitigation, control and eradication (to reduce extent) Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution at source Reduce diffuse pollution pathways (i.e. control entry to water environment) Mitigate/remediate diffuse pollution impacts on the receptor The presence of signal crayfish is an issue in this catchment. We have also identified actions to tackle invasive non-native species (INNS). Their ability to spread rapidly means that prevention is the most cost-effective solution. It is critical that all partners follow and promote the principles of good biosecurity as outlined in the Check, Clean, Dry campaign ( All actions to control and manage non-native species should follow the national measures in the Anglian river basin management plan and fit within the GB Invasive Non-Native Species Strategy ( There are also actions in this catchment to monitor and control the spread of Himalayan balsam, Japanese knotweed and giant hogweed. The second most significant proposed measures are for the water companies to improve to their sewage treatment infrastructure to remove phosphate. A combination of these actions, together with work to reduce agricultural diffuse pollution, will have a significant impact on water quality. However, such actions will rely on the goodwill and investment of local residents and businesses. Owing to the scale of the number of treatment works needing improvement, not all were found to be cost beneficial. It is therefore unlikely that they will be funded in the water company s next five year asset management plan. Other proposed measures relate to improve the morphology (river function and form) and riparian habitats along the river. Measures in this catchment include: tree planting, channel narrowing; bank re-profiling and other channel modifications to improve flow diversity; improved floodplain connectivity and the modification or removal of structures to enable fish to travel upstream. Some of these actions would require significant local consultation and landowner permission. In some cases the improvements would have an added benefit of reducing flood risk. Opportunities will be sought with relevant authorities and land managers to improve the morphology and habitat whilst maintaining water bodies for their various functions (for example to maintain land drainage). Flow and water levels are also an issue in this catchment. Abstraction reduces water available in river systems and affects flow. Groundwater abstraction lowers the water table which can reduce spring flow to rivers. The most water is abstracted by water companies for public supply. Other uses are for agriculture, such as crop irrigation and livestock watering. Measures to address this in this catchment include controlling abstractions to protect flows. There are some proposed actions are to tackle diffuse pollution by nutrients (phosphate and nitrate) in the rural areas and pollutants (such as oil and chemicals) from the urban areas. This catchment is in the Little Ouse Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) Priority Area. This CSF project is a joint initiative between the Environment Agency and Natural England. It is funded by Defra and the Rural Development Programme for England. Natural England s CSF Officer has a programme of targeted farm visits and events covering the relevant water 30

31 bodies in this catchment. We will use our own resources, where necessary and in a targeted approach, to give practical advice and support to enable farmers, property owners and businesses to take voluntary action to reduce diffuse water pollution. These actions will also be beneficial for the local groundwater bodies. Success depends on action being taken on the advice given. You can find out more detail on the status and long term objectives by using the Catchment Data Explorer tool at: Lark catchment economic appraisal and environmental assessment An economic appraisal was carried out for technically feasible measures that will enable water bodies to reach good ecological status/potential. Measures to prevent any drop in status are not subject to economic appraisal. Groups ( bundles ) of measures that could improve the status of water bodies in the catchment were identified. The costs of the measures and the benefits they would result in were assessed. This process identified measures that were worthwhile to implement and water body objectives that are worthwhile to achieve. Worthwhile measures are those where the benefits to society from implementing the measurer exceed the costs of putting the measures in place Results and recommendation The initial economic appraisal included all measures and was found to be not worthwhile. Different combinations of measures were subsequently appraised to find a worthwhile bundle for the catchment. Some additional benefits were valued and monetised to provide further justification that the benefits of implementing the measures are greater than the costs. The additional benefits are biodiversity benefits from agricultural schemes and benefits from measures that contribute to groundwater body improvement are included in the results. The results presented here are for a combination of measures which do improve some water bodies in the catchment and that are economically worthwhile. The number of phosphate removal schemes in the catchment was adjusted from 7 to 2 to find a worthwhile bundle of measures.. The results of the economic appraisal are shown Monetised costs and benefits of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 5 Net present value Benefit cost ratio Present value benefits Present value costs 2.2 million million 50.9 million 5 The benefits and costs are shown in Present Value terms, which is a way of expressing the value of costs and benefits that will happen in the future in today s money. We apply a discount rate and benefits to reflect people s preference for receiving goods and services now rather than later. 31

32 This means that for every pound that is spent towards improving the water environment in this catchment, you could expect to receive 1.04 of benefits Benefits and costs of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 6 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Ecosystem Service Water regulation (timing and scale of run-off, flooding, etc.) Erosion regulation; Cultural heritage; Recreation and tourism; Aesthetic value; Existence Values; Provision of habitat None None Fresh water Positive or negative impact : very positive : positive o: neutral : negative : very negative o Fresh water is the ecosystem service with a major negative impact from the cost beneficial measures. Generally, the availability of fresh water for the provision of domestic, industrial and agricultural supply is an ecosystem service that greatly benefits from improvement measures to flow and nutrient removal. While the proposed changes may have a positive impact on the flow, this is counter balanced by the negative impact having no phosphate removal schemes. Phosphate and nutrient levels may increase due to planned growth at Bury St Edmunds and Mildenhall. Point source discharges, primarily from water company water recycling centres, are the major contributor of phosphate within the catchment. Phosphate removal schemes will contribute significantly to the reduction in river phosphate concentration. Owing to the large number of treatment works needing improvement, it is reasonable to assume this work would be funded over a number of water company s five year asset management plans running up to It is hoped that innovation over this time will reduce the cost of treatment. The ecosystem service that is very positive is water regulation; implementing buffer zones will slow the flow of water and sediment into the watercourses. This should reduce the fast reacting nature of some sections of watercourse and could reduce flood risk by holding more water within the flood plain for longer. Erosion will also be reduced improving soil retention. This will have significant benefit to society and although it is not monetised as part of this economic appraisal it will further support the proposed measures in this catchment along with a positive contribution from erosion regulation; cultural heritage; recreation and tourism; aesthetic value; existence values and provision of habitat. 6 Improving the water environment has wider benefits than those we have been able to monetise in the appraisals. We have identified these using wider benefits. An ecosystem service is a service that the natural environment provides that improves our quality of life. 32

33 The Final Appraisal Report and associated documents provide a more detailed summary of these results. This can be requested at AnglianRBD@environment-agency.gov.uk. Scenario 3 presents all technically feasible measures, with none ruled out on the basis of cost (see part 1, section 4.4, Table 18 of the draft river basin management plan document). Commentary from the catchment partnership: The catchment partnership s comments on the economic appraisal are that CamEO welcomes cost effective investment in the River Lark catchment that delivers environmental improvements. However, they do not feel that they have been sufficiently engaged in the appraisal process to provide a sufficiently considered response at this stage. They do, however, intend to work closely with stakeholders in the Lark sub-catchment during the consultation period and would welcome specific comments on the appraisal process Possible scale of improvement for the Lark operational catchment The information presented so far has focused on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing any drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile. This section focuses on the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the period to 2021, based on current knowledge of plans and actions. In this operational catchment: Have measures been implemented (or are secured for ) that will deliver improvements that have not yet been reflected in classification results? E.g. Catchment Sensitive Farming, Catchment Restoration Fund Projects Are there measures planned to deliver Protected Area objectives that will also contribute to improvements in water body status? Has this operational catchment been identified in water company draft business plans as an area for improvement? Has this operational catchment been identified as a priority for action under the new environmental land management scheme (NELMS)? Have the local catchment partnership identified measures they are likely to secure funding for, which will bring about improvement within the 2nd cycle? Are any additional improvement measures included in Environment Agency or other statutory plans? Yes or No Yes see 1 Yes see 2 Yes see 3 Yes see 4 Yes see 5 Yes see 6 1. Any classification data collected between 2009 and 2015 are interim data, which are subject to change. Improvements in data quality and assessment techniques mean that interim data are used as indicative information for decision making only and this is not as definitive as the next classification in Measures have been implemented that will make improvements that are not reflected in the interim data. Interim data reflects both background environmental changes causing both improvements and drop in status, and improvement from measures in place. 2. In most places all Protected Area objectives contribute to an improvement to background quality in a water body, not necessarily an improvement in status in all water bodies where those objectives apply. 33

34 3. We are working closely with water companies to support their investment in environmental improvement. All water company business plans identify all catchments as an area where their investment can improve water body status. Final plans won t be agreed until All operational catchments have targeted priority action areas within them as part of the draft NELMS. We have worked closely with Natural England to develop this. 5. Local catchment partnerships are at various stages of planning and agreeing what measures they will prioritise, identifying where the measures will be most effective and then seeking funding. 6. Improvement measures are included in our draft Flood risk management plans, Environment Agency plans for biodiversity, and various other statutory plans. Based on our understanding of the information above, and our catchment knowledge, we have medium confidence that this operational catchment will see an improvement towards the proposed long term objectives by By 2021, the CamEO partnership want to see more informed local decision making to be at the heart of environmental management in the Lark sub-catchment. To achieve this they aspire to: help stakeholders develop an understanding of the issues in the River Lark identify agreed interventions required to provide environmental benefit that meet the needs of local communities and businesses develop new partnerships and ways of working that empower all stakeholders to be involved in the design and delivery of interventions. This will maximise delivery opportunities, minimise duplicated effort and ensure value for money develop a strategy that sets a path for all water bodies in the catchment to achieve good ecological status by 2027 deliver projects that improve the water and wider environment in the River Lark catchment seek and secure funding to maintain integrated catchment planning and delivery 34

35 3.3 Little Ouse and Thet Operational Catchment Figure 16 - Little Ouse River at Santon Downham The upper reaches and tributaries of the River Thet and the River Sapiston extend as far as Attleborough and Elmswell before their confluences with the Little Ouse at Thetford and Euston. The Little Ouse flows on to the South Level just north of Lakenheath. This catchment is characterised by Breckland and woodlands with varied land use including forestry and agriculture. The catchment is important for local, national and internationally protected species and habitats including Eel, Otter and Water vole as well as one of the few remaining populations of the native whiteclawed crayfish within the River Thet. Figure 17 - Map of the Little Ouse and Thet operational catchment 35

36 There are 18 river and1 lake water bodies in this catchment. There are no estuarine or coastal waters. The catchment lies on top of 1 groundwater body which is considered in its own sections later in this document. This section relates to the surface water bodies only. The status (health) of the water environment in 2009 was assessed as being generally moderate. Our current analysis suggests that 42% of the water bodies in the Little Ouse and Thet catchment should have a long term objective of achieving good status/potential, as shown in Figure 19. Figure 18 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the Little Ouse and Thet catchment in cycle 1 36

37 Figure 19 - Chart showing the classification and long term objectives of all water bodies in the Little Ouse and Thet catchment in cycle 2 For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( Since 2009, investigations in this catchment have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are not achieving good status/potential, and the likely causes. These are shown in Figure

38 Figure 20 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status of water bodies in the Little Ouse and Thet catchment by type and source sector Measures to improve the water environment have been assessed. Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are shown in the table : Improve modified physical habitats Removal or easement of barriers to fish migration Removal or modification of engineering structure Improvement to condition of channel/bed and/or banks/shoreline Improvement to condition of riparian zone and /or wetland habitats Changes to operation and maintenance Vegetation management Managing pollution from waste water Mitigate/remediate point source impacts on receptor Manage pollution from towns, cities and transport Reduce diffuse pollution at source Improve the natural flow and level of water Control pattern/timing of abstraction Review time limited licences to make sure that any replacement licences fully support water body objectives including preventing any drop in status 38

39 Manage invasive non-native species Early detection, monitoring and rapid response (to reduce the risk of establishment) Building awareness and understanding (to slow the spread) Mitigation, control and eradication (to reduce extent) Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution at source Reduce diffuse pollution pathways (i.e. control entry to water environment) Mitigate/remediate diffuse pollution impacts on the receptor The most significant proposed measures relate to phosphate removal and improvements to water company infrastructure. Work is also required to improve private water recycling centres which are prevalent across this rural operational catchment. A combination of these actions, together with work to reduce diffuse pollution at agricultural locations will have a significant impact on water quality, but will rely on the will and investment of local residents and landowners. The second most significant proposed measures relate to improving the morphology (river function and form) and riparian habitats along the river. Measures in this catchment include: channel narrowing; bank re-profiling and other channel modifications to improve flow diversity; tree planting and the modification or removal of structures to enable fish to travel upstream. Some of these actions would require significant local consultation and landowner permission. In some cases the improvements would have an added benefit of reducing flood risk.. Opportunities will be sought with relevant authorities and land managers to improve the morphology and habitat whilst maintaining water bodies for their various functions (for example to maintain land drainage). Many of the proposed actions are to tackle diffuse pollution by nutrients (phosphate and nitrate) from arable and livestock agriculture. This catchment is within the Little Ouse Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) Priority Area. The CSF project is a joint initiative between the Environment Agency and Natural England. It is funded by Defra and the Rural Development Programme for England. Natural England s CSF Officer has a programme of targeted farm visits and events covering the relevant water bodies in this catchment. We will use our own resources, where necessary and in a targeted approach, to give practical advice and support to enable farmers, property owners and businesses to take voluntary action to reduce diffuse water pollution. These actions will also be beneficial for the local groundwater bodies. Success depends on action being taken on the advice given. The ability of invasive non-native species (INNS) to spread rapidly means that prevention is the most effective solution. It is critical that everyone should follow and promote the principles of good biosecurity as outlined in the Check, Clean, Dry campaign ( All actions to control and manage non-native species should follow the national measures in the Anglian river basin management plan and fit within the GB Invasive Non-Native Species Strategy ( There are actions in this catchment to monitor and control (where possible) the spread of Himalayan balsam, giant hogweed, signal crayfish, and zebra mussel. Flow and water levels are also an issue in this catchment. Abstraction reduces water available in river systems and affects flow. Groundwater abstraction lowers the water table which can reduce spring flow to rivers. The most water is abstracted by water companies for public supply. Other uses are for agriculture, such as crop irrigation and livestock watering. Measures to address this in this catchment include controlling abstractions to protect flows. 39

40 You can find out more detail on the status and long term objectives by using the Catchment Data Explorer tool at: Little Ouse and Thet catchment economic appraisal and environmental assessment An economic appraisal was carried out for technically feasible measures that will enable water bodies to reach good ecological status/potential. Measures to prevent any drop in status are not subject to economic appraisal Results and recommendation Measures proposed to improve the water environment to good status in this catchment are cost beneficial; the benefits are greater than the costs. The results of the economic appraisal are shown Monetised costs and benefits of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 7 Net present value Benefit cost ratio Present value benefits Present value costs 42.4 million million 62.1 million This means that for every pound that is spent towards improving the water environment in this catchment, you could expect to receive 1.68 of benefits. Some additional benefits have been valued and monetised as part of this economic appraisal to provide further justification that the benefits of implementing the measures are greater than the costs. These additional benefits are biodiversity benefits from agricultural schemes and benefits from measures that contribute to groundwater body improvement are included in the results above Benefits and costs of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 8 7 The benefits and costs are shown in Present Value terms, which is a way of expressing the value of costs and benefits that will happen in the future in today s money. We apply a discount rate and benefits to reflect people s preference for receiving goods and services now rather than later. 8 Improving the water environment has wider benefits than those we have been able to monetise in the appraisals. We have identified these using wider benefits. An ecosystem service is a service that the natural environment provides that improves our quality of life. 40

41 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Ecosystem Service Provision of Habitat; Aesthetic value Fresh Water; Water regulation (timing and scale of run-off, flooding, etc.); Cultural heritage; Recreation and tourism; Existence Values None None None Positive or negative impact : very positive : positive o: neutral : negative : very negative o The wider benefits that are very positive are provision of habitat. This will have significant benefit to society and although it is not monetised as part of this economic appraisal it will further support the proposed measures in this catchment along with a positive contribution from fresh water; water regulation, cultural heritage and tourism ecosystem services. The Final Appraisal Report and associated documents provide a more detailed summary of these results. This can be requested at AnglianRBD@environment-agency.gov.uk. Commentary from the catchment partnership: The catchment partner s comments on the economic appraisal are that CamEO welcomes cost effective investment in the Little Ouse and Thet catchment that delivers environmental improvements. However, they do not feel that they have been sufficiently engaged in the appraisal process to provide a sufficiently considered response at this stage. They do, however, intend to work closely with stakeholders in this sub-catchment during the consultation period and would welcome specific stakeholder comments on the appraisal process. 41

42 3.3.5 Possible scale of improvement for the Little Ouse and Thet operational catchment The information presented so far has focused on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing any drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile. This section focuses on the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the period to 2021, based on current knowledge of plans and actions. In this operational catchment: Have measures been implemented (or are secured for ) that will deliver improvements that have not yet been reflected in classification results? E.g. Catchment Sensitive Farming, Catchment Restoration Fund Projects Are there measures planned to deliver Protected Area objectives that will also contribute to improvements in water body status? Has this operational catchment been identified in water company draft business plans as an area for improvement? Has this operational catchment been identified as a priority for action under the new environmental land management scheme (NELMS)? Have the local catchment partnership identified measures they are likely to secure funding for, which will bring about improvement within the 2nd cycle? Are any additional improvement measures included in Environment Agency or other statutory plans? Yes or No Yes see 1 Yes see 2 Yes see 3 Yes see 4 Yes see 5 Yes see 6 1. Any classification data collected between 2009 and 2015 are interim data, which are subject to change. Improvements in data quality and assessment techniques mean that interim data are used as indicative information for decision making only and this is not as definitive as the next classification in Measures have been implemented that will make improvements that are not reflected in the interim data. Interim data reflects both background environmental changes causing both improvements and drop in status, and improvement from measures in place. 2. In most places all Protected Area objectives contribute to an improvement to background quality in a water body, not necessarily an improvement in status in all water bodies where those objectives apply. 3. We are working closely with water companies to support their investment in environmental improvement. All water company business plans identify all catchments as an area where their investment can improve water body status. Final plans won t be agreed until All operational catchments have targeted priority action areas within them as part of the draft NELMS. We have worked closely with Natural England to develop this. 5. Local catchment partnerships are at various stages of planning and agreeing what measures they will prioritise, identifying where the measures will be most effective and then seeking funding. 6. Improvement measures are included in our draft Flood risk management plans, Environment Agency plans for biodiversity, and various other statutory plans. 42

43 Based on our understanding of the information above, and our catchment knowledge, we have medium confidence that this operational catchment will see an improvement towards the proposed long term objectives by By 2021, CamEO want to see more informed local decision making to be at the heart of environmental management in the Lark sub-catchment. To achieve this we aspire to: help stakeholders develop an understanding of the issues in the River Lark identify agreed interventions required to provide environmental benefit that meet the needs of local communities and businesses. develop new partnerships and ways of working that empower all stakeholders to be involved in the design and delivery of interventions. This will maximise delivery opportunities, minimise duplicated effort and ensure value for money. develop a strategy that sets a path for all water bodies in the catchment to achieve good ecological status by deliver projects that improve the water and wider environment in the River Lark catchment. seek and secure funding to maintain integrated catchment planning and delivery. 43

44 3.4 Lower Cam Operational Catchment Figure 21 - Punts on the River Cam at Cambridge The River Cam flows through the city of Cambridge, popular for punting, canoeing and rowing, to its confluence with the Ely Ouse within the South Level. Tributaries include the Bourn, Bin, Hobson s and Cherry Hinton Brooks and the water level managed New River and the Burwell, Soham, Bottisham and Swaffham and Bulbeck Lodes. There is significant growth around the Cambridge conurbation. Elsewhere the catchment is mainly rural. The catchment is important for wetland species and habitats. Although some water courses are embanked, there are excellent examples of important fenland habitat, notably Wicken Fen and Chippenham Fen. Figure 22 - Map of the Lower Cam operational catchment There are 10 river and1 lake water bodies in this catchment. There are no estuarine or coastal waters. The catchment lies on top of 1 groundwater body which is considered in its own sections later in this document. This section relates to the surface water bodies only. The status (health) of the water environment in 2009 was assessed as being generally moderate. Our current analysis suggests that 45% of the water bodies in the Lower Cam catchment should have a long term objective of achieving good status/potential, as shown in Figure

45 Figure 23 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the Lower Cam catchment in cycle 1 Figure 24 - Chart showing the classification and long term objectives of all water bodies in the Lower Cam catchment in cycle 2 For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( 45

46 Since 2009, investigations in this catchment have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are not achieving good status, and the likely causes. These are shown in Figure 25 Figure 25 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status of water bodies in the Lower Cam catchment by type and source sector Measures to improve the water environment have been assessed. Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are shown in the table : Improve modified physical habitats Removal or easement of barriers to fish migration Removal or modification of engineering structure Improvement to condition of channel/bed and/or banks/shoreline Improvement to condition of riparian zone and /or wetland habitats Changes to operation and maintenance Vegetation management Sediment management strategies Managing pollution from waste water Mitigate/remediate point source impacts on receptor 46

47 Manage pollution from towns, cities and transport Reduce diffuse pollution at source Improve the natural flow and level of water Control pattern/timing of abstraction Review time limited licences to make sure that any replacement licences fully support water body objectives including preventing any drop in status Manage invasive non-native species Early detection, monitoring and rapid response (to reduce the risk of establishment) Building awareness and understanding (to slow the spread) Mitigation, control and eradication (to reduce extent) Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution pathways (i.e. control entry to water environment) Mitigate/remediate diffuse pollution impacts on the receptor The most significant proposed measures are for the water companies to improve to their sewage treatment infrastructure to remove phosphate. A combination of these actions, together with work to reduce diffuse pollution at agricultural locations, will have a significant impact on water quality but will rely on the will and investment of local residents and landowners. The second most significant proposed measures relate to improving the morphology (river function and form) and riparian habitats along the river. Measures in this catchment include: channel narrowing; bank re-profiling and other channel modifications to improve flow diversity; improved floodplain connectivity; sensitive management practices and the modification or removal of structures to enable fish to travel upstream. Some of these actions would require significant local consultation and landowner permission. In some cases the improvements would have an added benefit of reducing flood risk. Opportunities will be sought with relevant authorities and land managers to improve the morphology and habitat whilst maintaining water bodies for their various functions (for example to maintain land drainage). Flow and water levels are also an issue in this catchment. Abstraction reduces water available in river systems and affects flow. Groundwater abstraction lowers the water table which can reduce spring flow to rivers. The most water is abstracted by water companies for public supply. Other uses are for agriculture, such as crop irrigation and livestock watering. Measures to address this in this catchment include controlling abstractions to protect flows. The ability of invasive non-native species (INNS) to spread rapidly means that prevention is the most effective solution. It is critical that everyone should follow and promote the principles of good biosecurity as outlined in the Check, Clean, Dry campaign ( All actions to control and manage non-native species should follow the national measures in the Anglian river basin management plan and fit within the GB Invasive Non-Native Species Strategy ( There are actions in this catchment to monitor and control (where possible) the spread of Himalayan balsam, giant hogweed, floating pennywort, signal crayfish, and zebra mussel. You can find out more detail on the status and long term objectives by using the Catchment Data Explorer tool at: 47

48 3.4.1 Lower Cam catchment economic appraisal and environmental assessment An economic appraisal was carried out for technically feasible measures that will enable water bodies to reach good ecological status/potential. Measures to prevent any drop in status are not subject to economic appraisal Results and recommendation Measures proposed to improve the water environment to good status/potential in this catchment are cost beneficial; the benefits are greater than the costs. The results of the economic appraisal are shown Monetised costs and benefits of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 9 Net present value Benefit cost ratio Present value benefits Present value costs 11.3 million million 59.1 million This means that for every pound that is spent towards improving the water environment in this catchment, you could expect to receive 1.20 of benefits. Some additional benefits have been valued and monetised as part of this economic appraisal to provide further justification that the benefits of implementing the measures are greater than the costs. These additional benefits are biodiversity benefits from agricultural schemes and benefits from measures that contribute to groundwater body improvement are included in the results above. 9 The benefits and costs are shown in Present Value terms, which is a way of expressing the value of costs and benefits that will happen in the future in today s money. We apply a discount rate and benefits to reflect people s preference for receiving goods and services now rather than later. 48

49 3.4.4 Benefits and costs of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 10 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Ecosystem Service Provision of Habitat Fresh Water; Water regulation (timing and scale of run-off, flooding, etc.);climate regulation; Erosion regulation; Recreation and tourism; Existence Values None None None Positive or negative impact : very positive : positive o: neutral : negative : very negative o The ecosystem service that is very positive is provision of habitat. This will have significant benefit to society and although it is not monetised as part of this economic appraisal it will further support the proposed measures in this catchment along with a positive contribution from water regulation, erosion regulation, tourism, climate regulation and fresh water. The Final Appraisal Report and associated documents provide a more detailed summary of these results. This can be requested at AnglianRBD@environment-agency.gov.uk. Commentary from the catchment partnership: The catchment partnership s comments on the economic appraisal are that CamEO is working with the Cam Catchment Partnership in the Lower Cam and the Cam, Rhee and Granta operational catchments. The Cam Catchment partnership has reviewed the first draft of the economic appraisal and agrees with the outputs. As such, the partnership supports the delivery of these cost beneficial measures. Further local measures have been identified from within the partnership that will complement the delivery of Water Framework Directive and improvements to the water environment in and around Cambridge. 10 Improving the water environment has wider benefits than those we have been able to monetise in the appraisals. We have identified these using wider benefits. An ecosystem service is a service that the natural environment provides that improves our quality of life. 49

50 3.4.5 Possible scale of improvement for the Lower Cam operational catchment The information presented so far has focused on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing any drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile. This section focuses on the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the period to 2021, based on current knowledge of plans and actions. In this operational catchment: Have measures been implemented (or are secured for ) that will deliver improvements that have not yet been reflected in classification results? E.g. Catchment Sensitive Farming, Catchment Restoration Fund Projects Are there measures planned to deliver Protected Area objectives that will also contribute to improvements in water body status? Has this operational catchment been identified in water company draft business plans as an area for improvement? Has this operational catchment been identified as a priority for action under the new environmental land management schemes (NELMS)? Have the local catchment partnership identified measures they are likely to secure funding for, which will bring about improvement within the 2nd cycle? Are any additional improvement measures included in Environment Agency or other statutory plans? Yes or No Yes see 1 Yes see 2 Yes see 3 Yes see 4 Yes see 5 Yes see 6 1. Any classification data collected between 2009 and 2015 are interim data, which are subject to change. Improvements in data quality and assessment techniques mean that interim data are used as indicative information for decision making only and this is not as definitive as the next classification in Measures have been implemented that will make improvements that are not reflected in the interim data. Interim data reflects both background environmental changes causing both improvements and drop in status, and improvement from measures in place. 2. In most places all Protected Area objectives contribute to an improvement to background quality in a water body, not necessarily an improvement in status in all water bodies where those objectives apply. 3. We are working closely with water companies to support their investment in environmental improvement. All water company business plans identify all catchments as an area where their investment can improve water body status. Final plans won t be agreed until All operational catchments have targeted priority action areas within them as part of the draft NELMS. We have worked closely with Natural England to develop this. 5. Local catchment partnerships are at various stages of planning and agreeing what measures they will prioritise, identifying where the measures will be most effective and then seeking funding. 6. Improvement measures are included in our draft Flood risk management plans, Environment Agency plans for biodiversity, and various other statutory plans. 50

51 Based on our understanding of the information above, and our catchment knowledge, we have medium confidence that this operational catchment will see an improvement towards the proposed long term objectives by In the Cam Catchment Partnership ( Cambridge Past Present and Future is working with other key organisations the Cam Valley Forum, the Cam Conservancy, local councils and the Environment Agency to develop a strategy to protect and improve the environment of the river Cam. This ambitious plan encompasses the whole river basin, stretching from the river's various sources to its confluence with the Great Ouse just south of Ely, with everyone councils, businesses, public agencies and voluntary organisations working together to improve the river and its environment. The Partnerships vision is a river system and riverside land that supports a flourishing and varied wildlife and provides an attractive environment for residents, visitors and businesses. Our partnership aims are to: provide a vision, aims and objectives, and an action plan, to help unlock funding influence management and maintenance feed into the local-plan process 51

52 3.5 South Level and Cut-off Channel Operational Catchment Figure 26 - View across the South Level from Haddenham ridge The South Level is a level dependent environment and consists of a series of high level rivers and low level drains. The area is mainly rural, with the city of Ely at its centre, and the market towns of Soham and Littleport. Agriculture is the main land use. Across the area Internal Drainage Boards are responsible for managing the water in the low level network of drains. During wet periods, water is pumped into the high level system to help land drainage and prevent flooding, and during the summer, water is transferred back into the low level system for irrigation. Figure 27 - Map of the South Level and Cut-off Channel operational catchment There are 3 rivers and 1 lake in this catchment. There are no estuarine or coastal waters. The catchment lies on top of 2 groundwater bodies which are considered in their own sections later in this document. This section relates to the surface water bodies only. The status (health) of the water environment in 2009 was assessed as being generally moderate. Our current analysis suggests that 50% of the water bodies in the South Level and Cut-off Channel catchment should have a long term objective of achieving good status/potential, as shown in Figure

53 Figure 28 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the South Level and Cut-off Channel catchment in cycle 1 Figure 29 - Chart showing the classification and long term objectives of all water bodies in the South Level and Cut-off Channel catchment in cycle 2 For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( 53

54 Since 2009, investigations in this catchment have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are not achieving good status/potential, and the likely causes. These are shown in Figure 30. Figure 30 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status/potential of water bodies in the South Level and Cut-off Channel catchment by type and source sector Measures to improve the water environment have been assessed. Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are shown in the table Improve modified physical habitats Removal or easement of barriers to fish migration Improvement to condition of channel/bed and/or banks/shoreline Improvement to condition of riparian zone and /or wetland habitats Sediment management strategies Managing pollution from waste water Mitigate/remediate point source impacts on receptor Improve the natural flow and level of water Control pattern/timing of abstraction Review time limited licences to make sure that any replacement licences fully support water body objectives including preventing any drop in status 54

55 Manage invasive non-native species Early detection, monitoring and rapid response (to reduce the risk of establishment) Building awareness and understanding (to slow the spread) Mitigation, control and eradication (to reduce extent) Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution at source Reduce diffuse pollution pathways (i.e. control entry to water environment) The most significant proposed measures relate to improving the morphology (river function and form) and riparian habitats along the river. Many of the water bodies in this catchment are maintained as statutory navigations. The quality of the water in this operational catchment is influenced by water levels. As many of the ditches are static in the summer months, good status may not be achievable for some elements. Climate and coastal change may also limit future improvements in the status of this operational catchment. Measures in this catchment include: removal or replacement of hard bank reinforcement with soft engineering solution; bank re-profiling and riparian management; and the modification or removal of structures to enable fish to travel upstream. Opportunities will be sought with relevant authorities and land managers to improve the morphology and habitat whilst maintaining water bodies for their various functions (for example to maintain land drainage). The second most significant proposed measures are for phosphate removal and improvements to water company infrastructure in the upstream catchments as well as in this catchment. However, such actions will rely on the will and investment of local residents and businesses. Many of the proposed actions are to tackle diffuse pollution by nutrients (phosphate and nitrate) from arable and livestock agriculture. This catchment is within the Little Ouse Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) Priority Area. The CSF project is a joint initiative between the Environment Agency and Natural England. It is funded by Defra and the Rural Development Programme for England. Natural England s CSF Officer has a programme of targeted farm visits and events covering the relevant water bodies in this catchment. We will use our own resources, where necessary and in a targeted approach, to give practical advice and support to enable farmers to take voluntary action to reduce diffuse water pollution. Success depends on farmers and land managers accepting and acting on the advice given. The ability of invasive non-native species (INNS) to spread rapidly means that prevention is the most effective solution. It is critical that everyone should follow and promote the principles of good biosecurity as outlined in the Check, Clean, Dry campaign ( All actions to control and manage non-native species should follow the national measures in the Anglian river basin management plan and fit within the GB Invasive Non-Native Species Strategy ( There are actions in this catchment to monitor and control (where possible) the spread of Himalayan balsam, signal crayfish, giant hogweed, floating pennywort, Dikerogammarus haemobaphes, mitten crab and zebra mussel. You can find out more detail on the status and long term objectives by using the Catchment Data Explorer tool at: 55

56 3.5.1 South Level and Cut-off Channel catchment economic appraisal and environmental assessment Economic appraisal was carried out for technically feasible measures that will enable water bodies to reach good ecological status/potential. Measures to prevent any drop in status are not subject to economic appraisal Results and recommendation Measures proposed to improve the water environment to good status / potential in this catchment are cost beneficial; the benefits are greater than the costs. The results of the economic appraisal are shown Monetised costs and benefits of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 11 Net present value Benefit cost ratio Present value benefits Present value costs 52.3 million million 8.3 million This means that for every pound that is spent towards improving the water environment in this catchment, you could expect to receive 7.27 of benefits Benefits and costs of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 12 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Ecosystem Service Water regulation (timing and scale of run-off, flooding, etc.); Erosion regulation Positive or negative impact : very positive : positive o: neutral : negative : very negative 11 The benefits and costs are shown in Present Value terms, which is a way of expressing the value of costs and benefits that will happen in the future in today s money. We apply a discount rate and benefits to reflect people s preference for receiving goods and services now rather than later. 12 Improving the water environment has wider benefits than those we have been able to monetise in the appraisals. We have identified these using wider benefits. An ecosystem service is a service that the natural environment provides that improves our quality of life. 56

57 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Fresh Water; Recreation and tourism; Aesthetic value None None None o The wider benefits that are very positive are water regulation and erosion regulation. These will have significant benefit to society and although they are not monetised as part of this economic appraisal they will further support the proposed measures in this catchment along with a positive contribution from the wider benefits from tourism, and fresh water. The Final Appraisal Report and associated documents provide a more detailed summary of these results. This can be requested at AnglianRBD@environment-agency.gov.uk. Commentary from the catchment partnership: The catchment partner s comments on the economic appraisal are that CamEO is working with Cambridgeshire Acre in this operational catchment. No comment received from Cambridge Acre on the economic appraisal as just starting to build a catchment partnership Possible scale of improvement for the South Level and Cut-off Channel operational catchment The information presented so far has focused on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing any drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile. This section focuses on the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the period to 2021, based on current knowledge of plans and actions. In this operational catchment: Have measures been implemented (or are secured for ) that will deliver improvements that have not yet been reflected in classification results? E.g. Catchment Sensitive Farming, Catchment Restoration Fund Projects Are there measures planned to deliver Protected Area objectives that will also contribute to improvements in water body status? Has this operational catchment been identified in water company draft business plans as an area for improvement? Has this operational catchment been identified as a priority for action under the new environmental land management scheme (NELMS)? Have the local catchment partnership identified measures they are likely to secure funding for, which will bring about improvement within the 2nd cycle? Are any additional improvement measures included in Environment Agency or other statutory plans? Yes or No Yes see 1 Yes see 2 Yes see 3 Yes see 4 Yes see 5 Yes see 6 1. Any classification data collected between 2009 and 2015 are interim data, which are subject to change. Improvements in data quality and assessment techniques mean that interim data are used as indicative information for decision making only and this is not as definitive as the next classification in Measures have been implemented that 57

58 will make improvements that are not reflected in the interim data. Interim data reflects both background environmental changes causing both improvements and drop in status, and improvement from measures in place. 2. In most places all Protected Area objectives contribute to an improvement to background quality in a water body, not necessarily an improvement in status in all water bodies where those objectives apply. 3. We are working closely with water companies to support their investment in environmental improvement. All water company business plans identify all catchments as an area where their investment can improve water body status. Final plans won t be agreed until All operational catchments have targeted priority action areas within them as part of the draft NELMS. We have worked closely with Natural England to develop this. 5. Local catchment partnerships are at various stages of planning and agreeing what measures they will prioritise, identifying where the measures will be most effective and then seeking funding. 6. Improvement measures are included in our draft Flood risk management plans, Environment Agency plans for biodiversity, and various other statutory plans. Based on our understanding of the information above, and our catchment knowledge, we have medium confidence that this operational catchment will see an improvement towards the proposed long term objectives by The CamEO Management Catchment Partnership is working closely with Cambridgeshire ACRE in this operational catchment to hopefully build a catchment partnership that can work at the very local level addressing issues on the ground and raising awareness of the issues affecting our local rivers. It is hoped that the any local partnership in the South Level will be able to support the wider work within the management catchment. 58

59 3.6 Wissey Operational Catchment Figure 31 - River Wissey at Northwold Gauging station The Wissey rises as a chalk stream east of Bradenham and flows in a westerly direction for 35 miles until it joins the Great Ouse. The area is mainly rural, with the market towns of Swaffham and Watton in the east and the village of Stoke Ferry in the west. Agriculture is the main land use with cereals as the major crop. The value of these crops means, in summer, up to 14% of the arable area may be irrigated using water from the river or groundwater. The catchment is a key water source for public water supply and irrigation. Figure 32 - Map of the Wissey operational catchment There are 8 river and 2 lake bodies in this catchment. There are no estuarine or coastal waters. The catchment lies on top of 1 groundwater body which is considered in its own sections later in this document. This section relates to the surface water bodies only. The status (health) of the water environment in 2009 was assessed as being generally moderate. Our current analysis suggests that 50% of the water bodies in the Wissey catchment should have a long term objective of achieving good status/potential, as shown in Figure

60 Figure 33 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the Wissey catchment in cycle 1 Figure 34 - Chart showing the classification and long term objectives of all water bodies in the Wissey catchment in cycle 2 For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( 60

61 Since 2009, investigations in this catchment have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are not achieving good status, and the likely causes. These are shown in Figure 35. Figure 35 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status/potential of water bodies in the Wissey catchment by type and source sector Measures to improve the water environment have been assessed. Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are shown in the table : Improve modified physical habitats Removal or easement of barriers to fish migration Removal or modification of engineering structure Improvement to condition of channel/bed and/or banks/shoreline Improvement to condition of riparian zone and /or wetland habitats Changes to operation and maintenance Vegetation management Managing pollution from waste water Mitigate/remediate point source impacts on receptor 61

62 Manage pollution from towns, cities and transport Reduce diffuse pollution at source Improve the natural flow and level of water Control pattern/timing of abstraction Review time limited licences to make sure that any replacement licences fully support water body objectives including preventing any drop in status Manage invasive non-native species Early detection, monitoring and rapid response (to reduce the risk of establishment) Building awareness and understanding (to slow the spread) Mitigation, control and eradication (to reduce extent) Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution at source Reduce diffuse pollution pathways (i.e. control entry to water environment) The most significant proposed measures relate to improving the morphology (river function and form) and riparian habitats along the river. Measures in this catchment include: channel narrowing; bank re-profiling and other channel modifications to improve flow diversity; improved floodplain connectivity; sensitive management practices and the modification or removal of structures to enable fish to travel upstream. Some of these actions would require significant local consultation and landowner permission. In some cases the improvements would have an added benefit of reducing flood risk. Opportunities will be sought with relevant authorities and land managers to improve the morphology and habitat whilst maintaining water bodies for their various functions (for example to maintain land drainage). The second most significant proposed measures are for the water companies and private operators to improve to their sewage treatment infrastructure to remove phosphate. A combination of these actions, together with work to reduce agricultural diffuse pollution, will have a significant impact on water quality. However, such actions will rely on the goodwill and investment of local residents and businesses. Actions to prevent pesticide pollution, from both agricultural and amenity use, are necessary to reduce the impact on water abstracted from the Wissey at Stoke Ferry. All of the catchment upstream of Stoke Ferry is in the Wissey Drinking Water Safeguard Zone. Many of the proposed actions are to tackle diffuse pollution by nutrients (phosphate and nitrate) from arable and livestock agriculture. This catchment is within the Little Ouse Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) Priority Area. The CSF project is a joint initiative between the Environment Agency and Natural England. It is funded by Defra and the Rural Development Programme for England. Natural England s CSF Officer has a programme of targeted farm visits and events covering the relevant water bodies in this catchment. We will use our own resources, where necessary and in a targeted approach, to give practical advice and support to enable farmers, property owners and businesses to take voluntary action to reduce diffuse water pollution. These actions will also be beneficial for the local groundwater bodies. Success depends on action being taken on the advice given. Flow and water levels are also an issue in this catchment. Abstraction reduces water available in river systems and affects flow. Groundwater abstraction lowers the water table which can reduce spring flow to rivers. The most water is abstracted by water companies for public supply. Other uses are for agriculture, such as crop irrigation and livestock watering. These actions will also be beneficial for the groundwater. Measures to address this in this catchment include controlling abstractions to protect flows. 62

63 The ability of invasive non-native species (INNS) to spread rapidly means that prevention is the most effective solution. It is critical that everyone should follow and promote the principles of good biosecurity as outlined in the Check, Clean, Dry campaign ( All actions to control and manage non-native species should follow the national measures in the Anglian river basin management plan and fit within the GB Invasive Non-Native Species Strategy ( There are actions in this catchment to monitor and control (where possible) the spread of Himalayan balsam, floating pennywort, Japanese knotweed, mitten crab, zebra mussel and signal crayfish. You can find out more detail on the status and long term objectives by using the Catchment Data Explorer tool at: Wissey catchment economic appraisal and environmental assessment An economic appraisal was carried out for technically feasible measures that will enable water bodies to reach good ecological status/potential. Measures to prevent any drop in status are not subject to economic appraisal Results and recommendation Measures proposed to improve the water environment to good status/potential in this catchment are cost beneficial; the benefits are greater than the costs. The results of the economic appraisal are shown Monetised costs and benefits of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 13 Net present value Benefit cost ratio Present value benefits Present value costs 16.8 million million 53.2 million This means that for every pound that is spent towards improving the water environment in this catchment, you could expect to receive 1.32 of benefits. Some additional benefits have been valued and monetised as part of this economic appraisal to provide further justification that the benefits of implementing the measures are greater than the costs. These additional benefits are biodiversity benefits from agricultural schemes and benefits from measures that contribute to groundwater body improvement are included in the results above. 13 The benefits and costs are shown in Present Value terms, which is a way of expressing the value of costs and benefits that will happen in the future in today s money. We apply a discount rate and benefits to reflect people s preference for receiving goods and services now rather than later. 63

64 3.6.4 Benefits and costs of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 14 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Ecosystem Service Provision of Habitat Fresh Water; Water regulation (timing and scale of run-off, flooding, etc.); Erosion regulation, Recreation and tourism; Aesthetic value; Existence values None None None Positive or negative impact : very positive : positive o: neutral : negative : very negative o The ecosystem service that is very positive is the provision of habitat. This will have significant benefit to society and although it is not monetised as part of this economic appraisal it will further support the proposed measures in this catchment. It will also have a positive contribution from fresh water; water regulation; erosion regulation, tourism. The Final Appraisal Report and associated documents provide a more detailed summary of these results. This can be requested at AnglianRBD@environment-agency.gov.uk. Commentary from catchment partnership: The catchment partnership s comments on the economic appraisal are that CamEO is working with the Wissey partnership in this operational catchment. For more details please see The Wissey partnership has reviewed the first draft of the economic appraisal and largely agrees with the outputs. As such, the partnership supports the delivery of these cost beneficial measures. That withstanding, there are local concerns beyond the delivery of the Water Framework Directive that the partnership wishes to highlight. The partnership believes there are two paramount issues relating to the water environment in the Wissey catchment: water quantity and quality. The economic appraisal identifies this, and the partnership plans to compliment this with locally identified measures. 14 Improving the water environment has wider benefits than those we have been able to monetise in the appraisals. We have identified these using wider benefits. An ecosystem service is a service that the natural environment provides that improves our quality of life. 64

65 There is a pressure upon water resources for public water supply, the agricultural sector and the environment. Understanding this issue and raising awareness of the pressure on water resources is a key priority for the partnership. Water quality is also a key concern; for both the protection of the natural environment, and to allow the abstraction of compliant drinking water. The partnership intends to identify and suggest actions to address local issues alongside those identified within the economic appraisal Possible scale of improvement for the Wissey operational catchment The information presented so far has focused on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing any drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile. This section focuses on the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the period to 2021, based on current knowledge of plans and actions. In this operational catchment: Have measures been implemented (or are secured for ) that will deliver improvements that have not yet been reflected in classification results? E.g. Catchment Sensitive Farming, Catchment Restoration Fund Projects Are there measures planned to deliver Protected Area objectives that will also contribute to improvements in water body status? Has this operational catchment been identified in water company draft business plans as an area for improvement? Has this operational catchment been identified as a priority for action under the new environmental land management scheme (NELMS)? Have the local catchment partnership identified measures they are likely to secure funding for, which will bring about improvement within the 2nd cycle? Are any additional improvement measures included in Environment Agency or other statutory plans? Yes or No Yes see 1 Yes see 2 Yes see 3 Yes see 4 Yes see 5 Yes see 6 1. Any classification data collected between 2009 and 2015 are interim data, which are subject to change. Improvements in data quality and assessment techniques mean that interim data are used as indicative information for decision making only and this is not as definitive as the next classification in Measures have been implemented that will make improvements that are not reflected in the interim data. Interim data reflects both background environmental changes causing both improvements and drop in status, and improvement from measures in place. 2. In most places all Protected Area objectives contribute to an improvement to background quality in a water body, not necessarily an improvement in status in all water bodies where those objectives apply. 3. We are working closely with water companies to support their investment in environmental improvement. All water company business plans identify all catchments as an area where their investment can improve water body status. Final plans won t be agreed until All operational catchments have targeted priority action areas within them as part of the draft NELMS. We have worked closely with Natural England to develop this. 65

66 5. Local catchment partnerships are at various stages of planning and agreeing what measures they will prioritise, identifying where the measures will be most effective and then seeking funding. 6. Improvement measures are included in our draft Flood risk management plans, Environment Agency plans for biodiversity, and various other statutory plans. Based on our understanding of the information above, and our catchment knowledge, we have medium confidence that this operational catchment will see an improvement towards the proposed long term objectives by The Wissey partnership was established in 2012 as a Water Framework Directive pilot partnership. A River Improvement Plan was developed by the partnership, which can be found at: PLANfinal-web-version.pdf. Additionally, a river rehabilitation plan is being developed for the Upper Wissey with the support of the Didlington Fisheries and the Norfolk Rivers Trust. By 2021, we want more informed local decision making to be at the heart of water management in the Wissey sub-catchment. To achieve this they aspire to: complete projects identified in the river rehabilitation plan for the Upper Wissey. continue to identify and deliver local projects and measures identified in our River Improvement Plan in partnership with communities, organisations and other catchment stakeholders. secure long term sustainability of the partnership to ensure the delivery of these local measures for the benefit of the water environment 66

67 3.7 Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk Groundwater body Figure 36 - Chalky soils in fields near Royston, Cambridgeshire The Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk is a Principal aquifer and a Drinking Water Protected Area. The Chalk outcrops across most of the groundwater body, groundwater flow is usually rapid and fracture flow is dominant. The aquifer is therefore particularly vulnerable to any potentially polluting activity at the surface. It is utilised heavily for public water supplies and businesses throughout the area, as well as industrial, agricultural and small private domestic supplies. Base flow from the aquifer supports many of the surface water bodies across the outcrop. Figure 37 - Map of the Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk operational catchment Groundwater Chemical Status The chemical status for this groundwater body is poor. The groundwater body is currently failing the General Chemical test and the Drinking Water Protected Area test. The general chemical test fails due to widespread elevated nitrate concentrations. In many cases the concentration is above the drinking water standard. The Drinking Water Protected Area test assesses small private domestic supplies, it has failed due to increasing nitrate trends which could or has led to an exceedance of the drinking water standard. 67

68 3.7.2 Groundwater Quantitative Status The quantitative status for this groundwater body is poor. It has failed the water balance test, the impact on surface water test ant the impact on wetland test. Water Balance test The water balance test failed due to the predicted effects of groundwater abstraction upon low river flows. Impact on surface water test The impact on surface water test is at poor status due to groundwater abstraction having a confirmed adverse impact on river flow. A complex part of this test revolves around attributing a flow failure to the cause of ecological harm. In some surface water bodies this has been established. However further biological data is being collected to improve our understanding and confidence of the links between flow and ecology. What is understood is there is a clear link between groundwater abstraction and reduced river flows. Impact on wetlands groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems (GWDTE) Cavenham and Icklingham Heath Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) has been identified as having GWDTE features classed as unfavourable no-change. As a result feasible measures have been identified and implemented leading to all but one of the SSSI (GWDTE) units being in unfavourable recovering condition. The scheme implemented included floodplain restoration. Further investigation and feasible measures are also being put forward as part of the Restoring Sustainable Abstraction (RSA) scheme. Our current analysis suggests that the Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk catchment will remain at poor status, as shown in Figure 39. Figure 38 - Chart showing the classification of all water bodies in the Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk catchment in cycle 1 68

69 Figure 39 - Chart showing the classification and long term objectives of all water bodies in the Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk catchment in cycle 2 For more information on the changes since cycle 1, please see section 4.3 Changes since first cycle (new building blocks) within Part 2 (technical annex) of the RBMPs. ( Since 2009, investigations in this catchment have helped to determine the reasons why water bodies are not achieving good status, and the likely causes. These are shown in Figure

70 Figure 40 - Chart showing the confirmed reasons for not achieving good status of water bodies in the Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk catchment by type and source sector Measures to improve the water environment have been assessed. Some of these measures will benefit more than one water body or catchment and some are very specific. The cumulative effect and benefits of measures for the operational catchment have been considered. The measures proposed for this catchment are shown in the table : Manage pollution from rural areas Reduce diffuse pollution at source Mitigate/remediate diffuse pollution impacts on the receptor The chemical failures due to widespread nitrate pollution have been largely apportioned to diffuse agricultural pollution. The outcrop is highly vulnerable to leaching with thin light soils throughout much of the groundwater body. The majority land use throughout the groundwater body is arable farming accounting for nearly 70% of the outcrop and includes several outdoor pig units. Other sources of nitrate are leaky sewers in urban areas, small scale domestic sewage discharges, larger industrial effluent discharges to ground or dry ditches and point sources such as manure storage and fertiliser handling areas. Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) is considered to have the highest potential to reduce diffuse agricultural pollution through: the use of educational material, promoting best farming practices throughout the groundwater body and agri-environment schemes tailored to reducing diffuse nitrate pollution, such as the new environmental land management scheme (NELMS). The measures to address the quantitative failures for the surface water test are being assessed through the hydrology investigation within each operational catchment. The water balance test measures consider moving abstraction to catchments which are in surplus. 70

71 However in our area we do not have the resource to move the amount of abstraction required to reach good status. A basic cost benefit assessment was undertaken to assess whether reducing abstraction to reach good status would be beneficial. The outcome was it is not cost beneficial to reduce abstraction with the aim of achieving good status for the water balance test Protected Areas While the whole groundwater body is a Drinking Water Protected Area, the groundwater body also has 11 Safeguard Zones (SGZ s). The SGZ s have been designated as part of article 7 of the Water Framework Directive where drop in status of water quality is leading increased requirement for purification treatment. The SGZ s are pollutant specific which, in the case of this groundwater body, the designations are all due to the rising concentration of nitrate. Following the designation of the SGZ, action plans have been put in place to help investigate and apportion the source of the nitrate with the aim of identifying measures to help reduce and reverse the upward nitrate trend. The highest source of nitrate impacting upon these sources has been apportioned to diffuse agricultural pollution. The majority land use of these SGZ s is arable cropping such as; Oilseed Rape and Winter Wheat with the inclusion of some outdoor pig units. Measures within a SGZ are voluntary and Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) is seen as the most effective tool to help implement low nitrate input measures such as: Promoting Agri-schemes especially the low nitrate input options where they will have the greatest benefit to the source. Educating farmers and their agronomists of the impact intensive farming is having upon public water supplies. Promoting best farming practices through local workshops. For this groundwater body we have currently remodelled some of our groundwater abstractions, meaning we have a better conceptual understanding of where a source s water is coming from, which in turn can help us focus on areas where measures can have the greatest benefit. However when dealing with groundwater sources we must consider the lag time between implementing a measure and the time taken to realise the benefit at the source. The SGZ s in the groundwater body will have lag times between a few years up to 3 decades (4 or 5 decades in some cases). Therefore it is important to ensure the measures become common agricultural practice in the most sensitive locations. All of these measures are considered to be needed to improve the water environment to as near to good status as practicable. The costs and benefits of the measures have been considered in the catchment economic appraisal, results of which are shown. You can find out more detail on the status and long term objectives by using the Catchment Data Explorer tool at: Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk groundwater catchment economic appraisal and environmental assessment The economic appraisal was undertaken with respect to achieving good chemical status. The quantitative side has been undertaken as part of the hydrology investigations. 71

72 3.7.5 Results and recommendation Measures to improve this groundwater are not cost beneficial; the costs are greater than the benefits. Measures proposed are to ensure there is no drop from the current status of the groundwater and for protected area compliance only. The results of the economic appraisal are shown the results are based on the results of an economic appraisal carried out for this groundwater in this catchment Monetised costs and benefits of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment 15 Net present value Benefit cost ratio Present value benefits Present value costs 101 million million 162 million This means that for every pound that is spent towards improving the water environment in this catchment, you could expect to receive 0.37 of benefits Benefits and Costs of implementing the measures proposed for this catchment Benefits and Disbenefits to society Ecosystem Service Fresh Water Water regulation (timing and scale of run-off, flooding, etc.); Erosion regulation; Water purification and waste treatment; Nutrient cycling None None Positive or negative impact : very positive : positive o: neutral : negative : very negative o 15 The benefits and costs are shown in Present Value terms, which is a way of expressing the value of costs and benefits that will happen in the future in today s money. We apply a discount rate and benefits to reflect people s preference for receiving goods and services now rather than later. 72

73 Benefits and Disbenefits to society Food (e.g. crops, fruit, fish etc.) This groundwater economic appraisal summary report and the Final Appraisal Report for the groundwater economic appraisal provide more detail for these results. This can be requested at Other associated documents are also available upon request Possible scale of improvement for the Cam and Ely Ouse Chalk operational catchment The information presented so far has focused on the proposed long term objectives for the water environment, based on preventing any drop in status and delivering all improvements which are technically feasible and worthwhile. This section focuses on the possible scale of improvement which could happen in the period to 2021, based on current knowledge of plans and actions. In this operational catchment: Have measures been implemented (or are secured for ) that will deliver improvements that have not yet been reflected in classification results? E.g. Catchment Sensitive Farming, Catchment Restoration Fund Projects Are there measures planned to deliver Protected Area objectives that will also contribute to improvements in water body status? Has this operational catchment been identified in water company draft business plans as an area for improvement? Has this operational catchment been identified as a priority for action under the new environmental land management scheme (NELMS)? Have the local catchment partnership identified measures they are likely to secure funding for, which will bring about improvement within the 2nd cycle? Are any additional improvement measures included in Environment Agency or other statutory plans? Yes or No Yes see 1 Yes see 2 Yes see 3 Yes see 4 Yes see 5 Yes see 6 1. Any classification data collected between 2008 and 2015 are interim data, which are subject to change. Improvements in data quality and assessment techniques mean that interim data are used as indicative information for decision making only and this is not as definitive as the next classification in Measures have been implemented that will make improvements that are not reflected in the interim data. Interim data reflects both background environmental changes causing both improvements and drop in status and improvement from measures in place. 2. In most places all Protected Area objectives contribute to an improvement to background quality in a water body, not necessarily an improvement in status in all water bodies where those objectives apply but all should lead to improvement. 3. We are working closely with water companies to support their investment in environmental improvement. All water company business plans identify catchments where their investment can improve water body status. Final plans won t be agreed until All operational catchments have targeted priority action areas within them as part of the draft NELMS. We have worked closely with Natural England to develop this. 73

74 5. Local catchment partnerships are at various stages of planning and agreeing what measures they will prioritise, identifying where the measures will be most effective and then seeking funding. 6. Improvement measures are included in our own plans, the water companies and others Based on our understanding of the information above, and our catchment knowledge, we have medium confidence that this operational catchment will see an improvement towards the proposed long term objectives by

75 3.8 Cam and Ely Ouse Woburn Sands Groundwater body Figure 41 - View across farmland near Hilgay The Cam and Ely Ouse Woburn Sands is a Principal aquifer and a Drinking water Protected Area. The Woburn Sands is confined across most of the groundwater body, with the aquifer only outcropping along the north-western edge. Groundwater flow is usually fairly quick and matrix flow is dominant with some fracture flow. Only the small outcrop is particularly vulnerable to any potentially polluting activity at the surface. It is utilised for public water supplies, as well as industrial, agricultural and small private domestic supplies. Base flow from the aquifer supports a few surface water bodies across the outcrop. Figure 42 - Map of the Cam and Ely Ouse Woburn Sands 75