Only 17% of rivers at Good Ecological Status

warrenslaney

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,959
Location
Youlgrave
According to Paul Knight on Costing the Earth



When the Water Framework Directive was signed up to by the UK, the legal target was for 100% of rivers to be at Good Ecological Status by 2015. Only 17% are there. I wonder how many were at Good Ecological Status before 2000?
 

Guest100

Well-known member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
10,276
Location
North Wales
According to Paul Knight on Costing the Earth



When the Water Framework Directive was signed up to by the UK, the legal target was for 100% of rivers to be at Good Ecological Status by 2015. Only 17% are there. I wonder how many were at Good Ecological Status before 2000?

I suspect more reaching Good status before, Warren. I think's it's becoming apparent the WFD isn't worth the paper it's written on. Removal of barriers? You're kidding, let's add some more. Destruction of spawning habitat by local authorities in the name of flood defence? Hey, crack-on. Spending some time trying to improve habitat and overall river conditions for migratory fish populations, on one small section of one river, one thing has become apparent, you spend more time fighting tooth and nail trying to stop it going backwards rather than making any meaningful advances. Useless shower of shites.
 
Last edited:

boisker

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
2,616
Location
Devon
Interesting to hear CEH say that although agriculture does need to raise its game further that even if they were perfect rivers would still fail as it's still largely related to sewerage/grey water systems/treatment.
I wonder how many people on the forum use phosphate free washing up liquid and other such personal choices, there's a huge amount of basic things the public could do that would have major benefits.
 

keora

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
235
Location
West Yorks
I also listened to the BBC radio 4 programme "costing the earth", where the 17% figure was quoted for English rivers.

The presenter also said that 43% of Welsh rivers were of a good ecological quality and in Scotland it was just over 50%.

England isn't doing well because we've got a much higher population density than Wales and Scotland. So more effluent and pollution gets into the rivers.

As for the figures for good ecological status before 2000, I wonder if they exist. I thought the Euro Water Framework Directive has new criteria for assessing river quality.
 

boisker

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
2,616
Location
Devon
They do exist but assessed under different criteria so are not at all comparable
, there was a major dip in the results when the new assessment criteria were used.
 

warrenslaney

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,959
Location
Youlgrave
When I first heard about this piece of legislation it seemed like the most amazing thing. In hindsight I shouldn’t have been so excited; it took the UK 8 years to even begin. They resisted a judicial review in 2011 by promising over £100m of investment in rivers, to only deliver 1/3 of that. Again charges of lack of ambition were levelled at DEFRA when they quietly got the end date pushed out by another 12 years. Now we hear that WFD isn’t even codified into domestic law.

If you really want anything good to happen to rivers, you must do it yourself, but when has that not been the case?
 

flybye

Pro Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
116
Another reason to stay in the EU. British governments have an appalling disregard for environmental issues in general and wfr in particular.
 

Latest posts

Top