
Changes to bathing water status test will deny rivers protection, say critics
Rivers are unlikely to be granted the protections of bathing water status under the government's changes to the system, campaigners have said.
River activists have reacted with fury as details of the reforms were revealed on Wednesday.
In an unexpected move, ministers are imposing a feasibility test on any waterway where a community is seeking a bathing water designation. If water bodies are deemed too polluted to improve to at least 'sufficient' water quality they will not be given a designation.
River campaigners have said the restriction is very likely to exclude river sites from being granted bathing water status. No single stretch of river in England is in good overall health and the rivers that have bathing water status at the moment all record poor water quality, as a result of sewage and agricultural pollution, which will take time and investment by water companies to improve.
The EU-derived bathing water regulations are being used by campaigners as a driver to clean up toxic rivers, which suffer from sewage pollution and agricultural runoff.
When a waterway gets the status it is subjected to a much tougher testing regime by the Environment Agency to determine the level of faecal pollution at the site. Waterways are given the status: poor, sufficient, good or excellent.
Becky Malby of the Ilkley Clean River Group, who was behind the campaign to make part of the River Wharfe the first river to be designated as a bathing water area, said: 'We are shocked at the move to only designate waters that have the potential to meet sufficient water quality. Bathing status is awarded where people use rivers to protect them. This new restriction means that at many rivers in England where people paddle, play and swim there will be no information on water quality, and those rivers will not have to comply with bathing status requirement to reduce raw sewage pollution to 10 episodes a year.'
When the Wharfe received the designation in 2020, it was classed as being poor quality, she said. It has taken five years and a multimillion pound investment from Yorkshire Water to get to the stage where the river is expected be given sufficient or good status in the years to come.
Chris Coode, the chief executive of environmental charity Thames21, said other government changes to the rules such as testing bathing water sites all year round rather than just in the summer were a step in the right direction. But he joined Malby's criticism of the new feasibility test.
'This change would significantly reduce the chances of inland river sites achieving designation, diverting monitoring and investments to already clean sites and preventing essential improvements needed to make our rivers safe for swimming, paddling and playing,' he said.
Surfers Against Sewage also attacked the new feasibility test. Dani Jordan, the director of campaigns and communities, said: 'The proposed 'feasibility test' that deems some areas as too polluted to protect will feel like a snub to communities who are simply asking the government for help in tackling the pollution of their local bathing spots so that they can enjoy them safely.'
A government source said the changes were designed to ensure that 'poor' sites were only fully designated where it was feasible and proportionate to improve the water quality to 'sufficient' standards. The source said public health needed to be protected.
Under the changes, which cover England and Wales, the definition of 'bathers' will be expanded to include participants in watersports other than swimming, such as paddle boarders and surfers, the bathing water season will be extended to the whole year from its current term of May to September and multiple testing points will be created at the bathing water sites.
Emma Hardy, the water minister, said: 'Bathing water sites are the pride of local communities across the country. But safety and cleanliness is paramount, and we must go further and faster to open up our waterways for families to enjoy.'
Applications for bathing water status, which have been on hold during consultation over the changes, will reopen in May.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
13 hours ago
- BBC News
Waste company excepts partial liability for Calne smell
A waste management company has accepted partially responsibility for the smell that has dogged a Wiltshire town in recent Waste Solutions' admitted that one of its sites, the Lower Compton landfill, had been "identified as one of the sites in the Calne area which may be contributing to odour issues".At a heated public meeting in the town attended by Wiltshire Council, the Environment Agency and Hills, more than 40 attendees were given the opportunity to question representatives from the various company also announced that it has been served with Section 36 order, which say it has to remedy the situation by the end of July. Residents have complained regularly about the smell, which has been described as "eggy", "gassy", "stagnant" and "sulphurous", in recent months, with the odours often lingering over the town in the early hours of the a sign of the severity of the issue, the Environment Agency said it had received more than 600 complaints in April and May. 'Completely unacceptable' Simon Allen, waste operations director at Hills, apologised to the local community."We accept that we are responsible for some of the odour in Calne," he said."We've accepted entirely through the recent odour complaints, that what we have done, in places, hasn't been good enough."We're working with the Environment Agency. They've served an enforcement notice to ensure we complete the final capping."If I knew 100% what was causing this, and I could fix it, I would. I don't want to be here listening to all these complaints." Ben Shayler, area environment manager for the Environment Agency said that he sympathised with local residents."I completely understand the problems that are being experienced in Calne, and I really feel for the residents", he said."It's completely unacceptable the levels of odour that we're experiencing at the moment."Local councillor Sam Pearce-Kearney said "it was good that Hills' have taken responsibility" and added he is "confident" the issue will be resolved by late summer.


Scotsman
13 hours ago
- Scotsman
100 years of refrigeration - why are animals still transported live?
PA History repeats itself at animals' expense Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Sometimes, it feels like we'll never learn. That our mistakes of the past are just waiting to resurface, to be repeated all over again. That our promises to do better are just window-dressing for a harsher reality. It seems particularly pertinent when anniversaries come round to remind us that something as wrong as exporting live animals over long distances, simply to be slaughtered at the other end, just aren't necessary. And haven't been for a long time. And so, it was with a big sigh of disbelief that we heard the news earlier this year that Brittany Ferries was resuming live animal exports from Ireland to France. Dame Joanna Lumley and Pauline McLynn joined forces with over 120 high-profile individuals, experts and civil society organisations to condemn the decision. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Out of kilter It seemed to particularly go against the grain as Britain had just banned live exports from Scotland, England and Wales to the continent only a year before. The ban from Britain in May 2024 finally enshrined in law the will of the people, many of whom had come out to protests around ports and docklands around the country for decades. Finally, the voice of reason had been heard. Action had been taken to condemn a redundant and cruel trade to the history books where it belongs. Scientific evidence shows that when live animals are exported or transported long distances, they often suffer extremes of temperature and are deprived of rest, food or water. It doesn't take a scientist to know that putting sentient beings into lorries and taking them on journeys that can last days, causes them fear and distress. Must do better While Great Britain introduced a ban on the live export of farmed animals last year, and Australia has announced the end of the live export of sheep by sea from 2028, the trade continues in the EU. It is a matter of shame that the EU's current revision of its animal transport rules is appallingly weak. Journeys can last several days or even weeks, exposing animals to exhaustion, dehydration, injury, disease, and even death. Some 44 million farm animals annually have been found to be transported between EU member states and exported internationally, many of them on long distance journeys lasting eight hours or more. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The trade is flourishing owing to the rising demand for meat in some parts of the world: European companies are cashing in on the need to stock farms in countries such as Libya and Vietnam with breeding and fattening animals. For some countries – including Spain, Denmark, Ireland and Romania – livestock export is still seen as a key part of the farming economy. Yet it is not only cruel, but also totally unnecessary. Redundant for a Century This year is the 100th anniversary of the invention of the first refrigerated truck. Made for the ice cream industry in 1925 by American inventor, Frederick McKinley Jones, it meant that chilled desserts, or carcases for that matter, could be transported over long distances and arrive in great condition. From that day on, loading cattle, sheep and pigs into lorries to ship them abroad for slaughter was no longer needed. Instead, they could be slaughtered at a local abattoir and the carcases transported to wherever they are required. Refrigerated sea transport has an even longer history. In 1877, the French steamer Paraguay completed the first successful travel with its shipment of 5,500 frozen sheep carcases from Argentina arriving to France in reportedly excellent condition despite a collision that delayed the delivery for several months, thus proving the concept of refrigerated ships. From that day on, we've never needed to subject live animals, often young animals just weeks old, to long distance sea journeys for slaughter or fattening again. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Blind persistence Yet, we carry on despite clear evidence that doing so causes profound harm. Recommendations published recently by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), identified multiple welfare concerns in the transportation of live animals including 'group stress, handling stress, heat stress, injuries, motion stress, prolonged hunger, prolonged thirst, respiratory disorders, restriction of movement, resting problems and sensory overstimulation'. The EU is believed to be the world's biggest live animal exporter. What fuels this outdated trade? Not need. Not compassion. Just cold, hard cash. A backward pursuit of an outdated economic model whereby animals are treated as inanimate objects and where farm specialisation has fuelled a trend towards fewer, but larger farms and slaughterhouses. Against this backdrop, meat producers aim to minimise production and slaughter costs, maximise revenues and optimise economies of scale by exploiting cost differences between member states. And who pays the price? The animals. The voiceless creatures whose purity of spirit, innocence and blamelessness renders them defenceless in the face of unyielding, uncaring and backward-looking practices. To throw another pertinent anniversary into the mix, this June sees the tenth International Ban Live Exports Day raising awareness of the scale and impact of these cruel journeys by land and by sea and sending a clear message to the companies that profit from this misery that it is totally unacceptable. Brittany Ferries, are you listening? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad


Libya Herald
a day ago
- Libya Herald
IOM delivers training to over 180 Libyan youth
IOM Libya announced yesterday that over 180 Libyan youth graduated from its YESS Centres in Tripoli, Benghazi, Sabha and Misrata. The youth received training in fashion design, plumbing, air conditioning, graphic design, administration skills, flight booking, reception and other areas. The training was conducted with support from the EU and Italy. Tags: IOM International Organization for Migration Libyayouth training