The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

6. THE PROPOSED WAY FORWARD

The Scottish Executive sees a need for early action in order to bring about water quality improvements, and we wish to work with the farming industry and other interested parties. At this point we are seeking views on possible approaches.

6.1 The present position

CAP reform, agri-environment schemes and other policy initiatives will help to protect water quality. It is possible that further developments of Land Management Contracts or other elements of CAP could result in additional improvements in water quality.

However, it is difficult to assess what scale of improvement may be expected, and how much of the change required to produce a reduction of diffuse pollution will be made. In some catchments it is possible current measures may go a considerable way towards delivering our water quality targets but the SEPA characterisation report suggests that significantly more action is likely to be required for the control of diffuse pollution.

The Water Framework Directive requires the introduction of a programme of measures, including basic measures to prevent or control diffuse pollution, in order to achieve good water status by 2015; these measures must be in place by 2009 and operational by 2012, within the river basin management planning process. Some of these measures have already been implemented for various activities under the Controlled Activities Regulations.

If no action were taken before the implementation of the programme of measures were required (2012), farmers would then be faced with the prospect of implementing substantial additional measures and changes in farm practices over a relatively short period of time.

6.2 Regulation/ GBRs

The principles for risk based regulation introduced through the Controlled Activities Regulations ( CAR) 2005, and the proposed application of these principles to controlling diffuse pollution have already been set out in detail in section 5.

This 'light touch' method of regulation by using GBRs should be cost effective as it is mostly based on existing codes and best practice methods.

Regulation has the advantage of setting compulsory standards for everyone, so that those who are managing their land to good environmental standards are not put at a disadvantage compared with others within the same area who are not delivering the same environmental benefit.

Under the proposals for national GBRs operators will not be required to register with SEPA under the general authorisation, but must comply with the rules set out nationally or for each activity. The targeted GBRs will be accompanied by a requirement of registration by operators of the identified activities in the at-risk catchments.

6.3 The Supportive Approach

While regulatory controls can tackle bad practice, we see a need to promote good practice.

Best management practice farming is likely to require new skills and new business approaches.

The supportive approach could include the promotion of introducing a package of measures including information, voluntary action and providing additional incentives through the LMC scheme to support water quality.

There is a vast array of information available for farmers from a variety of sources. Publications such as the PEPFAA Code and the 4 Point Plan are well publicised and readily available, but we have no guarantees that the advice contained within these is used fully. There are other sources of information which are available but may not be so widely recognised. We therefore need to ensure that relevant information on improving water quality is accessible, and put to good use, not only in agriculture and forestry but also by other land users who may have an impact on the water environment.

Voluntary action of either individuals or groups may help to introduce many of the changes in practices required, particularly those that are low cost. Actions could potentially address aspects such as better soil management and the more targeted use of the N and P content of feeds and fertilisers.

Incentives to improve water quality are already offered in LMCs, although the adoption of measures which will have a direct relation to water quality has yet to be quantified. There is scope to include further incentives both in Tier 2 and Tier 3 of LMCs. Although many aspects of this approach are potentially voluntary and not guaranteed to deliver the change required, it would provide a strong incentive for farmers to make the required changes whilst help is on offer.

The supportive approach has the scope to be an efficient and cost effective way to help make the necessary changes to be in a good position to meet the requirements of WFD from 2012, but still does not guarantee that all farmers will apply best practice methods.

6.4 A combination of measures

Our analysis has drawn us to the conclusion that, to achieve improvement in water quality through the reduction of diffuse pollution, a combination of measures will be the best route.

By taking a regulatory approach only we would be able to cover the 'basic' measures of control required. This means we would lose the advantage of being able to encourage farmers, through incentives, to take action over and above the 'basic' measures. On the other hand, if we do not include some form of regulation we are relying solely on those who are willing to adopt new measures whether by voluntary action or through incentive payments. This would leave us with no foundation on which to place the WFD requirements.

A combination of measures which could include the updating of guidance, further LMC measures, the promotion of voluntary action, and a light touch regulatory regime looks attractive. Such a package would continue the Scottish Executive's approach of supporting farming while meeting the requirements of the WFD.

6.5 Proposed Timetable in context of WFD

The current proposed timetable for WFD implementation is as follows:

It is proposed to phase-in any new regulatory approach from 2007 with the national GBRs being rolled out prior to the targeted measures. This will allow a significant lead-in time and will prevent the risk of not having controls in place by the 2012 deadline. The timing will be phased to concur with the implementation of the full LMC scheme. Farmers will be encouraged to apply for diffuse pollution mitigation LMC measures prior to the implementation of the proposed controls.

6.6 Roles

SEERAD's Role

It is envisaged that SEERAD staff will play a major role in advising the agriculture sector of the changes required under CAR. As the measures will be phased in as River Basin Management Plans are developed, there will be time for the progression of the planning required for areas where risks are identified.

SEPA's Role

SEPA is the lead authority for the implementation of WFD measures in Scotland. Under CARSEPA has the responsibility of addressing the key pressures on the water environment in order to achieve the environmental objectives of the WFD. Accordingly SEPA has carried out a risk assessment, described previously, and has prepared a River Basin Management Planning Strategy that will be issued in December 2005. SEPA will lead and co-ordinate the river basin planning process in Scotland. These plans will set out, amongst other things, the environmental objectives (targets) for all water bodies, present the Programme of Measures (actions) to achieve these objectives, and display the monitoring programmes set up to assess progress. It is envisaged that SEPA in partnership with other regulators will have a close working relationship with land managers and associated organisations in the control of diffuse pollution, so as to fulfil the environmental objectives of the WFD. SEPA is already responsible for enforcing a range of legislation relating to air, soil and water, as well as landfill and waste management.

It is expected that SEPA will be responsible for;

• Identification and prioritisation of areas impacted by diffuse pollution.
• Assessment of water quality improvement required.
• Identification of pressures and cost-effective measures to address diffuse pollution
• Promotion of a partnership approach to solving diffuse pollution pressures through engagement with land managers and the local community through the River Basin Management Planning process
• Roll-out of the Programme of Measures through a partnership approach.

The roles of all organisations involved in the measures to control diffuse pollution will be developed in line with the rest of the strategy. Decisions on the extent and nature of the various roles will have resource implications and these will need to be assessed carefully before any decisions are made.

Questions

11. Do you agree that specific problems in "at risk" catchments should be dealt with through targeted GBRs to be developed in consultation with the industry?

12. Do you agree with the proposed approach of combining regulations ( GBRs) with the development of guidance, support and the promotion of voluntary action?

13. Do you agree that the proposed GBRs and a suite of supportive measures is the right approach? What should they include?

« Previous | Contents | Next »