« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
5. THE PROPOSED GENERAL BINDING RULES
5.1 Fertilisers
Fertilisers, whether from animal manure and other organic sources or from mineral sources, are essential to achieving high yields and thus to a productive farming industry. However, when the nutrients are lost to the land, they are liable to cause undesirable changes in the chemical composition of and the ecological health of watercourses. Nitrates (N) and Phosphates (P) are particularly important in this context.
In certain parts of Scotland, where nitrate concentrations in groundwater have reached or are approaching 50mg/l, Nitrate Vulnerable Zones ( NVZs) have been designated and an Action Programme introduced. The Scottish Action Programme has been reviewed and new rules are due to be proposed.
In freshwater in Scotland phosphates are normally the limiting factor and thus more critical for eutrophication than nitrates. In rivers in Scotland there is generally enough flow to prevent a build-up of nutrients having serious adverse consequences, but in lochs there are many instances of algal blooms and other undesirable changes occurring as a result of nutrients from agricultural sources. Achieving good water status across Scotland by 2015 requires action to prevent and reduce the run-off of nutrients, and as phosphates tend to accumulate (and be released over several years) action should start as soon as practicable.
It is recognised that some loss of nutrients is inevitable and that conventional farming may involve some phosphate surplus. Research has shown that P is being added to soil in excess of the needs of crops on a range of farms representative of land use in Scotland ( http://www.sepa.org.uk/publications/technical/imp_env_man/index.htm). But it is recognised that much can be done to reduce such surpluses and achieve better control of nutrients. In general, it is in farmers' interests that the nutrients are taken up by crops or animals for agricultural benefit.
The proposed GBRs therefore propose restrictions on the storage and application of fertilisers, especially manures and slurry, close to water bodies or in circumstances that are likely to lead to leaching to groundwater. Groundwater often feeds rivers, and therefore leaching of nutrients may result in eutrophication downstream.
Animal manures and slurry are also a source of faecal contamination, and are thus a risk to water supplies. Measures are proposed to protect wells, springs and boreholes, especially where these are used for drinking water; these measures will help to achieve compliance with the Drinking Water Directive.
Animal manures and slurry are a significant factor in Scotland's difficulty in achieving compliance with the standards of bathing waters. In 2006, for the first time, all of Scotland's designated bathing waters met the mandatory standards. A new Bathing Waters Directive was adopted in 2006, and achieving the new standards will require further improvement in the control of diffuse pollution.
5.2 Livestock
Livestock, especially cattle, can cause damage to the water environment, either by the deposition of manure, or by trampling the ground, in or close to water courses resulting in soil erosion. In the December 2005 consultation it was proposed to prohibit livestock from having direct access to water courses on improved ground. (It was recognised that on hill ground it would not be desirable or practicable to fence off water courses and provide alternative drinking water.)
There is evidence that the access of livestock at fairly high stocking densities can result in the
downgrading of water quality. In the Brighouse Bay study
( http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Water/15561/15068), looking at measures to protect bathing waters from faecal contamination, the field measures concentrated on excluding livestock from watercourses. This involved fencing and the installation of gravity-fed field troughs. The study found that there was a reduction in high flow Faecal Indicator Organism ( FIO) concentration in sub-catchments where an additional 30% of the stream bank length was protected. Similar improvements in water quality have been found as a result of excluding or controlling stock in the Mains Burn catchment (West Lothian) and in the Tarland (Aberdeenshire). However, in discussions the Executive accepted that it was not practicable to exclude stock from water courses in all lowland areas; the proposed rules are thus limited to avoiding the erosion or poaching of land close to water and to the protection of sources of water supply.
There are differing views on whether it is better to move ring feeders periodically or leave a selected area to be "sacrificed". The proposed set of GBRs does not impose a solution either way, but it is proposed that livestock feeders, which naturally tend to have poached ground round them, should be positioned at a distance from surface waters.
In some cases improvements can be made by allowing cattle to have access to drinking from the water course in a specified area but not to stand in the burn or river.
We expect that the adoption of good practice, together with adherence to the proposed GBRs on livestock, will result in improvements to water quality in watercourses draining livestock fields. However, where SEPA find catchments with water courses that are not of sufficient quality, they will be expected to propose the registration of the activities in those catchments giving rise to the risk and to propose targeted rules. Such targeted measures will involve some administration costs, registration fees, and the restriction necessary to protect the water environment.
5.3 Land cultivation
Land cultivation activities can be a risk to the water environment through soil erosion and the loss of nutrients and pesticides to watercourses. Adoption of good practice measures will minimise the risks. The rules restrict tilling close to water courses and to sources of drinking water. They are based on the provisions (voluntary) of the PEPFAA Code and on the cross-compliance conditions of GAEC.
In forestry there are similarly rules set out in the Forests and Water Guidelines, aimed primarily at protecting soils and at minimising the run-off into water courses. Avoiding planting close to water courses may also reduce the acidification of waters.
5.4 Discharges of surface water
The CAR contains a GBR on surface water run-off from premises which include farm steadings and buildings, urban or rural ( GBR 10). The proposed rule applying to drainage from land is designed to provide a similar protection to watercourses from rural land use activities.
There are further provisions which would give statutory effect to some of the guidance in the Forests and Water guidelines on surface water run-off.
5.5 Construction and maintenance of waterbound roads
The construction of roads, in particular forestry roads, is an obvious risk of soil erosion and resulting sedimentation of water courses. A rule based on the F&W Guidelines is proposed, applicable to any waterbound (unmetalled) road, track or path.
5.6 Pesticides
The potential risks of pesticides, which include herbicides, to plant life, invertebrates and aquatic life generally are well known. The proposed rules embody good practice. It is envisaged that an operator following a Local Environment Risk Assessment for Pesticides ( LERAP assessment) would be complying with the proposed rule. A rule is proposed to prevent the back siphoning which can occur if a device is filled from a watercourse.
5.7 Sheep dipping
The proposed rules on sheep dipping follow those in the Sheep Dipping Code of Practice. This is not in itself mandatory, but may be a condition of the authorisation granted by SEPA under the Groundwater Regulations and now under CAR for the disposal of spent sheep dip.
The first rule proposes that the dipped sheep should be left for their fleeces to dry before they are allowed access to any water course.
The second provides that any mobile or new sheep dipping facility shall be placed at a substantial distance (50 metres) from any watercourse or source of water.
Q3. Do you consider these are the main activities which contribute to diffuse pollution from rural land use?
Q4. Will the measures contained within the GBRs contribute to the mitigation of diffuse pollution?
« Previous | Contents | Next »