Our Position On…
Read on for more information on where we stand on certain issues.
Working with water companies
Together with our umbrella organisation, The Rivers Trust (who are campaigning hard on this issue), we want to see more effective regulation of the water industry to ensure that Combined Sewer Overflows are used legally and within permit conditions.
We are extremely concerned about the level of discharges and their impact on our waterways.
Exposure to untreated contaminated wastewater poses a serious risk to people and wildlife; that this can happen within water courses with the highest level of environmental protections highlights the extent of the problem.
We will continue to work with our partner organisations to push for increased transparency surrounding discharges, better regulation and accountability on this issue.
These sorts of spills have become the normal rather than the exception and this is unacceptable, we support our industry’s calls to ensure that in future they only happen under exceptional circumstances and our beautiful rivers in West Cumbria (and indeed all our rivers) are healthy environments, safe for people and wildlife to enjoy.
Beavers
The European beaver (Castor fiber) was found throughout England (including Cumbria Wales and Scotland) and is thought to have been hunted to extinction by the mid-16th century. Defra is committed to providing opportunities to reintroduce native species and state that their reintroduction, when carefully planned and managed, can enrich our natural environment and provide wider benefits for people and wildlife.
Beavers have already come to Cumbria and there is currently an enclosed beaver trial taking place in the Eden catchment at Setterah Park on the river Lowther led by Lowther Estate. A second license was agreed for an undisclosed site in South Cumbria, in 2020 the site received their beavers and they’re doing well. There was also a proposed beaver reintroduction on our patch in the river Liza (a tributary of the river Ehen) as part of the Wild Ennerdale project. Their vision is to see free living beavers reintroduced to the length of the river Ehen, from mountains to sea and have just finished their public engagement period.
Unfortunately during the engagement period they have hit a hurdle and the project has now stalled. The proposed barrier across the River Liza to keep the beavers ‘enclosed’ would need a 100mm bar spacing to securely keep beavers in. Bar spacing would need to be twice this width to avoid deterring salmon and trout which migrate to spawning groups in the tributaries of the River Liza. The Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act prohibits any activities that may impact fish movements. Wild Ennerdale acknowledge that restricting other natural processes, to bring beavers into the valley, would be contrary to the ethos of Wild Ennerdale. For now, they are unable to proceed with the development of a licence application for the release of beavers into a partial enclosure.
Free-living beavers have always been the long-term ambition for their beaver project and a release directly into the wild may be an alternative option for Ennerdale. The Government is currently considering its approach to wild release in England and we await clarity on this. This option has additional complexities. It requires further feasibility work to consider the wider implications of free-living beavers. This will help inform whether Wild Ennerdale apply to release free-living beavers if this option becomes available. There will be opportunities for feedback and discussion, with an emphasis on impacts for local landowners.
Based on the evidence so far, WCRT believes beavers do have a role to play in rivers in Cumbria. However, reintroducing beavers is not without its challenges such as understanding potential adverse impacts on the environment and other iconic species and balancing the opinions of different stakeholders. There is a need for more evidence on the impact of beaver reintroduction, especially in an upland environment.
The Beaver Trust has established an English Beaver Strategy Working Group and prepared proposals for Defra and Natural England. WCRT is part of the Cumbria Beaver Group (CBG) which is working together to support and inform trial enclosed releases of beavers in the county of Cumbria, to educate the public about beavers and, pending a ministerial decision regarding the future status of beavers in England, to promote sensible strategies for beaver management in the longer term.
WCRT supports the enclosed beaver trials in Cumbria in order to further develop our knowledge and understanding of beavers in their role of restoring our rivers.
River Dredging
Dredging is the process of removing a build-up of sediment from the bed of a watercourse to increase the depth or width of the river channel. Gravel management is the strategic removal of large shoals of gravel that have built up in the river and there is an important distinction. Gravel or silt management can be beneficial in some circumstances but dredging to increase channel capacity (often suggested as a way of reducing flood risk) can cause significant knock-on problems and is not a sustainable method of management as it needs doing repeatedly.
Dredging can:
Make riverbanks unstable and increase erosion rates.
Make water travel more quickly downstream to towns, increasing flood risk
Deposit gravel in areas where it causes problems or increases flood risk
Be detrimental to the ecology, particularly salmon and trout who need gravel to lay eggs into
Sometimes gravel management can help to reduce flood risk. For example, where a bridge or culvert is under capacity, gravels will be deposited and further reduce the capacity of the structure which may cause it to overtop the banks sooner. But in general, dredging will increase flood risk downstream.
Deeper, wider channels allow the channels to hold a greater mass of water and have less storage on the floodplains. This results in a more powerful and faster flow creating larger and earlier flood peaks downstream – it simply moves the problem downstream.
Straightening the natural course of a river (many of our rivers have been artificially modified in this way), shortens the length of the journey the water has to take, so a straighter and shorter river has a higher gradient which means water flows more quickly to towns and villages downstream.
Utilising flood storage areas and Natural Flood Management (NFM) is much more effective and much more beneficial for the natural environment too.
Plastic tree guards
Planting trees is a big part of our work to look after rivers. Trees and woodlands provide many benefits to wildlife, climate change, river health, flood risk and cleaner water for people – to name just a few! Trees also however provide a tasty snack for herbivores. As we have larger populations of herbivores than would have naturally existed, we do need to protect trees as they grow. Fences can be used to keep out livestock, but deer can jump these stock fences and 2-metre high deer fences are expensive to erect and not always appropriate in areas of open access – they also don’t keep out the smaller animals such as voles that nibble at the base of newly planted trees. A common approach therefore is to protect each tree with an individual guard.
Most tree guards are made from polypropylene plastic. As we become more aware of the problems of plastics and micro plastics in the environment, it might seem counter-intuitive to use a lot of plastic tubes as part of environmental enhancement projects. However, polypropylene is biodegradable and breaks down without any toxic effects on the environment. On average, trees need to be in tubes for about five years before they are big enough to withstand browsing pressures. After this time, we remove the tubes and if they are still in good condition we reuse them. We also remove any empty tubes after the first year. Tree care to remove tubes and cut back weeds is just as important as planting trees.
Manufacturers are working hard to produce tree guards made from alternative materials, including recycled cardboard, to date they haven’t been able to withstand the Cumbrian climate but there have been lots of improvements in their design. We will be trialling these for the next couple of years.
Every site has different objectives and constraints that determine what approach we take. For example we don’t always need tubes in areas with lower populations of herbivores or with certain browsing resistant trees such as hawthorn, alder, holly and Scots pine. Additionally some sites require different sized guards depending on the height of the animals eating them. We work closely with the Woodland Trust, landowners and other experts to decide which method of planting and protection is the best. We then keep a close eye on how they grow and which species survive to inform our future planting strategy in the future.
We also share best practice and learning with partner organisations including other Rivers Trusts, the Woodland Trust, Cumbria Woodlands and the National Trust who are also working to find and trial alternatives.
Working with farmers
Please see our umbrella organisation, The Rivers Trust’s position on working with farmers which reflects our own practice.
