Disappointing government response to WildFish chalk stream plea for better protection

In July, WildFish wrote to the Secretary of State for the Environment asking them to consider designating all of the chalk streams in England as Special Areas of Conservation (“SACs”) to create better protection. That would mean assessing chalk streams to higher standards than those of the standard river classifications. 

This comes at a time when the government is pressing ahead with ill-conceived plans for growth that would increase the pressure on these rivers and streams due to over-abstraction and pollution.  

Over three months later, we have now had a response from the minister. The reply – presumably written with the advice from Defra colleagues – says several things which show a lack of real understanding of the issues.

As we wrote an open letter, we have also published Defra’s response here. 

Our first thoughts are these: 

1. Apparently (though we see no signs of this so far) “Restoring chalk streams is fundamental to this government’s ambitious programme to clean up our rivers, lakes and seas for good.”
2. The response says that chalk streams are “protected under the Water Framework Directive (WFD)” – that’s the same Directive that the Cunliffe Review suggests watering down. Unfortunately, even in its current form, WFD assessments of chalk streams just aren’t sensitive enough to spot the damage being caused to these precious waterbodies.
3. We are told that “where chalk streams are designated sites, they are subject to bespoke environmental targets.” We agree – that’s why they should all be protected in this way.  
4. But there are no more chalk streams joining the handful of protected sites: “At the point of EU Exit, the UK network of SACs was considered sufficient for habitats related to chalk streams and there are currently no plans to review sufficiency for these or other habitats.” 
5. We are told that we can be reassured because as “sensitive waterbodies”, developers “should be assessing and mitigating impacts to water quality in these areas.” We thought it was the regulator’s job to decide on mitigation and assessment. Anyway, it looks like even the limited protection they describe will be put into question if the Planning & Infrastructure Bill becomes law. That’s because it weakens protections in the name of growth. 
6. The response refers to other framework documents. But we say none of them are good enough or apply the right standards to ensure protection for chalk streams. 
7. Then there’s the government panacea: the Chalk Stream Restoration Strategy. The Restoration Strategy’s one big wish is for enhanced protection status for all chalk streams. This one way to make a real difference has not been progressed.
8. We certainly think it is good news (although it should have happened years ago) that protection of chalk streams is a priority for the “plan to reform the water industry.” But all the “Storm Overflows Discharge Reduction Plan” does is to weakly point to what water companies should be doing by law already. We thought the last incarnation was so bad that we challenged it in court. 
9. We understand that the government sees itself as “ambitious” – but we say its aims are split between growth and its advertised intention to do something about chalk streams. 
10. We say the answer is simple: designate the streams and apply the higher standards. That, hand in hand with proper regulation and enforcement would make the difference. We need action not vague suggestions of ambition. 

Over 85% of the world’s chalk streams are found in England. They are as internationally rare and ecologically important as coral reefs and rainforests. Follow the link below to learn more about these unique habitats and the wild fish they support.