CaBA Water Industry Workshop - London

1. Six areas where water companies
interests align with the CaBA (there will be more!)
David Johnson C.Eng and MICE. Rivers Trust.
Q1: Does catchment management work? Think SAB Miller
Q2: Do you have enough data to understand water
company issues? There is lots of evidence that can be used.
Q3: Time to talk to the Engineers? Is catchment
management + engineering the way forward?.

2. 1) Sewer capacity and CSOs. The
problem a CaBA could help with.
Ø Peak runoff exceeding hydraulic
capacity of the sewer =>
Ø Sewer flooding or
Ø Discharges from CSOs.
Ø Not all flooding can be helped by NFM
measures.
Ø Design the NFM to suit the problem.

3. 1) Sewer capacity and CSOs. Data and
tools.
Ø CaBA data package
Ø Talk to the engineers,
what you want is a list of
DG5s and problem CSOs
where upstream
measures could help.
Ø Need the sewershed for
the issue (asset
database)
Defra Urban demonstrator

4. 1) Sewer capacity and CSOs. Case
study and potential trip hazards.
Ø NFM modelling in Manchester helps to
quanGfy the potenGal benefit of SuDS and
focus effort where it could make the most
difference.
Ø 10% reducGon in peak runoff on a good day.
Ø Engineers know which issues could be
helped by reducing peak runoff.
Ø MulGple benefits (NIA and Green
infrastructure)
Ø What about GW flooding, do not swap one
problem for another

5. 1) Sewer capacity and CSOs. Case study
and potential trip hazards. Strategic
approach….
Maps iden*fy where SuDS
have the greatest poten*al
Natural Course 2017

6. 1) Sewer capacity and CSOs. Case study
and potential trip hazards.
Natural Course 2017

7. 2) Nitrate in groundwater. The problem a
CaBA could help with.
Ø GW is the best source of drinking water, low carbon
and minimal treatment.
Ø Nitrate comes from ag, urban and aerial deposiGon
Ø Most of the focus is on agricultural land management
Ø Groundwater quality is complex so a diagram is
helpful =>
EA Water Resource Strategy 2008

8. the umbrella body of the rivers trust movement
where there’s water, there’s life
How the natural GW system works: Groundwater quality is
affected by land management and abstrac*on management.

9. 2) Nitrate in groundwater. Data and
tools.
Ø Safeguard Zones (can be confusing)
Ø NEAPN nitrate load
Ø FARMSCOPER
Ø Defra evidence review
Ø Water companies have a list of target
groundwater catchments for N
Ø What about monitoring?

10. 2) Nitrate in groundwater. Case study
and trip hazards
Ø 10% on a good day! Be realisGc. Cover crop calc.
Ø But can do a lot more in small areas and if there
are high loss acGviGes.
Ø Hierarchy of asks based on 40 years of research!
Ø DiluGon is the soluGon to polluGon…
Ø MulGple benefits from many of the best
measures….
Ø One of the best cases for a CaBA

11. Manure management. Minimal manure in
GW catchment => No autumn applicaGon =>
Low N manure => slurry or poultry licer.
Autumn cover. Early autumn establishment
=> Cover crops => ‘greening up’ => late
harvest bare soil.
Nutrient applica*on. Low-opGmal nutrient
applicaGon => Precision nutrient management
=> full evaluaGon of manures => Insurance
applicaGon for yield or quality.
Landuse. Woodland => permanent pasture
=> low leaching crops => high leaching
crops => plough-up or outdoor pigs
2) Nitrate in groundwater. Case study
and trip hazards (hierarchy)

12. 3) Pesticide in SW. The problem a CaBA
could help’
Ø PesGcide more of a problem in SW (drinking
water)
Ø Very expensive treatment, Ozone and GAC.
Ø Catchment management is about usage, Gming
and good pracGce.
CSF EvaluaGon 2014

13. 3) Pesticide in SW. Data and tools
Ø SgZ in CaBA data package
Ø PesGcide usage survey
Ø Local farmer or agronomist surveys
Ø FARMSCOPER and Scimap (fools errand?)
Ø It is all (well nearly all) about usage…

14. 3) Pesticide in SW. Drinking water. Case
study and trip hazards.
Ø Highly complex (2 steps forward 1 step back)
Ø Varies year on year depending on usage and
Gming and soil condiGons/weather
Ø Needs a long term approach which aims to
reduce usage of each acGve ingredient.
Ø Move towards contractors?
Ø What are the mulGple benefits?
Ø OperaGng rules + CM

15. 4) Phosphate in surface water. The
problem a CaBA could help with
Ø New P standards in SW mean that P stripping
will be required.
Ø The smaller the works the more expensive
each kg of P is to remove.
Ø Can we remove P from land more cheaply
using a CaBA? What is the opportunity?

16. • New P standards mean
that P stripping will be
required.
• The smaller the works
the more expensive each
kg of P is to remove.
• Can we remove P from
land more cheaply?
• 10% on a good day in 20
years Gme…..
• Takes a long Gme due to
soil store.
• Takes even longer due to
sediment store.
• MulGple benefits (soil
retenGon, reduced ag
costs, sediment reduced
and habitat created.

17. 4) Phosphate in surface water. Data and tools
• CaBA data package
• PSYCHIC
• SAGIS
• CaMMP Hub
• FARMSCOPER
• Scimap

18. 4) Phosphate in surface water. Case study
M o s t
effecti
ve
measur
e
Measure P e r c e n t a g e
improvement in
phosphorus lost
to the river
I s i t c o s t
e f f e c t i v e ?
R a n k e d m o s t
costly (5) to
least costly (1)
1 Use slurry injection
application techniques
20% 5
2 Do not spread slurry or
poultry manure at high-
risk times
10% 1
3 Construct bridges for
l i v e s t o c k c r o s s i n g
rivers/streams
7% 3
4 Capture of dirty water
in a dirty water store
7% 4
5 Fence off rivers and
streams from livestock
6% 2

19. 4) Phosphate in surface water. Case study and
trip hazards (think about +me to improve)
1 2 3 4 5
Nitrate
(%)
12 5 5 5 4
Phosphorus
(%)
20 10 7 7 6
Sediment
(%)
0 0 0 0 0
Ammonia
(%)
25 0 0 0 0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Nitrate
(%)
Phosphorus
(%)
Sediment
(%)
Ammonia
(%)

20. 5) Low flows and reducing abstraction.
The problem a CaBA could help with.
Ø Every Ml/day of water is worth ~£1M per annum to
a water company.
Ø Reducing abstracGon is not ideal.
Ø Can we make rivers resilient to low flows rather
than put water back in them?
Environment Agency Water Resources Strategy, 2008

21. 5) Low flows and reducing abstraction.
Data and tools.
Ø CAMS water resource
status.
Ø AbstracGons
Ø Low flow study areas?
Ø The EA were going to
publish guidance?
Ø There are some case
studies in then SE

22. 6) The eel regulations. Could a CaBA
help?
Ø Water company assets
have to comply with eel
regulaGons.
Ø Consultant reports that
highlight structures with
licle upstream habitat
Ø A more catchment
based approach to
maximise eel habitat
access.

23. 6) The eel regulations. Data and tools
and case study.
Ø Priority barriers (EA)
Ø GIS mapping to idenGfy
amount of upstream
habitat.
Ø PopulaGon, habitat and
pass-ability studies.

24. Q1: Does catchment management work?
Ø Modest improvement
Ø But there is not an alternative....think SB Miller
Q2: Do you have enough data to understand water
company issues?
Ø CaBA data package is a start but there is alot more out there.
Q3: Time to work with the Engineers. Catchment
management + engineering is the way forward.
Ø Engineering will do the heavy lifting.
Ø Engineers like numbers and evidence
Ø They also like solving problems

25. 1) NFM sewer capacity and CSOs. Data and
tools.
What data is available?
• CaBA data package
• Talk to the engineers,
what you want is a list of
DG5s and problem CSOs
where upstream
measures will help.
• Need the sewershed for
the issue
What tools are available?
• TUFLOW esp if it is part
of a SWAMP
assessment with above
and below ground
infrastructure
#Infoworks#
• JFLOW. Used for SW
flood maps and NFM
• Another
Graph of
Flow vs
Time
at
LocaGon
A
A

26. 3) PesGcide in SW. Drinking water
• What data is available to
you
• SgZ in CaBA data package
• PesGcide usage survey
• Local farmer or
agronomist surveys
• It is all (well nearly all)
about usage…
• What tools are available?
• Farmscoper
• Scimap?
• Models not as helpful for
such

27. 3) PesGcide in SW. The problem
• PesGcide more of a
problem in SW (Gme)
• Very expensive
treatment, Ozone and
GAC.
• Catchment management
is about amount and
Gming
• Not that much of a
problem for the ecology?