Looks like autumn muckspreading is back on

[texelburger]

Was on radio 4 this morning. Agricultural pollution 75%, water companies 25%

I wouldn't believe what anyone reports,yet alone the BBC.Water testing in our area has shown the majority of pollution comes from sewage.That comes from a "off the record" chat with a Guy testing for the EA.Yet ,publicly, the EA say different.The word agenda springs to mind as we are an easy organisation to blame with what appears to be little representation from bodies representing us.

 

[Hindsight]

The utility companies are looking at alternatives to landspreading in any case. I don't think incineration will be involved but other methods like gasification/pyrolysis would make more sense.

Hi, am aware of the work is it at the Birmingham sewage works? There was a piece if I recall on BBC Science programme. My comment was blunt but the gist from the Water company man was there is a cost associated with removing the to land option.

Was it Birmingham Uni doing research in conjunction with Water Co's??

 

[matthew]

Thankyou @Janet Hughes Defra .

What I would like to see on livestock farms, is common sense on the definition of 'growing crops'. As in grassland in an area where the temperature rarely falls below double figures and responds well to low level irrigation with 'dirty water'.
And given the 'Clarification' of the aforementioned 'dirty water', (post #28) how on earth when it drains into an underground tank system, prior to tanker collection as the weather / ground and crop need allows, does it become 'slurry'?

How do we transfer it from scraped concrete to the tanker, dessert spoon?

Guidelines need a lot more work BEFORE they are published.

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Honestly theres only so much the NFU CAN do, and i think they do as much as they can. After all once they've lobbied and presented their evidence at the end of the day its up to the minister...

How about doing some independent testing in a few water courses to see where it's actually coming from rather than just accepting the blame for the industry?

Strikes me there could be more poo coming from people than chickens, but I don't know the numbers involved.

 

[Tarw Coch]

How about doing some independent testing in a few water courses to see where it's actually coming from rather than just accepting the blame for the industry?

Strikes me there could be more poo coming from people than chickens, but I don't know the numbers involved.

Unfortunately the amount of testing to provide any credible evidence beyond a simple snap shot is beyond the means of an individual.
I’m quite surprised, sceptical even of the figures posted a few posts back but haven’t got any evidence to the contrary

 

[Nearly]

Unfortunately the amount of testing to provide any credible evidence beyond a simple snap shot is beyond the means of an individual.
I’m quite surprised, sceptical even of the figures posted a few posts back but haven’t got any evidence to the contrary

I plain old don't believe it.

Farmers aren't sneaky enough to have accidental muck spills at 2am.
Water companies seem to have it as a business plan.

 

[Hindsight]

Thankyou @Janet Hughes Defra .

What I would like to see on livestock farms, is common sense on the definition of 'growing crops'. As in grassland in an area where the temperature rarely falls below double figures and responds well to low level irrigation with 'dirty water'.
And given the 'Clarification' of the aforementioned 'dirty water', (post #28) how on earth when it drains into an underground tank system, prior to tanker collection as the weather / ground and crop need allows, does it become 'slurry'?

How do we transfer it from scraped concrete to the tanker, dessert spoon?

Guidelines need a lot more work BEFORE they are published.

And given the 'Clarification' of the aforementioned 'dirty water', (post #28) how on earth when it drains into an underground tank system, prior to tanker collection as the weather / ground and crop need allows, does it become 'slurry'?


Matthew - I think you are a bit muddled on this - but do correct me if I am wrong. The post 28 I think was taken or refers to / from NVZ guideline document. Dirty water only becomes reclassified if it is placed into a slurry store and thus by default becomes slurry. Provided kept and collected separately is retains its Dirty water classification and the more relaxed regulation to application.

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Unfortunately the amount of testing to provide any credible evidence beyond a simple snap shot is beyond the means of an individual.
I’m quite surprised, sceptical even of the figures posted a few posts back but haven’t got any evidence to the contrary

I was replying to the poster who said there's not much more the non farmers union can do. That was my suggestion.

 

[Wastexprt]

Hi, am aware of the work is it at the Birmingham sewage works? There was a piece if I recall on BBC Science programme. My comment was blunt but the gist from the Water company man was there is a cost associated with removing the to land option.

Was it Birmingham Uni doing research in conjunction with Water Co's??

Not sure of specific sites, but a contact in the industry remarked that the landspreading route is becoming seen increasingly as too risky by the utility sector.

There is a cost to removing the option, but currently we may be transferring that cost to the environment. Treated sludge is a great fertiliser with many benefits but, having done a Rapid Evidence Assessment a couple of years ago for sludge to land, not without it's drawbacks.

 

[Slippery Slope]

And given the 'Clarification' of the aforementioned 'dirty water', (post #28) how on earth when it drains into an underground tank system, prior to tanker collection as the weather / ground and crop need allows, does it become 'slurry'?


Matthew - I think you are a bit muddled on this - but do correct me if I am wrong. The post 28 I think was taken or refers to / from NVZ guideline document. Dirty water only becomes reclassified if it is placed into a slurry store and thus by default becomes slurry. Provided kept and collected separately is retains its Dirty water classification and the more relaxed regulation to application.

I was told by an EA inspector last week that as ‘dirty water ‘ has a nutrient value it is unspreadable even by low rate sprinkler systems during winter months and therefore I should consider my future storage options.

There certainly seems to be a wide range of opinions amongst the experts let alone those who are affected by them.

 

[Hindsight]

I was told by an EA inspector last week that as ‘dirty water ‘ has a nutrient value it is unspreadable even by low rate sprinkler systems during winter months and therefore I should consider my future storage options.

There certainly seems to be a wide range of opinions amongst the experts let alone those who are affected by them.

Ah, maybe I am behind the times then! Won't be the first time. Locally (Lincolnshire) not had that feedback from EA inspectors. But I will ask next time I come across any of the local EA staff.

 

[som farmer]

we have had an EA inspection recently. Absolutely certain the a-hole we had, new nothing about farming, everything was out of the book. But he was keen on 'clean' water, as opposed to 'dirty' water, once we had convinced him water could not run uphill, to the lagoon, yards that cattle move over, but not 'stay', if cleaned x2 daily, that is clean water, and can be irrigated through the system, though he did mention meters on the pump, to see how much we spread, conveniently forgot that bit. He got himself in a right muddle over slurry spreading, and amounts, we had to re send the email showing those figures, several times - he lost them. Absolute idiot, we formally complained, as did quite a few more, locally. His boss came out with him, and said, do your gutters, you are fine, idiot niggled away for a few more months, then -nothing. So no idea if we 'passed or failed', we assume we passed, and hopefully we are on the 'good boy list', and wont have more visits !

 

[matthew]

And given the 'Clarification' of the aforementioned 'dirty water', (post #28) how on earth when it drains into an underground tank system, prior to tanker collection as the weather / ground and crop need allows, does it become 'slurry'?


Matthew - I think you are a bit muddled on this - but do correct me if I am wrong. The post 28 I think was taken or refers to / from NVZ guideline document. Dirty water only becomes reclassified if it is placed into a slurry store and thus by default becomes slurry. Provided kept and collected separately is retains its Dirty water classification and the more relaxed regulation to application.

If I am muddled, then so are the EA. See below.

I was told by an EA inspector last week that as ‘dirty water ‘ has a nutrient value it is unspreadable even by low rate sprinkler systems during winter months and therefore I should consider my future storage options.

There certainly seems to be a wide range of opinions amongst the experts let alone those who are affected by them.

A recent inspection after a ‘potential to cause pollution ‘ report, classified our ‘dirty water’ system as slurry. And we wouldn’t be able to operate it after September.
That’s OK. Ticks a few boxes to get rid of cattle…. Net Zero anyone?

 

[Hindsight]

If I am muddled, then so are the EA. See below.



A recent inspection after a ‘potential to cause pollution ‘ report, classified our ‘dirty water’ system as slurry. And we wouldn’t be able to operate it after September.
That’s OK. Ticks a few boxes to get rid of cattle…. Net Zero anyone?

I stand corrected.

 

[matthew]

I stand corrected.

No, I may need to be corrected. And Dafta certainly need to appreciate exactly what they are asking of livestock farmers, before putting pen to even more paper.
And the EA need to join the dots before the threats start raining down on us. Especially as the GB water companies had 420,000 raw sewage discharges into rivers last year. And they admit to only three DAYS storage.

 

[Raider112]

No, I may need to be corrected. And Dafta certainly need to appreciate exactly what they are asking of livestock farmers, before putting pen to even more paper.
And the EA need to join the dots before the threats start raining down on us. Especially as the GB water companies had 420,000 raw sewage discharges into rivers last year. And they admit to only three DAYS storage.

I assumed EVERYONE had to have 6 months storage now?

 

[matthew]

I assumed EVERYONE had to have 6 months storage now?

Yes. Especially livestock farmers. Water companies may have a longer derogation, as complying = higher water bills. Bad news.
Errr food production? We’ll rewild, plant trees and import it.
(Forgive the cynicism - a lifetime of disappointment )

 

[JCfarmer]

Any update on rules regarding autumn muckspreading?
I'm interested cattle farmyard manure which low in N compared to other manures.

 

[beardface]

Any update on rules regarding autumn muckspreading?
I'm interested cattle farmyard manure which low in N compared to other manures.

Think it'll probably be in the wankly tomorrow, but looks like business as usual due to fert price.

 

[The Seeker]

The gov have set up a fertiliser task forces … everything gets a task force / farce