This is the final presentation from the Moston Brook Evidence and Measures project which ran from September 2012 to March 2013. Moston Brook water body is part of the River Irwell Pilot Catchment and the objective of the project was to devise reliable measures (actions) which were based on existing evidence and that could be implemented in years 2 and 3 by the Environment Agency and its partner to help meet Water Framework Directive (WDF) requirements and community aspirations. The presentation summarises the main suspected causes of WDF failure, the evidence for this, the main causes for failure in the sub-catchments resulting from the evidence found, and identifies measures to carry out, which will address the WDF failures and improve the quality of the water. This presentation can be used to inform others on how to improve the water quality of Moston Brook, and also to support other similar initiatives

Hulme, P.

English

Aquatic Commons

Saved 25/04/2013 Page 1 
1 
The Environment Agency / DEFRA 
Evidence and Measures Project 
Working with stakeholders to select measures based on existing evidence 
Prepared by P Hulme and N Rukin for the Water@Leeds Diffuse Urban Pollution Workshop, 23 Apr 2013 
Practical Solutions - Moston Brook 
Danielle Soulsby  danielle.soulsby@environment-agency.gov.uk 
Anne-Marie Bowman anne-marie.bowman@environment-agency.gov.uk 
Victor Aguilera Victor.Aguilera@defra.gsi.gov.uk 
Natalie Phillips (Kieboom) natalie.phillips@environment-agency.gov.uk  
Nick Rukin rukin@rukhydro.co.uk  
Paul Hulme paul.hulme@pjhydro.co.uk 
Paul Hulme, pjHYDRO 
pjHYDRO 
           Water Management 
2 
Evidence and Measures Headlines 
 250 measures   Specific actions on the ground aimed at improving the 
ecological status of the 13 water bodies that we have worked on.  
 
 15 partner organisations  Have attended the Evidence and Measures 
workshops 
– United Utilities, three Rivers Trusts, Natural England, RSPB, Lancashire Wildlife 
Trust, three local authorities, two universities, the Environment Agency 
– Prepared to take responsibility for choosing and implementing measures. 
 
 Lines of existing evidence  Includes both hard data that can be plotted on 
graphs or maps but also softer information such as what’s in anglers’ dairies 
or people’s memories. 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 2 
3 
Three Evidence + Measures 
Trial Catchments 
River Petteril water bodies between Penrith 
and Carlisle (Eden & Esk) 
Tidal Ribble water bodies between Preston 
and Lytham St Anne’s (Ribble) 
Moston Brook water body north-east 
Manchester (Irwell) 
Evidence + Measures 
4 
Moston Brook Summary 
 The project objective  To devise reliable measures 
which are based on existing evidence and that could 
be implemented in years 2 and 3 by the Environment 
Agency and its partners to help meet Water 
Framework Directive (WFD) requirements and 
community aspirations. 
 
 The result  In six months (Sep 2012 to Mar 2013), 35 
participants  from 11 organisations 
– Reached consensus on the main causes of WFD failure 
in Moston Brook; 
– Agreed on 67 measures which target these main 
causes of failure for submission into partners’ business 
plans and bids for funding; 
– Time inputs over six months: 1 EA person full-time, 
two consultants half- time. 
Moston Brook within the 
Irwell Pilot Catchment 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 3 
5 
Summary of the Evidence and Measures approach 
1. Identify the problem 
– WFD failures in a “difficult” catchment 
– List the suspected causes of WFD 
failure 
– Collect existing knowledge 
o Current & historical data, reports  
o Information from EA staff and 
partners 
 
2. Look at the evidence 
– Plot in time and space 
– Look for patterns 
– Gather the lines of evidence for and 
against each suspected cause 
 
3. Agree the most likely causes 
– At Causes Workshop  
– Based on all lines of evidence 
4. Identify measures that will address these 
most likely causes of failure 
– At Measures Workshop, considering: 
– Existing measures 
– New measures 
 
5. Get measures into business plans 
– Agency and external partners review 
the list of measures 
– Partners choose actions to implement   
(cost-effective? funding available? 
achievable?) 
 
6. Record the consequences of the measures 
that have been implemented. 
Used for “difficult” catchments, where measures unclear: 
Multiple failing WFD elements (ammonia, inverts etc.) 
Multiple suspected causes 
No agreement amongst stakeholders on main causes. 
Evidence + Measures 
6 
Suspected Causes of WFD Failure 
Gathered from stakeholders during project: 
 
 Landfill leachate from historic landfills 
 Intermittent sewage discharges (storm overflows) 
 Wrong connections (continual sewage discharges from domestic properties, 
sewage discharges connected to storm overflow culverts) 
 Highways (runoff from M60) 
 Geomorphological changes (straightening & culverts) 
 Leakage from cemeteries 
 Fertiliser use on parks and gardens 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 4 
7 
Summary of the Evidence and Measures approach 
1. Identify the problem 
– WFD failures in a “difficult” catchment 
– List the suspected causes of WFD 
failure 
– Collect existing knowledge 
o Current & historical data, reports  
o Information from EA staff and 
partners 
 
2. Look at the evidence 
– Plot in time and space 
– Look for patterns 
– Gather the lines of evidence for and 
against each suspected cause 
 
3. Agree the most likely causes 
– At Causes Workshop  
– Based on all lines of evidence 
4. Identify measures that will address these 
most likely causes of failure 
– At Measures Workshop, considering: 
– Existing measures 
– New measures 
 
5. Get measures into business plans 
– Agency and external partners review 
the list of measures 
– Partners choose actions to implement   
(cost-effective? funding available? 
achievable?) 
 
6. Record the consequences of the measures 
that have been implemented. 
Used for “difficult” catchments, where measures unclear: 
Multiple failing WFD elements (ammonia, inverts etc.) 
Multiple suspected causes 
No agreement amongst stakeholders on main causes. 
Evidence + Measures 
8 
Sub-catchments for Moston Brook 
 Roughly defined in GIS using water quality monitoring points 
(MPs) to define reaches and having regard to topography; 
 Helps break down the problem into manageable chunks; 
 Used to extract statistics on e.g. landfill area or number of 
consents per km2 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 5 
9 
Example Evidence Table (South Culvert Sub-catchment) 
Evidence related to intermittent (storm) sewage discharges 
Suspected 
causes 
Line of evidence A 
(variation across sub-catchments) 
Line of evidence B  
(variation in time) 
Line of evidence C  
(downstream changes) 
Line of evidence D 
(source apportionment) 
Results Score Results Score Results Score Results Score 
2) Intermittent 
(storm) 
sewage 
discharges 
(CSO & PSO) 
 
•Alford St Pumping 
Station 
(Improvements 
planned for 2015); 
1) Culvert from Highways Agency drawing 
(Fig3.5) suggests original Bower Brook culvert 
heads NE-SW past Alford St Pumping Station 
and then connects to South Culvert  outfall. 
(Fig3.5) 
 
2) NIRS: Insignificant UU sewage incident  
(2011), Table1.2. Could be blocked CSO but 
not storm overflow. 
 
3) 1990s incidents: 
Two sewage incidents (1993) & 1995) but  not 
clear which culvert , Table1.2 
 
4) A lot of sewage rags visible on culvert grid. 
(photo on Fig3.5) 
 
5) Predicted annual spill volume from  Alford 
St PSO is high, Table1.2. Spill volume 
significant compared to 5%ile daily flow 
estimate (0.073m3/s). Suggests spill will 
dominate flow. 
 
6)* UU modelling shows improvements 
needed at Alford Street CSO and UU will 
complete this by 2015.  
 
+ 
 
 
 
 
0 
 
 
 
0 
 
 
 
+ 
 
 
+ 
 
 
 
 
 
+ 
1) PO4 concentrations 
generally increase with 
decreasing flow suggesting 
that continuous background 
source dominates (rather 
than storm-related). (Fig3.4) 
 
2) PO4 concentrations at 
high flows (5%ile) are 
slightly higher than  dilution 
of continuous inputs  (see 
(1) above & Fig3.4) and 
could imply additional 
source at high flows e.g. 
PSOs 
 
3) NH4 v PO4 plot (Fig1.7) 
shows higher NH4 which is 
more consistent with 
sewage source than landfill, 
but highest NH4 not at flows 
lower than 20%ile so not 
very high flow. 
- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
+ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
+ 
 
 
 
- 
1) No sample 
data 
upstream of 
this culvert. 
 
 
NE 1)  SAGIS: 
CSOs major 
source of PO4 
across whole 
of Moston 
Brook (~60% 
compared to 
urban ~40%). 
No 
comparison 
within sub-
catchments 
but Alford St 
PSO marked 
on SAGIS 
map. 
+ 
What does each piece of evidence tell us about each suspected cause of WFD failure in this sub-catchment?  
Scores:  evidence supports [+], evidence opposes [-], evidence is uncertain [0], no evidence [NE], evidence not applicable [NA] 
Evidence + Measures 
10 
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0.000 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250
In
c
re
a
s
e
 i
n
 N
H
4
-N
 +
 N
O
3
-N
 (
m
g
/l
)
Spot Measured Flow at Williams Road (m3/s)
Modelled v Measured Increase in [NH4 + NO3]- Broadway to Williams Rd
Broadway to Williams Rd Increase (mg/l)
Predicted Concentration (mg/l NH4 + NO3)
Power (Broadway to Williams Rd Increase (mg/l))
Assumes Leachate Input of 95 m3/d (0.0011 m3/s) at 
66.6 mg/l NH4-N
Fig 3.9  Source Apportionment Empirical Approach 
(1) Landfill leachate inputs between Broadway and Williams Road 
 Compared downstream changes in WQ 
 
 Ratios used to provide further evidence 
of landfill source 
 
 Changes in water quality with flow in 
Brook modelled in Excel to constrain 
rates of discharge. 
 
 In this case 95 m3/day of landfill leachate 
with a concentration of ~67mg/l NH4-N. 
 
 Compares to estimated 100 m3/day 
leachate loss from Hardman Fold. 
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0
In
c
re
a
s
e
 i
n
 [
A
m
m
o
n
ia
c
a
l 
N
 +
 N
it
ra
te
-N
] 
(m
g
/l
 N
)
Increase in Potassium (mg/l)
Changes in [NH4 + NO3] and K between Broadway and Williams Rd on Moston Brook
Williams Road - d/s Broadway
LandSim Landfill NH4:K Ratio
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 6 
11 
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45
In
c
re
a
s
e
 i
n
 N
H
4
-N
 (
m
g
/l
)
Agency Estimated Flow (m3/s)
Modelled v Measured Increase in NH4 - Williams Rd and ptc Irk on Moston Brook
Williams to Irk Increase (mg/l)
Predicted Concentration (mg/l NH4-N)
Power (Williams to Irk Increase (mg/l))
Assumes Sewage Input of 625 m3/d (0.00723 
m3/s) at 45 mg/l NH4-N
20%
10%
5%
1%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
In
c
re
a
s
e
 i
n
 A
m
m
o
n
ia
c
a
l 
N
it
ro
g
e
n
 d
/s
 o
f 
W
il
li
a
m
s
 R
o
a
d
 (
m
g
/l
 N
)
Increase in Orthophosphate d/s of Williams Road (mg/l P)
Changes in NH4 and PO4 between Williams Rd and the Irk on Moston Brook
to ptc R Irk
EA Guidance Sewage Ratio
% is %Sewage in Water
Fig 3.10  Source Apportionment Empirical Approach 
(2) Sewage Inputs between Williams Road and the Irk 
 Compared downstream changes in WQ 
 
 Ratios used to provide further evidence 
of sewage source 
 
 
 Changes in water quality with flow in 
Brook modelled in Excel to constrain 
rates of discharge. 
 
 In this case ~200-300 m3/day of sewage 
with a concentration of ~45mg/l NH4-N. 
 
 200-300 m3/day of sewage 1100-1700 
people, or 400-700 properties. 
Average N:P Ratio for 
Sewage from EA N&P 
Guidance 
Evidence + Measures 
12 
Summary of the Evidence and Measures approach 
1. Identify the problem 
– WFD failures in a “difficult” catchment 
– List the suspected causes of WFD 
failure 
– Collect existing knowledge 
o Current & historical data, reports  
o Information from EA staff and 
partners 
 
2. Look at the evidence 
– Plot in time and space 
– Look for patterns 
– Gather the lines of evidence for and 
against each suspected cause 
 
3. Agree the most likely causes 
– At Causes Workshop  
– Based on all lines of evidence 
4. Identify measures that will address these 
most likely causes of failure 
– At Measures Workshop, considering: 
– Existing measures 
– New measures 
 
5. Get measures into business plans 
– Agency and external partners review 
the list of measures 
– Partners choose actions to implement   
(cost-effective? funding available? 
achievable?) 
 
6. Record the consequences of the measures 
that have been implemented. 
Used for “difficult” catchments, where measures unclear: 
Multiple failing WFD elements (ammonia, inverts etc.) 
Multiple suspected causes 
No agreement amongst stakeholders on main causes. 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 7 
13 
Group consensus scores 
Scores from Causes Workshop for each suspected cause in each sub-catchment based on the evidence considered. 
Scores from 0 to 5 (white to red): 
•     0 = definitely not a cause of the WFD failures; 
•     5 = definitely a major cause of the WFD failures. 
A high score means stakeholders consider there is enough evidence to proceed to selecting measures. 
Average of the 3 "roup consensus" scoresheets
Group (All) Colouring 0 3 5
Average of Score Sub-catchment
Suspected Cause 1) North Culvert 2) South Culvert
3) Wrigley Head - 
Broadway
4) Broadway - 
Williams Rd
5) Williams Rd - 
Silchester Dr
6) Silchester Dr - R 
Irk
1) Landfill 1.0 1.7 2.7 5.0 2.3 1.0
2) Intermittent sewage discharges 3.0 4.7 1.3 1.0 3.0 3.7
3) Wrong connections 3.0 3.7 1.7 3.3 4.3 5.0
4) Transport (including highways) 1.7 #N/A 1.3 1.7 #N/A #N/A
5) Industrial #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
6) Retail 1.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
7) Parks and gardens 0.7 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
8) Urban #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A
9) Geomorphology 0.7 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.0
10) Cemetery 1.0 2.0
Evidence + Measures 
14 
Main Causes of WFD Failure 
Sub-catchment Main Causes Measures 
North Culvert Intermittent 
sewage 
discharges, wrong 
connections 
South Culvert Intermittent 
sewage 
discharges, wrong 
connections 
Wrigley Head – 
Broadway 
Causes of failure 
here are mainly 
affecting the next 
sub-catchment 
Broadway – 
Williams Rd 
Landfill, wrong 
connections 
Williams Rd – 
Silchester Dr 
Wrong 
connections, 
intermittent 
sewage discharges 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 8 
15 
Summary of the Evidence and Measures approach 
1. Identify the problem 
– WFD failures in a “difficult” catchment 
– List the suspected causes of WFD 
failure 
– Collect existing knowledge 
o Current & historical data, reports  
o Information from EA staff and 
partners 
 
2. Look at the evidence 
– Plot in time and space 
– Look for patterns 
– Gather the lines of evidence for and 
against each suspected cause 
 
3. Agree the most likely causes 
– At Causes Workshop  
– Based on all lines of evidence 
4. Identify measures that will address these 
most likely causes of failure 
– At Measures Workshop, considering: 
– Existing measures 
– New measures 
 
5. Get measures into business plans 
– Agency and external partners review 
the list of measures 
– Partners choose actions to implement   
(cost-effective? funding available? 
achievable?) 
 
6. Record the consequences of the measures 
that have been implemented. 
Used for “difficult” catchments, where measures unclear: 
Multiple failing WFD elements (ammonia, inverts etc.) 
Multiple suspected causes 
No agreement amongst stakeholders on main causes. 
Evidence + Measures 
16 
Main Causes of Failure and Selected Measures 
 
Sub-catchment Main Causes Measures 
North Culvert Intermittent 
sewage 
discharges, wrong 
connections 
EA and UU act together to investigate any uncharted combined sewage 
overflows (CSO) and wrong connections - easy ones now, harder ones next 
AMP cycle. Look at Suffolk Street CSO data to ensure it only spills when it is 
supposed to. Check tank meets design criteria. 
South Culvert Intermittent 
sewage 
discharges, wrong 
connections 
Display the unique ID number on each CSO to enable the public to report 
incidents to UU. Surface water management plans - remove surface water 
system connected to foul system. (Also see Note 3). 
Wrigley Head – 
Broadway 
Causes of failure 
here are mainly 
affecting the next 
sub-catchment 
Hardman Fold: capping with suitable design, install leachate 
drain/interceptor & enhanced toe drain. Need full info about GMWDA 
infrastructure already in place. Surface water transfer from canal or surface 
drains to increase flow in the brook, dilute & increase resilience to pollution. 
Broadway – 
Williams Rd 
Landfill, wrong 
connections 
Stop up and divert the drains at 2 sites; the Lancaster Club & Lower 
Memorial Park (refer to “Groundwork” report). Wrong connection awareness 
campaigns either by post or email. Influence planners and local authority to 
open up culverts. Remove weir and replace with rock ramp for aeration. 
Williams Rd – 
Silchester Dr 
Wrong 
connections, 
intermittent 
sewage discharges 
Rationalisation of 6 CSOs into 2 in culvert between Kenyon Lane and 
Potters Lane. EA to attend Category 3 pollution incidents that have been 
identified as a risk in Moston Brook (for sewage). 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 9 
17 
Summary of the Evidence and Measures approach 
1. Identify the problem 
– WFD failures in a “difficult” catchment 
– List the suspected causes of WFD 
failure 
– Collect existing knowledge 
o Current & historical data, reports  
o Information from EA staff and 
partners 
 
2. Look at the evidence 
– Plot in time and space 
– Look for patterns 
– Gather the lines of evidence for and 
against each suspected cause 
 
3. Agree the most likely causes 
– At Causes Workshop  
– Based on all lines of evidence 
4. Identify measures that will address these 
most likely causes of failure 
– At Measures Workshop, considering: 
– Existing measures 
– New measures 
 
5. Get measures into business plans 
– Agency and external partners review 
the list of measures 
– Partners choose actions to implement   
(cost-effective? funding available? 
achievable?) 
 
6. Record the consequences of the measures 
that have been implemented. 
Used for “difficult” catchments, where measures unclear: 
Multiple failing WFD elements (ammonia, inverts etc.) 
Multiple suspected causes 
No agreement amongst stakeholders on main causes. 
Evidence + Measures 
18 
Measures on Ribble Life Action Plan 
Evidence + Measures 
Saved 25/04/2013 Page 10 
19 
Scaling up: e.g. Irwell Pilot Catchment 
WFD PO4 Classes 
WFD River Status 
Evidence + Measures 
20 
Any questions? 
  Photos: Ann Bates, Moston Brook Project Officer, Partnership 
Project - Oldham Council & Manchester City Council  
Evidence + Measures:  working with stakeholders to select measures based on existing evidence 


The Environment Agency/DEFRA Evidence and Measures Project: Practical Solutions - Moston Brook

http://aquaticcommons.org/11164/1/28_Talk_UrbanDiffusePollution_pjh_23Apr2013.pdf

The Environment Agency/DEFRA Evidence and Measures Project: Practical Solutions - Moston Brook

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Aquatic Commons