FAIRER, CLEANER WATER - FOR EVERYONE

UNITED UTILITIES WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR NEARLY 1 IN 5 SEWAGE SPILLS IN ENGLAND IN 2022.

//

UNITED UTILITIES WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR NEARLY 1 IN 5 SEWAGE SPILLS IN ENGLAND IN 2022. //

WHO ARE WE?

The Utilities Uncovered Consultative Panel (UUCP) is a group of individuals who are passionate about protecting England's rivers and water systems. We have come together as landowners who lease or manage land owned by United Utilities (UU) and have become exhausted by their sudden and fundamental policy changes. Changes which are made without any consultation or engagement and which fundamentally alter how people live their lives on moorland.

Formed in August 2023 as a direct result of such policy changes, the Panel meets to discuss and review topical issues and highlight the views and recommendations of those living, working, and using the land owned by United Utilities.

Our goal is to address concerns raised by individuals on the Panel and influence decisions by UU that potentially threaten local communities, all while protecting key water sources from pollution and environmental degradation.

Panel members includes individuals from the Peak District, Calderdale and the Forest of Bowland involved in:

  • Farming

  • Gamekeeping

  • Common grazing

  • Fishing

  • Hospitality

WHAT ARE OUR AIMS?

Our fundamental principle is the protection of the historic system of managing land for agriculture and game. This system extends to safeguarding our water, ensuring that such systems are kept free of sewage.

Additionally, we value land for agriculture and game as both a cultural heritage and as a primary delivery mechanism for a range of public benefits, from sports to farming. United Utilities has shown a disregard for our natural systems, and we must work together to protect landscapes and habitats valued by society.

The Panel’s broad aims are:

  • Ensuring the conservation of the special qualities of United Utilities owned land and the surrounding area.

  • Promoting the understanding and enjoyment of these qualities

  • Respecting local people’s diverse needs and uses.

““For many years they’ve [United Utilities] discharged sewage and untreated waste water on an industrial scale””
— Jamie Woodward, Professor of Physical Geography at Manchester University

UNITED UTILITIES ALLOWED 189.7 SEWAGE OVERFLOWS A DAY IN 2022.

//

UNITED UTILITIES ALLOWED 189.7 SEWAGE OVERFLOWS A DAY IN 2022. //

CURRENT CONSULTATIONS

The Panel will approach United Utilities over a wide range of issues. We hope United Utilities will embrace this historic opportunity to build a direct link with those on the ground. We believe that positive engagement in a review of issues will enable United Utilities to best plan for the outcomes it seeks whilst allowing individuals involved in managing their land to understand what all are trying to achieve.

  1. The Panel would like to understand if United Utilities is still neutral on game shooting.

  2. United Utilities has said it will now review existing shooting leases. Does it imagine it will be running its own review? If so, what measures will be put in place to ensure each finding reaches an objective conclusion and that this review is not just a PR stunt? What will be the structure of this review?

  3. More recently United Utilities has only been issuing one-year rather than its traditional ten-year leases. What prompted this switch? Has there been any change in tenant investment on United Utilities owned land as a result? Has this impacted sustainability? If so, by how much? If there has been no change, please can we see the evidence that supports this view. How much as United Utilities costs increased?

  4. Grouse moors were purchased by the water industry because they provide an abundance of clean drinking water. At what point did United Utilities become concerned about grouse shooting? It appears to coincide with United Utilities being criticised for polluting and forcing the closure sandy beaches. Is this just coincidence? If so, what evidence do you have to support this position?

  5. Does United Utilities still use the IUCN definition of sustainability which includes economic and social factors as well as environmental?

  6. Is United Utilities still committed to supporting rural communities and those working on land it owns and adjacent to it?

  7. In August 2023 United Utilities announced it ‘had recently’ conducted a land management review. The Panel would like to receive a copy.

  8. In what way was the RSPB involved in this land management review? Which other organisations and individuals, if any, were involved?

  9. Is the RSPB still providing conservation advice to United Utilities? Did it recommend that sporting leases should not be renewed? Did the RSPB share that grouse are still shot on one of its upland reserves?

  10. How much funding has the RSPB received directly from United Utilities since 2005? How much funding has the RSPB received indirectly as a result of providing conservation advice on United Utilities land?

  11. In what way is United Utilities and RSPB lobbying of water regulating authorities coordinated?

  12. United Utilities says it is committed to improving biodiversity and maintain protected species. What assessment has been made of the habitat change and conservation status of species vulnerable to foxes, such as ground nesting birds, should game management cease? How will this be measured and by whom? Who will pay to restore these species if the plan fails?

  13. United Utilities has said it wants to improve water quality and quantity. What measurable goals have been put in place? Who is monitoring them? Where is the raw data published?

  14. United Utilities us taking drinking water from catchments with large populations of lesser black-backed gulls. What data is available on this?

  15. To what extent is fox control effective on United Utilities land not currently managed for game? Where can the results be read? In particular, sites that do not benefit from being adjacent to an existing driven grouse moor? Has United Utilities visited the former grouse moor at Lake Vyrnwy, now manged by the RSPB, which it has declared is now facing local extinctions?

  16. The Forest of Bowland Special Protection Area (SPA) lists three species: hen harrier, merlin and the lesser black-backed gull. All are ground nesting. Has United Utilities got sufficiently vigorous systems in place to prevent bird losses due to predation by foxes and crow? How will that proposed to work and who will be monitoring the situation.

  17. What monitoring of other bird assemblages on Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) on United Utilities land have been put in place? How long have they been running? Where can they be read?

  18. What measurable targets has United Utilities set for achieving improved biodiversity on land it owns which has no game management? Who does this and when will it be published?

  19. Wildfire vegetation fuel loads are currently increasing on United Utilities land no longer traditionally managed by farmers and gamekeepers. What wildfire risk assessment has undertaken by United Utilities to assess this increased threat? Does the Fire and Rescue Service agree with United Utilities conclusions? Who is liable if the wildfire threat continues to grow?

  20. How many private landowners have written to United Utilities stating that they propose to hold it liable for any wildfire that spreads from United Utilities managed land?

  21. How many private landowners have written to United Utilities explaining that due to the increase in fuel loads on United Utilities land they will no longer be providing assistance to controlling wildfires on United Utilities land? What additional measures has United Utilities put in place? Has United Utilities made the Fire and Rescue Service aware of these changes?

  22. How much United Utilities infrastructure is on privately owned land? Have United Utilities staff experienced any drop in cooperation on access? If so, to what extent is that happening and is it increasing?

  23. United Utilities sates it plans to restore moorland through ‘rewetting’ land it owns. How many historic man-made drains are still to be blocked on United Utilities land?

  24. Is United Utilities planning to block naturally forming drainage channels? If so, what evidence does it hold that this will be effective and does it recognise that since this would involve altering a natural process, why does United Utilities describe this as ‘restoration’?

  25. Is United Utilities planning to control the wildfire risk through rewetting? What evidence does it have, from anywhere in the world, that this approach is effective?

  26. United Utilities says it wants to improve ‘catchment resilience’. What measurable targets have been set by Unites Utilities? How will this be measured and by whom? Who will pay to restore the landscape if it fails?

  27. Where is the evidence that United Utilities water abstraction consents are sustainable? How many of these licences allow 100% abstraction leading to streams drying up completely?

  28. What assessment has United Utilities made of the additional cost of cleaning water contaminated after a wildfire?

  29. Has United Utilities assessed why rotational heather burning and grazing has been reintroduced in some parts of the UK to reduce the cost of cleaning water contaminated after a wildfire?

  30. Has United Utilities conducted an assessment of the financial impact of not renewing sporting leases and the additional cost of then managing the land? If so, who will pay for this?