Welsh Water Water Source Catchment Management Conference

WaterSource Catchment Management Conference Monday 9 January 2017, SWALEC Stadium, Cardiff WaterSource@dwrcymru.com #WaterSource17

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Contents

3 Agenda 4 Introduction 5 Visual minutes map 6 Visual minutes enlargements 9 Photostory session 1 10 Consultation Question 1 12 Consultation Question 2 14 Consultation Question 3 18 Consultation Question 4

21 Consultation Question 5 23 Photostory session 2 24 Outcomes 26 Attendee feedback 29 Organisations represented at the conference

Report design, ‘Visual Minutes’ map & Brecon Beacons Mega Catchment Workshop facilitation by Fran O’Hara & the Scarlet Design team - www.ScarletDesign.com.

To receive these files in an alternative format/size please email ohara@scarletdesign.com Photographs: ©Steve Pope Fotowales 2017

2

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

3

Agenda TIME

ITEM

SPEAKER

10:00

Arrival: registration & refreshments

10:30

Welcome & Introduction to the day

Chair: Andy Middleton Founder Director, TYF Group & NRW Board Member

10:40

Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water: Vision 2050

Ian Christie Managing Director Water Services, DCWW

10:50

Catchment Operational Strategy

Paul Gaskin Head of Water Services Science, DCWW

11:00

WaterSource Launch

Phillippa Pearson Catchment Manager, DCWW

11:15

Questions to presenters

11:30

Coffee break

TIME

ITEM

SPEAKER

12:00

Ofwat

Nicci Russell Director Strategy and Policy, Ofwat

12:10

Questions to presenters

12:25

Introduction to the Brecon Beacons National Park

Julian Atkins Director Countryside and Land Management, BBNPA

12:40

The Brecon Beacons a Mega Catchment Landscape Scale Proposal for PR19: Exploring opportunities

Phillippa Pearson Catchment Manager, DCWW

13:00

Lunch & networking

13:30

Introduction to the Brecon Beacons Mega Catchment Workshop

Fran O’Hara Creative Director, Scarlet Design

Catchments: The Regulators View 11:40

Natural Resources Wales

Bob Vaughan Sustainable Land Use Manager, NRW

15:00

Coffee & feedback from breakout groups

Fran O’Hara & Group Leads

11:50

Drinking Water Inspectorate

Frank White Drinking Water Inspector, DWI

15:50

Summary & close

Andy Middleton

16:00

Informal Q&A session over farewell refreshments

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

4

Introduction Purpose ommunicate our 2050 Vision C Outline our Catchment Operational Strategy Launch our WaterSource approach to Drinking Water Catchment Management Identify common areas of interest to focus future collaboration

Outcomes 1. Partners understand our 2050 Vision 2. Our Catchment Operational Strategy and WaterSource approach are endorsed 3. Partners are aware of and supportive of our Catchment Strategy progress to date 4. Introduce and receive feedback on our proposed Brecon Beacons landscape scale project

Background We abstract water for drinking from 120 catchments covering an area of almost 11,000km2. Land within these catchments is subject to a variety of land use types and management practices, which influences the quality of the water running from the land.

By adopting a catchment management approach, we can ensure raw water entering our treatment works is of an expected, consistent and manageable quality. This will increase our ability to react, respond and recover from future events brought about by climate change.

Catchment management will also build resilience into the water supply components downstream whilst reducing the chemical/energy demand and waste production. The approach generates wider multiple benefits for biodiversity, environmental stewardship and for our customers and their communities.

Our integrated catchment management strategy addresses a number of water quality issues by safeguarding raw water quality before it enters our treatment works.

We call this approach WaterSource.

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

5

© SCARLET DESIGN INT. LTD 2017 MAPS: WWW.FRANOHARA.COM

‘Visual minutes’ map created at the event by Fran O’Hara capturing the key messages and themes from the presentations during the conference. Shared on social media using #WaterSource17.

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

6

© SCARLET DESIGN INT. LTD 2017 MAPS: WWW.FRANOHARA.COM

‘Visual Minutes’ map: enlargement 1

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

7

© SCARLET DESIGN INT. LTD 2017 MAPS: WWW.FRANOHARA.COM

‘Visual Minutes’ map: enlargement 2

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

© SCARLET DESIGN INT. LTD 2017 MAPS: WWW.FRANOHARA.COM

‘Visual Minutes’ map: enlargement 3

8

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Photostory 1

9

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

There is some support for covering the whole mega catchment area. However, most participants think it would be better to cover smaller, more specific areas.

Cover the whole mega catchment area “Give it a go… Always hard to start but ‘learn as you do…’” few participants agree that a big ambition is appropriate and A will show greater benefits. As one person said: “Be ambitious!”

However, someone else raised the “risk of biting off more than you can chew.”

“Vision - big. Implementation - appropriate!” ome people suggested the whole area should be covered but S in a targeted way so that specific issues are addressed where necessary. Another suggestion was for over arching coverage but with regional sub divisions where local data can be collected to help drive improvement. owever, if the whole mega catchment area is to be covered then H communication, information sharing, education and awareness will have to be carried out on the same scale.

10

Break the mega catchment down into smaller, specific areas “Whole area focussing on hot spots - areas that are of highest risk. Where we know we can start now to make a difference.

Where action = results and learn from that.”

One person asked if a “meaningful catchment scale ≤100ha?” nother suggested “strategic planning at catchment scale, delivery A and engagement locally.” lot of people agreed that existing projects, links or geographical A boundaries should be used to define smaller areas. Estate and farm boundaries, streamside corridors and river catchments, woodland buffer strips, administrative boundaries, watershed boundaries, river basins, land use and the area supplied were all suggested as good ways to define smaller areas to target.

Someone suggested splitting the catchment into areas of supply as “the users of the water might then get more involved”.

Someone else said the “impact on consumers could drive scale.” phased approach starting with pilot projects or trials that can be A rolled out more widely was also popular.

“Look at gaps to determine focus - don’t change what is working.”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

ome suggested it would be better to start where success is S more likely. This could be areas where the community is already engaged. Or areas where another project, such as the weed wiper project, has already been successful.

Others proposed targeting high risk areas first.

Don’t work in isolation “ Needs to be pressure/ catchment based although there will be many common parties across areas.” hatever area is covered there will be other things that have W an impact and must be considered. In particular, the NRW area statements and areas outside of the park boundary were mentioned.

Education and engagement “ Water systems often more connected than you think - more important that people and organisations understand scale.” hatever area is covered education and engagement will be W critical to success. This means “whole community education, not just schools.” Farmers and landowners will be key partners as will local authorities.

11

ther issues to consider when deciding on the area O to be covered It will be important to “consider combined interests” when deciding on how large the catchments should be and what areas should be covered. Specific issues such as “slow the flow, more leaky dams, more tree planting, understand effect of abstractions on flow, understand release of water from dams on geology” also need to be considered.

Current risk and environmental assessments will also need to be reviewed.

“Will need some ‘catchment specific’ initiatives to take into account special risks.”

Whatever the final decision on the area to be covered is, it must be on a “scale that is economically viable” taking into account issues such as travel time.

“Promote the Watershed as an area of catchment excellence.”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Participants gave a wide range of responses to this question, which perhaps highlights a need to involve as many people as possible. “Everyone! People = knowledge and on the ground experience.”

Several participants commented that as many stakeholders as possible should be involved, including all consumers. However, some commented that people’s level of involvement should be balanced with their level of influence. One participant suggested “need long-term collaboration.”

The need to raise awareness any participants highlighted that for involvement to be effective, M it needs to be supported by raising people’s awareness. As one participant said, “Need to tell Welsh Water customers where their water comes from.” Another suggested targeting householders, in particular in relation to “garden run-off, pouring chemicals down drains, phosphates from washing.” ther participants felt awareness should be raised on how much O work goes in to providing clean water and what people can do to help protect and maintain water supplies.

12

Landowners and land managers he most frequently mentioned group of people who need to be T involved are those whose work is linked to the land. This includes farmers, landowners and managers, foresters, graziers, estate owners, the NFU and the CLA. s one participant said, “farmers need to be more aware of A water issues.”

Environmental organisations “ENGOs are essential.” significant number of participants said environmental A organisations should be involved. As well as “all members of IEAP,” the organisations mentioned include NRW, BBNP, The Coal Authority, Wye and Usk Foundation, Wildlife Trust Wales, the RSPB, the National Trust and the Canal and River Trust.

One participant also suggested “the BBNP should lead – act as a broker.”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Local communities nother group that participants agree should be involved are A local communities, including “within catchments and recipients of water supply.” Participants also see “community engagement” as important.

Recreation and tourism any agree that groups of people who take part in recreational M activities, or the overarching bodies that represent them, should be involved. These include: anglers, the British Mountaineering Trust, horse riders, “Cycling UK,” ramblers, canoeists, golf clubs, “painters, poets, sculptors,” “SWOPAG,” scramblers, bikers and 4 x 4 enthusiasts. ourism bodies also featured in several participants’ responses, T including caravan parks and the tourist boards.

Young people “Future custodians.” everal participants mentioned the importance of involving S young people through, for example, schools, colleges and young farmers clubs. One participant said young people have “social

13

responsibility.” Another said, “young farmers more willing to be outcome based and more IT savvy.”

Health and wellbeing hree participants suggested involving health authorities and T highlighted both the wellbeing targets organisations have and the health and wellbeing benefits of clean water and a healthy outdoor environment: “maintenance of resource in response to increasing positive wellbeing pressure.”

Leadership Several participants suggested organisations or individuals who could take a lead. One participant said, “needs a very strong champion in each key organisation,” another suggested a “lead AM champion, Kirsty Williams?” and another said “need WG catchment lead.”

Other organisations Other organisations participants say should be involved are: local authorities; local service boards; care homes; businesses “Brecon Carreg” and “Penderyn distillery”; the MOD; police and fire services – “upland fires / rural crime / off-roading”; the press; water abstractors and the quarrying industry.

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Participants gave a very wide range of responses to this question with little common ground. Suggestions were as varied as “charging for car parking to raise funds” and “providing buses to encourage visitors to the park.”

However, the opportunity to develop conservation, farming and land use did feature strongly.

14

Several participants mentioned the opportunity to balance farming with rewilding. One said, “Rewilding of low agricultural productivity sites. Encouraging water storage and downstream flooding. Increases biodiversity, reduces pollutant inputs.” Another suggested, “Reversion to pristine environment in priority areas / exclude agriculture.”

As well as suggesting new and existing opportunities to explore, participants also raised questions in relation to who will take responsibility for the project and how it will be governed.

Opportunities to reduce the pressure on grazing, develop woodland resilience, plant peat, produce green energy and produce sustainable food were also mentioned. A few participants highlighted potential opportunities as a result of Brexit: “Brexit making farming profitable, reduce grazing pressure.”

No specific area / whole area responses

Participants highlighted several existing projects that could provide further opportunities in relation to conservation, farming and land use: the Red Tractor assurance scheme; the Cantref and LLywn On soil stabilisation project; the BBNP peat restoration project; the Glastir agri-environment scheme; soil sampling and nutrient management planning through farming connect and Cardiff University’s DURESS project.

Conservation, farming and land use “Active land management – future proofing.” any participants highlighted the opportunities for conservation, M in particular in relation to species management and developing biodiversity. Participants also see opportunities to develop land use, for example: “Partnership – graziers, landowners, regulators, communities.”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Data everal participants mentioned the opportunities the project would S provide to collect and share data: “Map all of the policy / strategy success factors that also affect this geographic area.” ne suggested the project would help to identify “hot spots where O more effect and risk.” Another said there would be “no choice but to change the graph.” ne participant identified an opportunity to develop “new land O management accounting systems.” Others can see opportunities for better mapping of existing risks and projects.

Promotion and partnership articipants suggested a diverse range of opportunities to P “promote the multiple benefits” of the project and work in partnership. These covered working with communities to connect people to where their water comes from, developing opportunities for tourism, developing educational resources, developing the rural economy and creating new employment opportunities. everal participants emphasised the need to work with others, for S example: “connect to rest of Wales” and “cooperative schemes.”

15

Learning from others and building on existing projects Participants mentioned a few projects to learn from: the Mersey Basin Campaign - “political promotion is important”; the Talbot catchment management plan; the marine conservation review; upstream thinking by South West Water; and the UU SCaMP project.

“Integrate with existing projects – not piecemeal.”

Area specific responses Cray / Crai here was no common theme in the suggestions for this area.

T However, one participant did suggest it was “a good place to start the central beacons landscape project.”

Participants suggested that developing forestry and increasing areas of woodland, increasing the floodplain and wetlands, reversing riverbank erosion and getting community engagement are all priority opportunities for this area.

One participant suggested the Forest Fawr Geopark as an existing project to work with.

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Fan Fawr, Pen y Fan, Waun Rydd > Merthyr Tydfil

16

Brecon > Crickhowell, River Usk

Again, one participant suggested this was “a good place to start.” everal participants suggested the development and S management of forestry as an opportunity for the area, and one said, “learn lessons – lost forestry led to wildlife moving = disease spread e.g. TB.” few participants said the project will provide an opportunity to A involve the community and visitors to the area. Suggestions for this included a free parking permit or annual pass, promoting anglers’ contribution to maintaining water quality and telling the story of the River Taff. ther opportunities participants suggested the project will provide O are a “central beacons landscape project”, soil stabilisation, the recovery of tenanted agricultural land and a “Nant Crew / Nant Ddu - Cantref Partnership Group.” ne participant highlighted the “Neuadd, Pentwyn, Pontsticill O resmix” as an existing project to work with.

here were five potential opportunities for this area, each raised T by one participant: abstraction from the river Usk to supply Cardiff; developing agri-environment schemes; increasing flood plains, woodlands and wetlands; restoring habitat along the river Usk; and reversing riverbank erosion.

Talgarth > Twmpa, Waunfach Again, for this area participants didn’t raise a common theme.

One suggested the 2012 Black Mountains SMS bid as a project to learn from and work with. Another suggested a partnership looking at land use in the Black Mountains.

One participant highlighted, “no treatment at Grwyne Fawr” and another highlighted the Glastir Commons as an area of note.

Penderyn Only two comments were made in relation to this area.

One participant suggested developing an education and visitor centre at Waterfalls.

Another asked “how to get Cardiff Tap Club to care about this.”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Fan Brychneiniog, Cribarth ne opportunity was suggested O for this area: “develop a carbon plan / budget, for an area / sub area.” our participants each F mentioned an existing project that could offer opportunities and learning: the NRW Tawe catchment management pilot; Meithryn Mynydd; Glastir advanced work at Mynydd Du and Waun Fignen Felin peat bog.

Crickhowell nly one participant commented O under this area: “CRT – abstraction improvement and canal relining.”

Brecon Beacons Mega Catchment Workshop Process Facilitated consultation booths were set-up in two rooms and participants discussed the 5 questions, mapping the dialogue with post-its and by writing on the large sheets. At the end of the session each facilitator fedback the key themes, the data from the workshop has been summarised in this report.

17

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Participants gave a wide range of responses to this question which may be illustrative of the scale and complexity of the project. However, even within this wide range, several themes stand out.

Funding “Many benefits, but who pays?” articipants raised several issues in relation to funding. A P recurring theme was that a lack of funding and restrictions on the use of existing funding pose a challenge for the project and could be a blocker: “Short term funding – lack of long term resource.”

One participant raised the lack of join-up with other schemes, for example the farming payment scheme, as a challenge. ne participant highlighted a challenge as, “5-year funding causes O limitations as no flexibility.” Another mentioned the “existing funding mechanisms for national parks.” Changes to funding as a result of Brexit were also raised. “ Investment decisions – 34-year vision – DCWW prepared to invest now and bear costs now for decisions that may not bring benefit to them until 2050? What does long term mean in the context of how long-term costs and benefits are viewed when set against immediate (next 5 years) costs?”

18

For the project to be a success, a funding model will be needed and long-term funding will have to be secured. Some agreed that making PES work will be beneficial (in relation to funding and in other areas). One participant suggested “increase cost of water.”

Another saw “organisations not willing to hand on £ for delivery” as a challenge. he questions of what happens if the project runs over budget and T how to compensate those affected were also raised.

Farming Several participants raised issues in relation to farming. Changes to the CAP as a result of Brexit were highlighted as a potential challenge as well as a possible opportunity: “pay farmers to farm water / biodiversity.” few participants agree that the threat to farm incomes and their A ability to run as viable businesses are also challenges. Some mentioned the increased use of pesticides as a result of the increased level of arable farming as a challenge to the project.

One highlighted the need to engage farmers and the difficulty in doing this effectively. Another raised the issue of reinstating farmer and landowner prosecutions.

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

I n relation to PES, one participant suggested that “agricultural binding rules would help to get PES going.”

Communication “Trust > building it > maintaining it.” significant number of participants agree that effective A communication is one of the biggest challenges for the project. “ Changing mindsets, communicating messages in appropriate languages, making ‘issues’ believable.” any highlighted the challenge in making sure the project is M communicated clearly and widely. Specific issues participants raised were “clear, intelligible goals in language understood by stakeholders,” clarity around shared objectives and different catchment issues, well-defined vision, scope and benefits.

Securing buy-in “ Getting all people who are involved to talk to each other to arrive at ‘win-win’ solutions.” ffective communication will also help encourage people’s E buy-in to the project. Securing this was raised by a number of participants as a challenge.

19

Several participants feel there is a lack of involvement from local communities, local authorities, farmers and regulators. However, the project should not be seen to be imposed on people. Historical conflicts will need to be addressed to help “get the right people together” and create the “belief that this will make the difference needed.”

“All involved need to be open-minded to what is best for catchment and not just what is best for them.”

Bureaucracy and regulation oo much bureaucracy and either a lack of regulations or the T limits set by them were raised by several participants as potential challenges and blockers. Changes to regulations in the future were also mentioned.

One participant said “the lack of enforced regulatory floor in the governing binding rules – so PES does not pay polluters not to pollute” was a blocker for the project. Another similarly said, “lack of forces regulation on land management, H2, set the PES regulatory floor.”

One suggested “get governments and regulators to share regulatory risks and accept longer term solutions.”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

“ Designations and other controls – and how you ensure you interpret these to allow things to happen.”

Working together to make it happen few participants raised the issue of “who takes responsibility” or A “who is responsible for what?” Two suggested that “PES needs an honest broker to bring the partners together to make it work.” ne participant highlighted the challenge in breaking down silo O working. Another said making decisions would be difficult with so many involved while another highlighted the challenge in defining the problems and agreeing the priorities when “all equal.”

“Long-term goals – groups with short-term political cycles.”

Taking risks “ Although want evidenced-based solutions, sooner or later there has to be a leap of faith, even if there isn’t 100% certainty.” t times, if it is going to be successful, the project will need to take A some risks. Several participants highlighted this as a challenge and want to “seize the opportunity!” ne participant suggested a flexible approach would “reap bigger O rewards” and said, “don’t be too rigid.” One asked “how much

20

do you model and predict before you start the project?” Another said, “need to focus on what is fit for purpose rather than trying to achieve perfection and actually achieving nothing.”

“People make it complicated. Try it and see.”

Evidence Several participants mentioned the challenge of making sure the project generates evidence to show that catchment management does deliver desired outcomes: “How do we capture and share lessons learned?”

One participant said the project “must develop a good multiple benefit assessment tool to identify benefits and sell at PR24.” nother suggested using a “natural capital approach and A ecosystem services to identify effects and derive benefits.”

Other challenges or blockers Some potential challenges or blockers were only raised by a single participant. These include: disease management; displaced and invasive non-native species; climate change; the Circuit of Wales; the age of farmers; tree cover; links to area statements; and poor mobile reception.

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Some participants want to “get on with it!” and suggested specific actions as the next steps to take. However, more participants feel there are still development stages to complete that will support the project’s success.

Build trust through education and awareness raising “Listen.” any participants agree that the next step should be to work with M communities and partner organisations to build trust and raise awareness of the project. Some participants feel it’s important to ask “what do people want?” However, one suggested that it was also important to “approach stakeholders with something to talk about.” long with “open conversations with local communities,” a few A participants suggested groups to target: those in the city region, landowners, farmers and young farmers. One suggested a social media strategy could be used to support this engagement. ducation was highlighted as an essential part of raising E awareness. This would help people understand “where your water comes from,” and the “cost of managing landscape / catchments and the benefits.” A couple of participants suggested demonstration projects including demonstrating “the consequence of inaction.” Another suggested “catchment specific education packages” for schools.

21

Specific education projects participants put forward cover promoting the health benefits of a healthy catchment, an appreciation of wilderness and an understanding of PES.

Research number of participants feel the next stage of the project A should be to conduct research and gather evidence. This should include a needs analysis for both the short and long term and the development of mechanisms to monitor activity and get meaningful feedback on the impact of the project. One participant suggested, “talk to landowners and farmers to start to identify issues and opportunities.” Another said, “build on existing initiatives.”

Several participants said the project could learn from others, in particular New York’s water catchment, as part of evidence-based research. One suggested, “go see and ask what was done.” wo participants also suggested research into finance, including T identifying “available funding sources.”

Bring the key players together, identify leads and create champions “Important to get buy-in at the start, not impose decisions and lay the groundwork for discussions asap.”

Many participants agree that no one organisation can do it on their

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

own and the success of the project will depend on enthusiasm and collaboration. As one suggested: “one collaborative group with one money pot and administrator and less hurdles.” everal participants feel the next stage of the project should be to S “bring the key players together,” decide who takes the lead” and “assign champions for change.” Key players were identified as DCWW, NRW, the BBNPA and public service boards, while key linked plans were seen as the NPMP, the NRW area statement and the LDP. I nitial meetings of the lead organisations should “look at opportunities,” and “identify mutually beneficial projects.”

Agree vision and objectives “ Refine / define components of the mega catchment concept 2017.” everal participants suggested the next stage of the project S should be to agree its vision and priorities for action. This should include “focussed objectives, prioritised over time.” One participant suggested the “PSB and area statement should help determine priorities.” ne participant said the vision should “define what people / O stakeholders want the landscape to look like in the future – nonintervention management, rewilding, future of farming.” While

22

another said stakeholders would need to determine the priorities from: “1. Water supply, 2. Viable agriculture, 3. Countryside access and wildlife.”

Specific actions Some participants agree that we need to “start somewhere” and put forward specific actions as the next step for the project. These are: compulsory purchase non-agricultural areas; submit planning applications; submit grant applications; rewild hills; and carry out a SWOT analysis on commons graziers; “few quick win case studies now.”

Timescales “Need to get the basics agreed asap before BREXIT leaves us with no agri-environment / agreement scheme.” here were far fewer suggestions from participants in respect of T timescales. Of those who did comment most felt the best way to proceed is a mix of short and long-term goals, in line with existing plans, funding and requirements, for example PR19, AMP 7 and Brexit. One participant suggested, “Total plan over full scale: 25 years with 5year catchment plans.” wo participants highlighted the need for a long-term commitment T to make sure the project is sustainable. Only one participant suggested a “short to medium-term 5 – 10 years” timescale.

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Photostory 2

23

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

24

Outcomes 1. Partners understand our 2050 Vision and 2. Our Catchment Operational Strategy and WaterSource approach are endorsed Q. Do you feel better informed about Welsh Water’s approach to catchment management as a result of this conference?

“Through presentations and discussions.”

“Much better informed - really good day.”

“Most definitely.”

“Yes, but some of the individual presenters were a bit policy focussed and dry, would be good to understand what the challenges look like in practise.”

“DCWW did a great job with this event.”

“Really supportive - good long term sustainable approach. The stat about 78% of Swansea water is not well known - why not make the most of this to make the public case for BBNP mega catchment project?”

“Great overview and introduction to catchment management.

Next step is to actually deliver it.”

“Bit unclear how this differs from how Welsh Water have been working up to this point.”

“Yes and more information on existing and proposed projects would be more useful.”

“Great to see - need to update all the stakeholders in the DCWW quarterly. Env. comms update a program.”

“But this needs to be followed by arranging a meeting (stakeholders) to move the discussion forward for planning whatever comes after Glastir.”

“Lofty ideas don’t always translate to outputs of improvement, but it’s a good start!”

3. Partners are aware of and supportive of our Catchment Strategy progress to date Q. Are you supportive of the proposed Brecon Beacons Mega Catchment approach?

“Further consideration of operational boundary, aligned to river basin management plans.”

“Was previously well aware of the approach but still learnt more.”

“It’s a great idea - it needs to get going, have a few set backs and learn from them.”

“I feel they do not know the approach themselves yet.”

“We have to start somewhere!!”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

25

Outcomes (continued) “Obviously it’s a willing partner in the BBNP.”

“Just get on with it.”

“I think how evidence is to be collected & gathered, increased trust, stakeholders, engaged & common goals reached on such a large landscape scale needs consideration, maybe with a pilot approach (smaller scale) as an interim.”

“Yes in principle, but question whether the size is manageable and may need to be into smaller catchments within the large projects.”

“But needs collaboration formed with honest broker - whole area.”

“It is too complicated.”

“BBNP = A drinking water factory! The weed wiper project works & is simple & easily understood. Why not expand it to all catchments in BBNP to reduce/eliminate the problem of pesticide drift Great Idea - just needs to be implemented and managed well.”

“Very exciting potential.”

“In principle, but still needs to define the practicalities.”

“Brecon Beacons not a closed system, links to Wales as an ever bigger catchment.”

“Good idea, but needs to be carefully implemented and monitored.”

“Feel it is too big on its own.”

“Landscape scale projects provide a huge opportunity for multiple benefits to be achieved.”

“We (DCWW) need to take the lead.”

“Need more discussion between organisations who have the potential to contribute to the process, and think about expanding the model to other catchments.”

“Maybe you need to look at the border of the Mega Catchment does it have to be the same as the park?”

“Of course.”

4. Introduce and receive feedback on our proposed Brecon Beacons landscape scale project Q. Do you believe there are opportunities for you/your organisation to work with Welsh Water on the proposed Brecon Beacons Mega Catchment?

“Facilitate engagement with landowners, help WW understand farming and farming systems catchment scale land mgt plans, farm infrastructure.”

“The project needs evidence driven management which means using existing information and generation of information to fill

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

26

Outcomes (continued) lacunae. This means monitoring and research need industry/ academic liaison for end user driven research… Cardiff Uni water URI.”

“I think the jury is out, let’s see. There are too many short term activities using volunteers, rather than business and government agencies working together on long term planning.”

“Yes, I would like to consider new and innovative techniques as well.”

“Wildlife Trusts would be very keen to be a partner.”

“As NRW - some areas of interest in terms of water resources, water quality and wider benefits to the environment.”

“Facilitate discussions with farmers, and land managers FWAG Cymru.”

“Opportunities for woodland creation to help deliver objectives for improving raw water quality. I live and work in BBNP.”

“Supporting the evidence; what to target where with monitoring and modelling support & comprehensive experience of working with multiple scales for multiple objectives, means support could be offered, but I remain nameless not to flog services.”

“Challenge will be capacity to develop the idea and deliver results with limited funding.”

“Already collaborating.”

“Biodiversity operates at landscape scales and wildlife trusts have a huge voluntary resource which could contribute.”

“Very much so.”

“Many interested farming groups in Wales and rest of the UK, particularly younger people. Would appreciate initiatives to support recognition of farming in the uplands: National Sheep Association on website. (NSA Report) ‘The complementary role of sheep in upland and hill areas.’”

“Again need more discussion with the organisations and clarity on the way forward.”

“Internships / Placements with the university.”

“BBNPA.” “Already in partnership with Welsh Water (NRW &Talybont plan).”

“Already doing so.”

“Yes!” “Many thanks for inviting us (Afonydd Cymru).”

“We are planning several projects in the BBMC area related to the SAC rivers.”

“Afonydd Cymru is the umbrella organisation for Wales’ River Trusts and are very focused on H2O quality.”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE – 9 JANUARY 2017

How useful have you found this conference?

“VERY USEFUL”

“I ENJOYED IT, I THINK THERE ARE OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE PROBABLY DONE A GREAT DEAL OF THIS TYPE OF STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT BEFORE. THAT SAID THE MEGA CATCHMENT IS A GREAT AND AMBITIOUS.”

“MORE PASSION FROM THE DCWW SPEAKERS - IT ALL FELT VERY DRY AND DULL AND THE SUBJECT ISN’T!”

“THE NUMBER OF ORGANISATIONS PRESENT WAS EXCELLENT” “EXCELLENT SELECTION OF SPEAKERS AND RANGE OF DELIVERY MECHANISMS AND STYLES TO FOSTER DISCUSSION”

“EXCELLENT CONFERENCE! WELL DONE PHILLIPPA”

“BBNP & DCWW COLLABORATION = THE FUTURE”

“VERY USEFUL AND A GOOD INSIGHT INTO WELSH WATER’S VISION”

“GREAT TO SEE OUR ENVIRONMENTAL STAKEHOLDERS HELPING WITH THE DAY AND PRESENTATIONS”

“VERY USEFUL COLLECTION OF PEOPLE FROM A VARIETY OF ORGANISATIONS & BACKGROUNDS. HEARD FANTASTIC CONVERSATIONS TO HOPEFULLY GET THIS STARTED”

“BRILLIANT START- LOOKING FORWARD TO TAKING THIS INTO THE FUTURE AS A REALITY”

27

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE – 9 JANUARY 2017

28

How useful have you found this conference?

“WE NEED EVIDENCE FOR FURTHER DIRECTION TO WORK SMART”

“VERY PROFESSIONAL ORGANISATION OF THE DAY. GOOD TO SEE SENIOR MANAGEMENT / BOARD REPRESENTATION TO REINFORCE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE INITIATIVE”

“GREAT TO SEE THE DEBATE STARTING ON THE MEGA CATCHMENT CONCEPT ”

“EXCELLENT RANGE OF STAKEHOLDERS IN ATTENDANCE”

“’EDUCATION’ IS KEY FOR ALL STAKEHOLDERS, EVIDENCE GATHERING NEEDS SUPPORT AND FUNDING”

“WHAT SURPRISED ME WAS THAT THE OBJECTIVE ABOUT WHAT THE BRECON BEACONS IS THERE FOR ISN’T CLEAR. IT SHOULD BE MADE CLEAR WHAT IT IS; RECREATION WITH NO LIMITS (OR NEARLY NO LIMITS!), WATER SUPPLIES FOR A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, FARMING AND WILDLIFE /LANDSCAPE HERITAGE. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY FUNDAMENTAL AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE CLEAR”

“GOOD COMMUNICATION ON 2050 VISION”

“DELIGHTED DC HAVE TAKEN THIS APPROACH”

“DISAPPOINTING THAT THE REGULATORS ARE JUST LEAVING THE SPACE & ABDICATING RESPONSIBILITY TO OTHERS”

“GOOD BUT SHOULD BE JUST THE START OF REAL LONG TERM COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO CATCHMENT APPROACH BY DCWW”

#WATERSOURCE17

WATERSOURCE CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Organisations represented at the conference Afonydd Cymru

National Farmers Union

APEM

National Sheep Association

Brecon Beacons Glastir Group

Natural England

Brecon Beacons National Park Authority

Natural Resources Wales

British Geological Survey

Non-Executive Board Member (DCWW)

Cardiff University

Ofwat

Coed Cymru

Ricardo Energy and Environment

Confor Wales

RKS ADAS

Consumer Council for Water

RSPB

Crai Community Council

The Coal Authority

Drinking Water Inspectorate

The National Trust

^ Cymru Welsh Water Dwr

Tilhill Forestry

Farmers’ Union of Wales

TYF Group

Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group Cymru

Voluntary Initiative

Independent Environmental Adviser (DCWW)

Welsh Government

Local Land Managers

Wildlife Trusts Wales

29