Oral evidence: Invasive species, HC 2129

Oral evidence, 25 June 2019.

Chair

I welcome our witnesses to our third hearing in our inquiry into invasive species. We are going to look at invasive species in freshwater environments, and we are very excited to have such an eminent panel with us here today. I will begin by asking you to introduce yourselves, starting from my right. This is basically a sound check.

Phil Brewin

Good morning. I am Phil Brewin. I work for the Somerset Consortium of Internal Drainage Boards, which is a group of three drainage boards covering all of the catchments in Somerset. I am also here representing the Association of Drainage Authorities.

Chair

I have trouble hearing you. We might need to move the mic, or you might need to speak up and speak from the diaphragm. We will move the mic forward a bit. Thank you.

Dr Smith

Hi, I am Emily Smith. I work for the Angling Trust. I am the environment manager and lead on invasive species. My background is that I have done some research looking at invasive species and unintentional pathways, and spread as well.

Kate Hills

Good morning. I am Kate Hills. I am the biosecurity and invasives manager at South West Water. Our parent body is Pennon, which also has Viridor under its wing. We sound French, but we are actually British owned. We are based in Exeter, with about 2 million residents. I am also the vice-chair of the Mammal Society.

Richard Atkinson

Good morning. I am Richard Atkinson. I work for British Canoeing, and I am the Policy Officer and the lead for invasive species.

Chair

Great. I remind witnesses, guests and Committee members to turn all phones to silent, please, before we start. Thank you. Can I kick off by asking how invasive species impact on your organisations’ activities, perhaps starting with the water company?

Kate Hills

I am not quite sure where to start. We are large aquatic landowners. We know that aquatic species are particularly problematic. I do not think we know the full challenges that we have ahead of us yet, but we know that they affect all aspects of our business—so that is operational, compliance, regulatory and financial. We have three core areas of work. One is clean water; that is from abstraction to transfer, storage, transfer, treatments and discharge. We have issues with waste water. This did come as a bit more of a surprise from the survey work we have done. For example, we found Crassula—New Zealand pygmyweed—in the sewage treatment filter beds. We have also had issues with rhododendron that is planted as a screen around sludge works. Badgers had burrowed under the rhododendron and lifted up the sludge plates—things we did not anticipate. Another big core area of our work is conservation, access and recreation. We know from research that the two big pathways for invasives are angling and boating. Climate change also has an impact on our work. Invasives can take advantage of drought and flood conditions. We have responsibilities to our customers. We had a customer review panel who said their four top things were that they wanted safe water, reliable waste service, resilience, and protection of the environment. Invasives fit into all of those categories. We also have responsibilities to our regulators—that is the Environment Agency and Ofwat—and responsibilities to our stakeholders. It is estimated, in a piece of research by Water UK, that water companies spend £7.5 million on invasives. That is an extremely conservative estimate.

Chair

How much did you spend last year?

Kate Hills

It was less than £1 million, but in April 2020 all water companies start their new five-year management plans. All water companies have an invasives remit. Thames Water is looking at spending £4.7 million. South West Water and several other water companies are investing around £2 million, so those three or four companies have already exceeded that £7.5 million target.

Chair

Thank you. That is very helpful. Mr Atkinson: canoes—it is your members that are spreading this stuff around.

Richard Atkinson

I am not so sure about that.

Chair

You would say that, wouldn’t you?

Richard Atkinson

There are 1.9 million people paddling in the whole of the UK and at many destinations abroad. People paddle for a number of different reasons: their health and wellbeing, the enjoyment of the natural environment, endurance, the thrill of white water, and even fishing. There is also the competitive side; our GB slalom team did very well at the latest world cup. We got four golds, two silvers and a bronze.

Chair

If we can we talk about invasive species rather than medal glory, that would be great. How do invasive species impact on your activities, and what are your responsibilities for managing them?

Richard Atkinson

BC recognises that this is having a major impact on our inland waters, mainly through the clogging of our waterways, the canal systems and the slower reaches of rivers. It is not just impacting on the paddling community, but on many other water-based recreational users, which is obviously having a high cost implication on organisations such as CRT and the Environment Agency. We are tackling it in a number of ways in the freshwater environment. It is one of our top priorities in maintaining and protecting our natural environment. We are promoting awareness of invasive species to our membership and the wider paddling community.

Chair

How do you do that?

Richard Atkinson

Through the development of environmental modules within our coaching system at different levels, and different levels of environmental information. This will hopefully impact on and influence new paddlers coming into the sport and seasoned paddlers that want to improve their skill levels and their knowledge of—

Chair

You say you are developing them. Are they complete?

Richard Atkinson

No, they are not.

Chair

Therefore, you have not done any training for coaches up until now?

Richard Atkinson

Yes, we have.

Chair

What have you done?

Richard Atkinson

We have launched the paddler support leadership guide scheme, which teaches leaders taking people out—commercial use and so on—about environmental issues and sustainability. That includes things like ensuring paddlers paddle sustainably in protected areas and ensure they carry out biosecurity—check, clean, dry—where they can, and a whole range of different environment information.

Chair

What do you mean by “where they can”? Surely it has to be something that happens every time?

Richard Atkinson

It is difficult, because paddlers do paddle in remote areas, in different catchments on the white water. So it is quite difficult to move and to use biosecurity when they are in a very rural, remote area.

Chair

Isn’t it too late by the time they are in the rural area? Surely the time to check the canoe—

Richard Atkinson

We do urge them to clean the boats before they go on any form of water.

Chair

Right. You urge them, but if they don’t, they can still go on?

Richard Atkinson

Yes, but we need to urge people to clean their boat before they enter any watercourse.

Chair

What is this module on invasive species, then? When will that be complete and rolled out?

Richard Atkinson

It is hopefully going to be rolled out by the end of this year.

Chair

To how many coaches?

Richard Atkinson

Roughly 800 to 1,000.

Chair

They are the people that you train every year, or they are the people that you already—

Richard Atkinson

Yes. They take part in the courses that British Canoeing—

Chair

What about the people that have already been trained?

Richard Atkinson

We also have a lot of web-based information on our website, and we have quite a bit of e-learning related to environmental sustainability as well. Anybody can access those.

Chair

What level qualification is this new module? Is this a level 1, a level 2?

Richard Atkinson

It is going to be level 1. I am not an expert in the coaching system, I am afraid. We have just changed to the personal performance awards.

Chair

If you could write to us with some more detail on that, that would be helpful. Thank you.

Richard Atkinson

Yes.

Chair

Dr Smith, the Angling Trust. Your members, too, are putting their rods in the water. What steps are they taking? How does this impact you?

Dr Smith

Again, just for a bit of background, about 4 million anglers or people went fishing in the last two years. Angling contributes £3.5 billion to the economy every year. We have a large volume of people going out enjoying fresh water and marine. From the side of impacts, from a fresh water perspective, it varies between areas, because you have some species that affect, say, slow-moving waters more than rivers. But for us, in particular, the key one is crayfish because they come in, and they can prey on fish eggs and juveniles up to fish of three years in age. So you are having that recruitment loss throughout rivers. Another one is floating pennywort.

Chair

How does that affect you?

Dr Smith

There is a rather famous photo that goes around of a sheep that has entered the water because it has assumed that it is land, basically—the water is that dense. Just think how dense that is when you are trying to get your rod in—it is just impossible. It cuts out light, so it is affecting the insects, the natural flora, and, again, that has a knock-on effect on fish. There are numerous other species, such as killer shrimp, which is very aptly named because of its impact in predating on fish eggs and other invertebrates—it is very aggressive. So there is a whole host of species that we have here that impact on anglers, as well as some that we do not have yet that are knocking on the door in Europe, ready to come in.

Chair

What are you worried about?

Dr Smith

The ponto-Caspian species. These originate in eastern Europe, and as channels for shipping have been opened up, they have been moved up, so, now, quite a lot of them are in western Europe, in the Netherlands. And then there is a lag; David Aldridge, who you have spoken to before, has done some research that shows about a four-year lag from them being in Europe and then coming into the UK. There are some fish—cobia species—that we are particularly concerned about, as well as more invertebrates.

Chair

Can I just ask: what are your biosecurity recommendations? How do you get them out to your members?

Dr Smith

We chair the angling pathway action plan group, so we are doing a lot of work with anglers on the ground to encourage them to check, clean, dry, and to make sure that they do that every time they go fishing. We have done stuff with international competitions. Last year there was a World Lure Championship. Before anglers came into the UK from abroad, we wrote and translated the check, clean, dry into 11 different languages. We gave that to them before they even set foot on soil, to encourage them to make sure they had checked, cleaned and dried their equipment before they came. All of our staff have to take e-learning on invasive species, and that is also for our volunteers and our coaches. We have that in there, and then they can go out on the ground and spread the word. There are also lots of different kinds of guidance and things out there for fisheries, volunteers and anyone who is working on water, anglers, basically—

Chair

How many of your volunteers and coaches have undertaken e-learning?

Dr Smith

All of our staff have to, and we have a target at the moment of about 50% to try to do it, but we are encouraging it all the time, and that is something where we are trying to put pressure on.

Chair

That is 50% by when?

Dr Smith

At the moment, that is the figure that we have and—

Chair

For volunteers and coaches?

Dr Smith

Yes.

Chair

Your target is 50% by 2020, 2050?

Dr Smith

That is our target at the moment, as in that is how many we have already that have done it. Beyond that, we want to increase that value.

Chair

To what?

Dr Smith

Ideally, 100%. That would be the one that I would want to see, because it is very important. They are the ones on the ground who have to go out and know about invasive species if they get asked.

James Gray

Very quickly, you said 4 million people fish, or 5 million or thereabouts. Do all have fishing licences or not all?

Dr Smith

No. That includes marine, so sea anglers.

James Gray

How many would have fishing licences?

Dr Smith

I think it is 1.5 million—of that order.

James Gray

How much are they each?

Dr Smith

I do not know the latest figures off the top of my head.

James Gray

You do not know. All right. It used to be about 20 quid, wasn’t it, roughly? [Interruption.] It was £27, was it? So that is £50 million a year raised from fishing licences. That goes to the Government. What do the Government do with it?

Dr Smith

We get some money back from rod licences from the EA, so my position is funded from rod licence money. They give some of that back to our alien attack project. So there is a lot of work. Some of it goes to invasives; some of it goes to—

James Gray

Just in passing, if the Government is earning £50 million or something—that figure is to be agreed—from rod licences, is there not an argument that the Government should be taking a more active part in biosecurity?

Dr Smith

Yes. A large proportion of that money could go towards invasive species, but recognising that there are other stresses as well on the environment—pollution and all that kind of stuff—so yes.

Chair

Mr Brewin?

Phil Brewin

Thank you, Chair. Drainage boards are local authorities that operate in low-lying areas in England. We manage water under permissive powers for the purposes of flood risk management, drainage and environmental protection. Also, of course, we have a duty to protect the natural environment, and the specific duty to protected areas. The invasive species can impact our operational practices. Nationally, we maintain around 22,000 km of water course. Within Somerset, that is about 650 km. Within those areas, we include sluices, pumps and other weirs. If we get very significant growth from plants like floating pennywort, that can cause extra maintenance, burdens, additional costs and costs in terms of waste disposal. I have not been able to quantify what that cost is for drainage boards, but, by way of example, the Environment Agency in 2017 spent around £500,000 removing over 1,000 tonnes of floating pennywort and plants like—

Chair

In your IDBs—in your job?

Phil Brewin

No, that was across England. Within our area, we do have that particular plant. It is a plant of great concern because it is very persistent. It does originate from tropical areas, so it is a plant—

Chair

Is it everywhere now?

Phil Brewin

No, it isn’t. It has been in the country for less than 20 years. It has become established in some areas in the east, which is where it was first introduced. It has now found its way to Somerset, and we recognise the very high risk associated with that. We are working with our local partners—in particular, the Environment Agency and Natural England—to develop a control programme.

Chair

This is about flooding—flood risk prevention?

Phil Brewin

Yes, it is about flooding, but there are also very significant environmental impacts. As Emily has just mentioned, it can out-compete native plants and animals, and it can form a very effective barrier on the surface of the water, which can change the chemistry and exclude light from the watercourse, which obviously impacts.

Chair

How many miles of your network are affected?

Phil Brewin

Currently, we have four patches in the Parrett. The most significant one is on the Tone. That must be about 5 km in total. There is also an outbreak near Western-super-Mare that is spreading through the ditch system, which is a great concern for us because of the rural flood risk that that poses.

Chair

What are you doing about it?

Phil Brewin

We are implementing biosecurity procedures. ADA has developed a template for all drainage boards in the country. That includes making operators aware of the risks and putting in place procedures for cleaning and drying machinery. For other species, like, for example, zebra mussels, we need to thoroughly clean the machines, including steam cleaning, which is an additional cost to us.

Chair

You are advising people to keep their machinery clean when they are going and doing dredging, but if they do not follow biosecurity, you have no powers to enforce compliance?

Phil Brewin

No, we don’t. There are a number of authorities that manage water within our area. There are private landowners who maintain their own private ditches as well. What we are trying to do, in Somerset in particular, is raise awareness of the issues, using tools like social media to get information out to farmers to make them aware of the problems. The response is usually quite good. They can provide us with up-to-date information on monitoring, and some will undertake control measures as well.

Chair

But you are just relying on goodwill?

Phil Brewin

We are, yes. There isn’t a great deal of funding for invasive species control. We are generally funding it out of our normal maintenance budgets.

Chair

We have heard evidence that any control or eradication measures that stop short of complete eradication are likely to be money down the drain—if you will pardon the pun—because the target species will quickly recolonise. If you were a farmer, and you read the research, what is the point of trying to control it?

Phil Brewin

That is a very important point. It shows the need for a sustained and continuing programme of control. Certainly, where we have aquatic plants, with different landowners on either side of the watercourse, that can make additional complications, because they will own up to the centre line of the watercourse and, in many instances, there can be a large number—even hundreds of landowners—involved in the process.

Chair

We had the example, when we were in Cambridge, of the gulf wedge clam—

Phil Brewin

Yes, in Lincolnshire.

Chair

It was spotted in one of your drains, as a small issue, and it is now over 10 km, so what has happened there? Why no action? Why no eradication? Are you just going to let it spread throughout East Anglia?

Phil Brewin

Well, no. I do know a little bit about this, and I believe that it is actually within an Environment Agency drain. It is within a drainage board district. It is quite a—

Chair

Are you saying it is in an Environment Agency drain?

Phil Brewin

I believe so. I would have to—

Chair

The agency has not eradicated it?

Phil Brewin

It is taking measures to identify the best means of control. It is a new species to this country. Some of the work is being done with Cambridge University looking at taking samples of the DNA, so that we can use remote sensing to determine where else this clam might be—it is not an easy thing to survey. There is also work looking at a bio-control that is species-specific that can kill this clam. The problem, of course, is it is often quite difficult to apply within a flowing watercourse. Therefore, it is unlikely we will be able to eliminate it completely, but—

Chair

Surely it could have been eliminated in 2015, when it was only over half a mile or a mile, and now it is over six miles, so it is going to be six times harder, isn’t it?

Phil Brewin

Absolutely, and this is a key lesson: early intervention and a thorough treatment programme are an investment that will save us money in the future.

Chair

This is the south 40-foot drains in the River Witham, in Boston? Our information is that it was unused for 40 years and was reopened in 2009. So that is an EA drain?

Phil Brewin

I believe so. I cannot confirm it, but that is what I was—

Chair

No, it is not. The Black Sluice IDB maintains the water levels. The EA provides licences for navigation, so it is one of your members that is responsible.

Phil Brewin

Okay, right.

Chair

What is the answer from one of your members?

Phil Brewin

I have just told you what—

Chair

You are aware of the problem—

Phil Brewin

I am.

Chair

But you are unaware that it is one of your members—that is actually responsible for eradication—that has sat back for the last four years and let this species take over.

Phil Brewin

We have permissive powers that allow us to undertake works for flood risk management and environmental protection. I do not think we are specifically responsible for eradicating invasive species.

Chair

Isn’t environmental protection one of your public duties?

Phil Brewin

It is, yes.

Chair

So wouldn’t eradicating an invasive species be full, smack, firmly in the definition of environmental protection?

Phil Brewin

Well, yes and no. We are undertaking those activities with the resources—

Chair

But this one wasn’t. One of your members has not done anything on it for four years.

Phil Brewin

Sorry, I cannot say any more, because I am unaware of specific actions regarding that species.

Chair

Okay. From your body, who has oversight of the environment activities of your members?

Phil Brewin

It is DEFRA and the Environment Agency.

Chair

How would they exercise that oversight?

Phil Brewin

We work as closely as possible and—

Chair

Has the Environment Agency ever forced you to do a particular clean-up of invasive species?

Phil Brewin

I don’t believe so, no.

Chair

All right, thank you very much. We will move on.

John Mc Nally

First of all, Mr Atkinson, you might be aware of one of my local constituents, Sophie Ogilvie, who won a gold medal at the European games. I have known her since she was a wee girl, and she is an extremely talented, highly successful young lady. I never thought I would get to speak about her, so thank you for reminding me of that. I want to move on to the tackling of invasive species themselves. We have heard that the catchment level approach is most effective when dealing with invasive species in fresh water systems. Are the Government doing enough to co-ordinate activities at this scale, and could the Government learn from the partnership approaches to funding and project implementation used by the Scottish Government’s invasive species initiative? For example, Chair, the £3.34 million project covering one third of Scotland’s mainland land mass is funded for four years until 2021, with a view to establishing voluntary local initiatives to combat invasive species in the long term, so there is real action going on here. In your opinion—perhaps Phil could start—are the Government doing enough to co-ordinate activities at this scale?

Phil Brewin

I would agree that it is very important that we do act at the right scale. Different authorities—in particular, drainage boards—only operate in low-lying flood plain areas, so we are unable to cover the whole catchment. One of the best approaches that we perhaps have is developing and supporting local catchment partnerships that bring bodies together and other organisations as well, including environmental NGOs. Those sorts of bodies would be an appropriate mechanism for developing a more strategic catchment approach to invasive species control. The big challenge, of course, is raising the funding and sustaining that funding in the long term.

John Mc Nally

I suspect it is a challenge that you do not need when you are trying to raise funding.

Phil Brewin

A particular issue is where funding may be available for a short number of years or for a specific project, when it really needs to be part of the daily routine to avoid future costs.

John Mc Nally

Could you comment on that, Dr Smith?

Dr Smith

Yes. The work, historically, has been quite piecemeal. There have been some really great initiatives that have gone on. My colleague here, Kate, in the South West Forum, has lots of enthusiastic people all coming together joining up to tackle invasive species. There is another one in Yorkshire and another one in Norfolk, but these are based on the will or enthusiasm of individuals. There have been some other cases. There is the Source to Sea Project. So the idea is recognising a more strategic approach and trying to manage it, from the top all the way down, to eradicate a species. However, although they have done great work in a short amount of time, funding dries up, so, unfortunately, they do not end up doing what they set out to do.

John Mc Nally

You can see a longer term commitment?

Dr Smith

If there was more sustained funding, that would be quite an important thing. There is now the RAPID LIFE EU project, which I think you have heard about in previous panels. They have these regional invasive management plans. There are five of them in England. That is a new programme that is bringing a lot of different stakeholders and interest groups together to try to prioritise which species are a problem in those regions and then to try to encourage action. Again, you need funding to make sure that is sustained. Also, that is only up to 2020, so making sure that that is continued is a real issue.

Kate Hills

Scotland is doing some exemplar work on control. You have the Outer Hebrides mink control project and the Cairngorms mink control project. Catchment work is an obvious unit when you are looking at aquatic control, but you do need to look beyond that. I think you need to look regionally. We have scoped what we have on our sites, but we need to know what is in our region and what could come in on to our assets. Things can cross regional boundaries, and with the raw water transfer proposals, you need to look between regions as well. So water companies are talking nationally. We have a great camaraderie, and we are sharing information. South West Water has set up an invasive water company forum. Yorkshire Water set up an e-mail system so we can all talk. Anglian Water is developing e-learning for water companies, and Welsh Water produced an original report about the problems coming in. Therefore, you need to look at your smaller units, but you need to think about the bigger scale as well.

Richard Atkinson

British Canoeing relies on its many volunteers to do a lot of the key work when it comes to non-native species and reducing plastics from our river systems. We have produced some real, tangible results. We have been working with Surfers Against Sewage on the Big Spring Beach Clean: Summit to Sea. We have removed nearly 13,000 kg of plastics, which was collected by just under 8,000 volunteers. These same volunteers are passionate about doing other environmental work, such as non-native species removal. We have set up a partnership with the Canal & Rivers Trust to look at removal of floating pennywort on a catchment basis. It is fairly local at the moment, but we are hopefully going to escalate that up to a national programme. We are working with canoe club volunteers to physically remove Pennywort from CRT waters before it gets too much to cope with. We have been very successful in that.

Chair

Where is that?

Richard Atkinson

That was at Dewsbury, on the Aire and Calder canal.

Chair

Very good. Hopefully you will come down to Wakefield soon.

Richard Atkinson

We are going to Wakefield on Friday, to Stanley Ferry.

Chair

What a shame, I won’t be there.

Richard Atkinson

We are going to Stanley Ferry on Friday, and we will be moving over to Hyde on the Peak Forest canal as well.

Chair

Brilliant, very exciting.

Richard Atkinson

We are going to promote these on a national basis and—

Chair

Next time, invite the MPs along.

Richard Atkinson

There is an MP coming to Peak Forest.

Chair

I do not remember seeing an invite to that, but never mind.

Richard Atkinson

As to the other things we are doing, we are working with the North Wales Wildlife Trust at a number of our events. In 2018 a number of canoe, polo and white water events were held at the National Water Sports Centre, with 500 people, at least, taking part in the events. We were demonstrating biosecurity—check, clean, dry—to these competitors, who do not come across check, clean, dry very often. This year, we are looking at attending events—the five sprinter regatta events—where there are going to be 3,000 to 4,000 people taking part. Again, we are going to be working with the Wildlife Trust to wash down boats, and supplying various invasives information. We have put permanent check, clean, dry signage at all our British Canoeing-owned sites, and we have installed a permanent wash-down facility at one of our sites on the River Washburn.

John Mc Nally

I think we are going to come on to that question later on from one of our other members.

Richard Atkinson

All right.

John Mc Nally

Could we move you on to the Government’s approach? Is it effective at tackling invasive aquatic vegetation, such as—something I had never really heard of before—floating pennywort and how it can be removed? My own particular interest was in giant hogweed and Japanese knotweed, which was a particular concern along the tributaries along the River Cairn and the Forth and all of the areas around there, which a lot of the canoeing started in my own area. Could you tell me if the Government are doing enough to tackle this? We removed 736 km of giant hogweed. It was treated, and 195 volunteers assisted with that. With mink removal alone, there were another 537 volunteers in total. We are hoping to increase that this year. They are funded through officers that are directly employed through the various partners involved in the funding, and I just want to know how things could be improved at this moment in time. I think you mentioned earlier that this is not going to go away; it is only going to get worse. If your funding is only for another year, it is kind of scary. What is ahead? Mr Brewin, would you like to start off again, please, with that question?

Phil Brewin

I would like to add that it is very valuable having volunteer effort, but the water environment can be quite a hazardous place to deploy volunteers, so that does need to be managed with extreme care. Giant hogweed is a poisonous, injurious plant as well, so we do need specialist input to control programmes. I would also like to highlight the way that invasive species can take advantage of weakness within control programmes. If there is land that cannot be accessed, or effort does stop—we have said this already—we very quickly return back to an earlier state where the plants or animals can return very quickly. The answer is to have a more catchment-wide strategic approach to control, to develop plans locally with partners, and to try as best we can—if we cannot raise the money nationally—to raise it locally. For example, in Somerset we have a new organisation called the Somerset Rivers Authority, which does bring partners together and is able to raise money locally for, in particular, flood risk management activities. Given the relevance of invasive species to flood risk, we might be able to raise local funds as well as draw on national funds.

John Mc Nally

I suppose the question is: is everybody actually talking to one another? We had an example from Dr Paul Walton. In the 1980s, Glasgow decided to get rid of the giant hogweed by spraying Roundup, and then they did not take it any further. It just ended at the city boundary. You think that, hopefully, we have managed to improve a great deal since those days. Would you like to comment?

Dr Smith

The question is in relation to management?

John Mc Nally

Yes, I meant management of it—working together.

Dr Smith

I think, for certain species, there is quite a lot of good work going on. You have heard about the Asian hornet previously, and then there is work on water primrose and topmouth gudgeon, so, on certain species, we are very good at co-ordinating and trying to get rid of them. In other cases, such as floating pennywort, unfortunately, in the past those involved have been quite slow to respond. They are getting better, and there is more guidance out there now, but there is less of a strategic approach. I think it is very species-specific and about what they can get money for and what the priorities are, when, actually, if you invest to begin with and try to get rid of it, it is so much more cost-effective in the long term.

John Mc Nally

Basic prevention is better than finding a cure, isn’t it?

Dr Smith

Yes.

John Mc Nally

Would you like to comment on that?

Kate Hills

The simple answer is, no, there is not enough being done to fund management projects. That is at the Government level and down. The GB Non-native Species Secretariat has a key role in co-ordinating this work. To have effective control, you need to be strategic, collaborative, and co-ordinated at the right scale, with the right resource. There are some exemplar examples: the Environment Agency with topmouth gudgeon. The plants are hardy. They have seed banks that they disperse at a wider rate than others, potentially, so it is very difficult. It needs a partnership approach, and no one sector is responsible. All water users and others need to be doing this. The local action groups do some brilliant work, but I worry that it is not necessarily at the top of the catchment, moving down; it is more piecemeal, which means it may not be worthwhile. It needs a much more strategic, co-ordinated, resourced approach.

John Mc Nally

You feel that the energy that people are willing to put in is just a bit unco-ordinated—

Kate Hills

Did you say just in recording it?

John Mc Nally

Not just in recording it. If you have people that are willing to give up their time in man hours—or woman hours, which is what they say nowadays—that energy has to be put into the right place, and it needs to be co-ordinated by professional people who know the size of this and what they are actually talking about, but you are saying there is a gap there at this moment in time?

Kate Hills

Yes, co-ordination and support is critical, but it is the long-term scale of the problem that is the issue. Some water companies fund projects through their upstream thinking projects or their catchment projects, but a lot of water companies, including South West Water, Welsh Water and Yorkshire Water, are looking at setting up in 2020 specific grants to help people go out and do this, so that we can have some kind of strategic element to the work that needs doing.

James Gray

We have heard—and you have answered quite a lot of this already—that a significant part of the pathways through which invasive species enter our waterways come about as a result of recreation. On fishing, there is less that we can do, so I want to focus for a moment back on canoeing. When you go to a public swimming pool for a swim, you have to have a shower beforehand, as well as, very probably, having a shower when you get out. Why, then, is it that you can turn up with your canoe and put it in the water with no scrubbing? You only scrub when you leave the water rather than enter it.

Richard Atkinson

No. We tell people to clean their boats before they enter.

James Gray

Do you?

Richard Atkinson

Yes.

James Gray

That is not what we heard from Dr Dunn, who says she is absolutely astonished by the fact that there is no requirement to wash down when you enter the reservoir, only when you leave it.

Richard Atkinson

I am not aware of that at all. Our policy is: we follow DEFRA’s check, clean, dry procedure to the word, really. We demonstrate check, clean, dry at a number of our events, as I mentioned earlier.

James Gray

I want to focus simply on this question of wash-down. As an organisation, you are clear that your members wash their boats off both as they get into the water and as they come out. Is that correct?

Richard Atkinson

Our policy is to tell them to do that. We cannot police what they do.

James Gray

You can at major events, can’t you?

Richard Atkinson

Yes, at major events, and that is what we are doing. We are promoting check, clean, dry, but if you are going—

James Gray

Let’s focus on what you can police. Quite plainly, you cannot police me in my private pond, but, in your major events that you run and other things, do you ensure that all canoeists wash down on entering the water as well as on leaving?

Richard Atkinson

At events, yes. That is basically what we try to do.

James Gray

You police that?

Richard Atkinson

We haven’t covered all the events. We are still in our infancy with looking at performance and competitive events. It will take time to get the message through to paddlers.

James Gray

You have quite a large number of people taking part in the Devizes to Westminster race, for example, or things of that kind—in my constituency.

Richard Atkinson

Yes.

James Gray

In order to do that, you are going to need a very significant wash-down facility.

Richard Atkinson

Yes.

James Gray

Who pays for that?

Kate Hills

Can I come in? A lot of people are talking about biosecurity. I do not think a lot of people know what it means. The public has just got used to the term “biodiversity” and now we have introduced this rather dull new subject. It is being talked about. It is not being done properly. For events and asset protection, the onus has to come back to the landowner. Water companies are looking at a range of biosecurity measures, and that does include wash-down facilities. This year South West Water is aiming to build the first pre-wash-down facility, and other companies will no doubt follow, but it is a bit like reinventing the wheel. No one has actually done that in Britain yet. I have no template or guidance to follow. New Zealand is the world leader in this, and I have argued with my line manager that I should be going to New Zealand for site visits.

James Gray

I would like to come and join you on that.

Kate Hills

There is nothing like face to face. You need to be there. They are not having it, so it is a really hard process. Again, it is back to the water companies talking to each other. We have a coalition through—

James Gray

It is not about talking, though, is it?

Kate Hills

It is sharing best practice.

James Gray

South West Water has more beaches than anybody else, and a significant part of the higher-than-average water charge that you make in South West comes about through your responsibility to clean up the sewage from the beaches. Now, to a very significant degree, that has occurred along sea outlets and all that stuff. The same, surely, will apply here: if it is the water companies who have the responsibility to provide the wash-down facilities to a very large number of sites where there will be canoeing. You are talking about a very large amount of money, and it is going to be the water customers who will end up paying for it.

Kate Hills

It will, and because of the impact on operations and the regulations, it is something that will have to be done. I forgot your question, sorry.

James Gray

We are talking about who pays for wash-down facilities. If it is the water companies, will they actually do it, and will Ofwat take account of the cost in setting the price for the next internal review?

Kate Hills

We do have to do it. It is working out how to do it. How many boats or fishing people do you get to an event? How much water do you need to wash that down? Have all the sites got hot water? What do you do with that contaminated water? How big a sump do you need to collect that? You can filter out the big bits, but how do you treat the little bits and the rest of it? Then, what do you do with the rest of that water? It is a huge thing. We need to talk about it and we need to learn. It will come in. Biosecurity is always about reducing risk, so it is prioritising our key sites, the key species and the key events, which are the big events, and it is a huge learning curve.

James Gray

We are not focusing down really. You came close to focusing down a moment ago. Given that there are very large numbers of sites where we have canoeing and fishing events on boats, and given that we have now heard that we do in fact wash down both on entering the water and leaving it, apparently—

Kate Hills

We will.

James Gray

I was surprised to hear that. Also, given that this is an enormously complicated thing to do, as you described, with sumps, hot water availability and all that stuff, you are talking tens of millions of pounds across Britain to do this, aren’t you? It is going to be an enormous operation.

Kate Hills

Potentially, yes, but the investment now is enormous. Thames Water spent £1 million alone on controlling mussels and may never get rid of them, so the investment there—

James Gray

Yes, hang on, we are not talking about controlling mussels; we are talking about the wash-down facilities and who is going to pay for that. You seem to accept that it should be the water companies that pay for it. Isn’t there an argument that they will say it should be the Government, local government or the users? Are you accepting that South West Water will pay for the wash-down facilities in the very many canoe sites across the south-west?

Kate Hills

As the landowners, I think it is our responsibility. If the Government would like to support that, fantastic, but we rely totally on the stakeholders and the recreational users to support the facilities we put in and check, clean, dry. We do have problems with canoeists and anglers because we have multiple points and sites. They may not necessarily use the facilities before they go on and after, and that is something we have to work with—awareness and responsibility for check, clean, dry.

Chair

We are going to move on. Thank you.

Ruth Jones

We have heard a lot about the check, clean, dry campaign already. In terms of your particular areas, do you think the Government have done enough to support and raise the profile of this particular campaign? If yes, then that is great. What have they done in your area? If no, what do you think they should be doing in your area? Perhaps I will start with Mr Atkinson.

Richard Atkinson

It is a difficult question, really. I am part of the DEFRA boating pathway action plan group. We seem to be working quite well together identifying the pathways. Hopefully, we are going to identify how we are going to stop movement of invasives from abroad. I cannot add much more to that, I am afraid.

Ruth Jones

In terms of the actual check, clean, dry campaign itself?

Richard Atkinson

I would say it is well promoted. We certainly promote it extensively within British Canoeing.

Ruth Jones

It is interesting, because, obviously, one of our previous witnesses has interviewed some of the canoeists, and they found that only 20% of the recreational canoeists knew about the campaign, so I just wonder how you are working with the Government to raise awareness.

Richard Atkinson

It depends which recreational paddlers you have talked to. We do not cover all paddlers in the UK. There are 1.9 million paddlers. Of those, nearly 500,000 go out once a week. Our membership is 38,000 individual members, and we have 400 affiliated clubs with that, so it is still covering only a small percentage of total numbers of paddlers within England and Wales. We are making efforts to increase membership, to get information out there on our website to people that are not necessarily members of British Canoeing.

Ruth Jones

My question is probably more about how the Government are supporting and helping to raise the profile, but I hear what you say. I will move on to Ms Hills.

Kate Hills

The GB secretariat is doing a great job promoting check, clean, dry, but they are under-resourced. They need more resources to do it bigger and better. There is a coalition of eight water companies funding biosecurity and check, clean, dry. We have revamped the materials, and we are trying to make it more active and pertinent to target groups. We know from the secretariat research that understanding of invasives and check, clean, dry has gone down in the wider audience but has increased with target audiences, like anglers. RAPID LIFE under APHA has a biosecurity accreditation scheme. It has been trialled in the south-west, which is really exciting. I think that needs to go wider afterwards. We need someone to pick up the mantle, fund that and be the inspectorate for that. Biosecurity is dull, so in Devon we have carved a 6-foot crayfish waving its claws and saying, “Hey, remember us? Biosecurity is about keeping us in and keeping us out.” You have to try and make it fun and interactive and to get the water users engaged. The water company coalition is important in delivering this, and that regional approach is important, so more can be done by all of us.

Ruth Jones

Thank you. Dr Smith?

Dr Smith

From our point of view, we have been monitoring the awareness in anglers. Since check, clean, dry launched, the number of anglers who are considered low risk—so, cleaning and drying their equipment—has doubled from 21% to 47% in the survey last year. It is showing that that message is getting out there, but, as was previously said, it is not always completely attached to the check, clean, dry. So using that as a sole predictor, I think, can be an issue, and actually asking people if they have heard of invasive species and about what they are doing—their behaviour changes—is a better way to measure that. With the limited resources people have had so far, the message is getting through, but I think the marketing ban hasn’t been very helpful. That means that they are quite restricted sometimes in getting leaflets and signs out there. We have had great support from the water companies. That has meant there is more money available to try to get it out there, and that has been a great help. There are now signs at ports as well for anglers—it is just that visual reminder. There are signs at fisheries and all that kind of work. There is a lot of stuff going on, but that is only with the small amount of money that people have had so far. In order to target the general public and other recreational users—we are only talking about anglers and boaters here, and there are so many other groups—there is definitely a lot more money that is needed to spread the word a lot more.

Ruth Jones

Thank you. Mr Brewin, do you have anything to add?

Phil Brewin

Yes, thank you. Obviously, as an industry, we are very supportive and well aware of the campaign. What I would like to add is that, in our experience, there are many other pathways to invasive species introduction. Most of ours appear to be associated with releases from ponds or aquariums, and most of the species have been present in the environment for many decades. We are adopting a risk-based approach to identifying those that are emerging—very high-risk species like floating pennywort and water primrose—and trying to target those through our operations.

Ruth Jones

Thank you. Back to the check, clean, dry campaign, and to Dr Smith and Mr Atkinson, what specific challenges do you face in raising awareness? You have already alluded to some, but are there any specific things?

Dr Smith

It is, again, funding and resources. There is only so much we can do. We try as much as we can to utilise the people that we have already to try to spread the word. It is just getting out to the people who do not know; it is trying to reach them. So it is about more resources and funding going into that, and different mechanisms. If you think of TV programmes or a thing like that, you can get the message out there. So it is just different approaches to what we have already. I think that is a big challenge. Once you actually start talking to people, and I have had conversations with a number of anglers about invasive species, they are really knowledgeable and they care a lot about their environment. As soon as you start having those conversations and it clicks, “Oh, that species. That is invasive. Oh, it affects me this way,” they become the promoters themselves in telling their friends. I think it is one of the things where, if you just have a little bulk funding to try to get the word out there, it will spiral. If you think of plastics and the changes that has had, for example, I think there is a real potential that they could have that behaviour change, so yes.

Kate Hills

Could I add that it is about making it evidence-based? You need the research behind it to say what the implications are and why it is going to affect that target user group, and to make it relevant to them and easy for them to do. South West Water and the Environment Agency are funding a PhD on biosecurity measures with Leeds University. We want to present people with information that shows how we are helping them to protect their own environment and making it fun.

Ruth Jones

Thank you. Mr Atkinson?

Richard Atkinson

As I said, we rely on our volunteers a lot to disseminate the information we give them. We have been training quite a few of them up to go out into the wilderness and preach check, clean, dry, biosecurity and so on. We have been working in partnership with the Wildlife Trust to deliver that training, and that has been very effective in the past in getting it out to the wider paddling community. I am trying to think of something else.

Chair

We will leave it there. Some final questions from Caroline.

Caroline Lucas

I want to talk about water transfers. My first question may be for Kate Hills, if that is okay. We have heard that there will obviously be a greater need for water transfers in the future, but where do you think the balance lies between allowing those transfers to take place and limiting the spread of invasive species?

Kate Hills

All raw water transfers are regulated by the Environment Agency. It has strict guidelines to work within and compliance activities to take with it. This is a new area that all water companies are going to look into in the next management plan. We are doing some very detailed risk assessments about the problems and the potential solutions that could be put in. I am not aware of the problems at the moment or of the solutions. We do not do huge amounts of raw water transfers in the south-west, but for the south-east, where they will have water shortages—due to the higher population and climate change elements—more work is needed there. It is very challenging and very exciting.

Caroline Lucas

Dr Smith, do you want to add anything on that?

Dr Smith

This is in relation to—

Caroline Lucas

To water transfers and the balance between the need to make transfers, on the one hand, but the risks of spreading invasive species at the same time, and the costs of trying to avoid the latter.

Dr Smith

Yes. I recognise it is a big challenge that water companies have to try to make sure that we have resilient systems going forward with climate change and increased drought in certain areas. However, it is highly complex. We have the issue of invasive species being moved, but also the issue of water quality and understanding, if you are moving water from one section to the other, what potential impacts that could have. It is a big challenge. There should be a risk-based approach, and more research needs to be undertaken in the area before we can fully understand what the consequences could be. That is my input there.

Kate Hills

Would you like me to expand on what we are looking at in the raw water transfer risk assessment?

Caroline Lucas

Yes, thank you.

Kate Hills

We are looking at the connections, the locations and the habitats they are going through—if they are designated—the frequency and length of the transfers. Are there natural barriers? Are there screens we can put in? We are looking at how we treat and store that water, existing and new connections, and how we discharge the water. Wessex Water has come up with a very clever matrix that is looking at the plants that could be spread by it—pieces of plant or plant fragment, or riparian species, as well as species that attach to eggs or fish, for example, and then the free-floating things. We have complicated matrices on how to look at that. Yorkshire Water is funding a PhD post with Leeds University on the risks and the potential mitigation measures for that. At this moment, it is an investigatory approach. It is difficult to give more concrete answers.

Caroline Lucas

Am I right that, at the moment, untreated water transfers are permitted, but we might be looking at something in the future that suggests that it is only treated?

Kate Hills

Yes. They are regulated by Environment Agency, and that can be within a catchment, between catchments or within a region, but the big issue, I understand, is when it is across regions, which will be helping to support the south-east with their water needs. From my early understanding at this stage, it is looking like they might transfer treated water rather than raw water.

Caroline Lucas

I appreciate that we are at the early stages of research into this, but, from what you have said already, it sounds like it could be an extremely costly process to make sure that we are not—

Kate Hills

Potentially, yes.

Caroline Lucas

Does anyone else on the panel want to add anything on that?

Phil Brewin

If I may, I might just add that the low-lying areas that drainage boards operate in are characterised by a very dense network of watercourses. Water is moved through those systems and needs to be for the purpose of flood risk management, but also for providing water to environmentally protected areas, like SSSIs. We are encouraged to have that connectivity within the system for certain species like eels, which need to be able to bypass structures and access wetland areas. It may not be that feasible to control invasive species at the point of transfer. It is much more practical to try to prevent them infesting the watercourse in the first place. While there are emerging technologies regarding fine mesh screens which can—as has just been mentioned—prevent the transfer of invasive species from one watercourse to another, or even from one catchment to another, those sorts of measures do need to be practical, effective and also affordable.

Caroline Lucas

Do you think enough is being done by the Government or indeed by the Environment Agency or anyone else on this? I must say I am slightly surprised that the research and the proposals for how we deal with this aren’t further advanced, because we know that climate change is accelerating at an alarming rate and, therefore, the need for these water transfers is only going to get greater and faster. The idea that we are somehow going to have sorted out all of these invasive species, so that the water that we are transferring is clean enough in the first place, seems to be a bit of an heroic assumption. It seems to me, at least, that it probably takes longer to get rid of those invasive species that are in our current supplies. We are not going to have time to do all of that before the very pressing need for making water transfers will be very real.

Kate Hills

I think awareness is increasing. I do not think funding is increasing enough to match that and deliver it.

Caroline Lucas

Just to be clear, will that be funding to the Environment Agency specifically or to the water companies, or both?

Kate Hills

All stakeholders and water users, yes. On the raw water transfer front, less water can be transferred if we use our water more wisely, so there is an onus on water companies to stop leakages, but also an onus back on the public to use their water carefully, reduce their consumption and be kind to their loos—put less down it, so we have less treatment of it.

Caroline Lucas

Mr Atkinson, do you want to add anything on the subject?

Richard Atkinson

Obviously, canoeists want clean water and plenty of it. Obviously, with climate change and water transfers, we do need to make sure our rivers are able to be paddled in in the future and that the water quality is going to be okay as well.

Chair

Can I just come back to Mr Brewin? Obviously, you have over 400 SSSIs under your control. How many of them are in good condition?

Phil Brewin

In 2010 we were encouraged and funded to get them into recovering condition. We did very close to the 95% target, and I think we are still quite close to that. Favourable condition itself is a little bit more complicated than just the water. It also includes land management as well. I am not entirely sure, but currently we have not quite reached the 50% target that we were set for 2020. Largely, again, funding is the reason why more effort is not being put in to achieve that target.

Chair

You have a 50% target of “good” by 2020. What are you at now?

Phil Brewin

I am not entirely sure. It is somewhere around 40%, I believe.

Chair

Could you write to us with that number, please?

Phil Brewin

Yes, sure. I can give you the details.

Chair

When you say you need more funding, where do you think that funding should come from? You were funded by DEFRA in 2010, is that right?

Phil Brewin

Yes, for capital works.

Chair

How much did you get in 2010?

Phil Brewin

Within Somerset, the drainage board spent about £8 million on improving infrastructure and developing water level management plans, which certainly improved the conditions within the sites and brought many of them into recovering condition.

Chair

Was that all Government money?

Phil Brewin

Yes, largely, and also local money. If I may, there is the potential here to unlock the capacity of landowners themselves and farmers. We should really be looking at the new environmental land management scheme. There is an opportunity to fund farmers for tackling things like invasive species and helping us not only achieve favourable condition but sustain it in the long term in the face of pressures like climate change.

Chair

If indeed such a land management scheme ever happens.

Phil Brewin

Well, this is true, but there will be some sort of scheme, I am sure. We need to look at those opportunities.

Chair

We are all still waiting. Ms Hills, we woke up this morning to the news that Southern Water has been fined £128 million for systematically and fraudulently misreporting what was going on in its sewage treatment works. This is the company, I believe, that miscalculated the levels of the Ardingly reservoir back in 2013. Do you not think there is a problem when water companies are putting people’s bills up by RPI each year and this type of systematic problem is being uncovered by the regulator?

Kate Hills

Yes, it is a problem, and it comes from both sides. Water companies can do better and need to, and the increasing fines will be an incentive to do so, but the water users need to improve their approach to water and wise water use as well.

Chair

Do you feel disappointed that it is undermining all the good work that you are doing, to be let down by one bad egg of a water company?

Kate Hills

It is not good for the industry, but the industry as a whole is trying really hard, I think, particularly on the invasives front.

Chair

You didn’t mention Southern Water when you were talking about the leading companies tackling this. You mentioned Yorkshire and some others in the east. What have Southern done?

Kate Hills

They are contributing to the secretariat coalition for check, clean, dry.

Chair

How much are they contributing?

Kate Hills

I do not know, as it is worked out on a scale according to size of company, but eight companies are putting in £150,000 each year for three years. I do not know what they are putting in, and I do not know what they are doing on the ground.

Chair

Okay. Great. Thank you very much indeed. That ends the first panel. Examination of witnesses Dr Kevin Austin, Dr Richard Shaw, Sara Redstone and Dr Anna Brown.

Chair

I would like to call our second panel to order and welcome our witnesses today. We would like to follow on from some of the very interesting conversations that we have just had. Can I ask the panel to introduce themselves, starting from my left with Dr Austin?

Dr Austin

I am Dr Kevin Austin, deputy director for agriculture, fisheries and natural environment at the Environment Agency.

Sara Redstone

I am Sara Redstone. I am the plant health and quarantine officer for the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.

Dr Shaw

I am Dr Dick Shaw. I work for CABI, an intergovernmental organisation working for 49 member countries. I am the director of the research centre in Egham, and I also look after CABI’s invasive species activities in Europe and the Americas.

Dr Brown

I am Anna Brown. I am head of tree health and contingency. Can I just apologise for the glasses? I get light-induced migraines, so it is probably better for everybody if I wear them.

Chair

Fantastic. Thank you very much for coming. As a fellow migraine sufferer, you have my deepest sympathies. If I can kick off, we have heard a lot about collaboration between governing bodies. I want to start with the Environment Agency because it seems like you have a key role to play here, and we have had lots of criticisms of your approach to non-native species. You heard the drainage board issue. We heard the issue around funding. Where do you sit in the middle of the invasive species web?

Dr Austin

We do not actually have specific duties in relation to invasive species, but what we do have are other duties where managing invasive species is a key part of our role—for example, protecting our flood assets, in particular, around the navigation, which we obviously—

Chair

Can you speak up a bit? It is quite hard to hear you.

Dr Austin

I apologise. We have duties particularly in relation to protecting our flood assets and ensuring open navigation and, of course, our wider duty to the water environment around framework directive obligations. We spend in the region of £2 million a year on managing invasive species. We are also contributing to the DEFRA invasive species eradication programme. We have around four species, in particular, that we are targeting there at the moment. We have a key role particularly in terms of the aquatic invasive species. There has obviously been a lot of focus on that in today’s session so far. There is obviously a significant terrestrial environment where we do not particularly have a key role, but where we have, for example, riparian species like Japanese knotweed and Himalayan balsam, we are also responsible for managing disposal of material and ensuring that we do that following the law. We are also responsible for regulating the waste cycle and those who are abiding by the waste cycle, and water companies, of course.

Chair

We had evidence from the Upper Calder catchment area that some of the terrible flooding that they have suffered in successive years since 2010 has been made worse by the Himalayan balsam invasions. There was very strong criticism that those invasive species had not been removed by anybody. You are responsible for them, but it is the landowner’s responsibility to get rid of them. Would it be useful to you if you were responsible for eradication? If you had responsibility and powers, what would change?

Dr Austin

We need to recognise that when you are talking about established riparian species like Himalayan balsam and Japanese knotweed, the extent and coverage of those species, and probably the current ecological impossibility of eradication, would make that an exceptionally expensive piece of work. It is all very well having the powers and duties, Chair, but the funding that would be necessary to put that forward would be probably beyond the public good.

Chair

It is a cost-benefit analysis, isn’t it, if you look at the insurance costs of flooding an entire village and the millions of pounds that go back into repairing people’s homes?

Dr Austin

In terms of the specific example you talked about, I am not aware of the cause and effect in terms of the flooding in that particular area. We have recently had, obviously, quite significant rainfall in Wainfleet that led to dramatic flooding, but those kinds of exceptional events, which we are going to see more of with climate change, will lead inevitably to flooding in some areas. I do not know whether Himalayan balsam specifically was the cause in that area, and I would have to come back to you with an answer in relation to that.

Chair

In answer to my question, would it be useful? I cannot see who is responsible. Everyone is talking, but I cannot see who is responsible for enforcement action, and that is where we are grasping at the air. Would it be useful for you to be responsible for it, as you are for regulating lots of other areas of the environment?

Dr Austin

Responsibility is fine as long as it comes with funding. It is for Government to decide how to allocate the funding and how to allocate that responsibility. It is our responsibility, I suppose, to identify how we use the funding we do receive to deliver against the powers and responsibilities we have and ensure the best operational use of that funding.

Chair

We have had the British Ecological Society saying that all actions are hindered by lack of funding and clear lines of responsibility. Nobody is accountable. Therefore, nobody is answerable. Therefore, nothing happens. The IDB thought you were responsible for their own ditch.

Dr Austin

In relation to the IDB, as I said, we have responsibility and powers over the waste and water sector. Now, I would have to check, but I do not personally think we could force the IDB to do that work. What we do have are powers under a 2015 amendment to the Wildlife and Countryside Act to go in and put in place orders to eradicate species where we think there is a particular problem, but, of course, that does not give us the power to force the landowners to pay for it, so it would require additional funding to take action. There are some powers—

Chair

Could you sue them? Is there a civil action that you could take if the landowner did not clear out those—

Dr Austin

You could exert powers on the landowners if you could prove that the landowners were responsible for the arrival of those species there. Now, that is obviously incredibly difficult.

Chair

Okay. That is interesting. I am just going to finish my line of questioning, if I may. Can I move on to Ms Redstone from Kew? If Zac Goldsmith was here, he would say—I am going to ask his question for him—that you discovered the oak processionary moth way back when, several years ago, and went to Government and asked for a very small amount of money to eradicate it. That money was not forthcoming, and now the oak processionary moth is rampant throughout the whole of the south-east of England. Is that an accurate reflection?

Sara Redstone

I would say that we certainly made stakeholders and Government aware of the issue, but the person who discovered the outbreak initially was an environmental health officer from Richmond. He was the person who made us aware. He was the person who encouraged us to check our collections to see whether the pest had spread into the Gardens. It was at that point, in September or October 2006, when we decided that, as we had found three nests, we needed to take action and make sure that our neighbours were aware of the problem, and we developed a co-ordinated strategic approach to try to tackle it.

Chair

You tackled it on your site, but there was not a co-ordinated approach?

Sara Redstone

Part of the challenge at that point was that the oak processionary moth was not recognised as a statutory pest. It was not a notifiable organism, and therefore neither the Animal and Plant Health Agency nor the Forestry Commission could issue statutory notices to require landowners to take action.

Chair

Is it recognised now?

Sara Redstone

Yes.

Chair

There is a regulatory lag.

Sara Redstone

Yes, and I think that is one of the challenges not just for organisms that we know are likely to be an issue for the UK, but also for organisms that we do not yet know of. It is one of those challenges with a system that is very list-based. Our legislation is based on tackling organisms of which we are aware, where either through our own experiences or the experiences of other countries we know there is likely to be a significant economic or environmental impact.

Chair

It is the unknown unknowns that we need to be looking for?

Sara Redstone

Unfortunately, yes.

Chair

What about the fact that the fungi are not classed as non-native invasive species? Does that cause you a problem in the plant world?

Sara Redstone

I am not aware that that is necessarily the case. Certainly Kew, as you know, is a global resource, and one of our key areas of research is fungal taxonomy and biology. We hold scientific licences to enable us to import fungi from around the world, some of them pathogenic but some not. Many of the ones we are interested in are what we call mycorrhizal fungi—fungi that have an association with plants, and at the moment we are particularly interested in mycorrhizae associated with forest trees in different parts of the world. I am not clear why people think that fungi are not controlled. Certainly, if you look at the importer’s guide for plant health, you will see that fungi are listed as a plant. It is something that my students find very amusing. Fungi and algae are definitely included in the user’s version of the legislation.

Chair

Our understanding of the Great Britain invasive non-native species strategy is that it does not cover ash dieback, sudden oak death or chytrid fungus in and of themselves. Dr Brown, can you enlighten us?

Dr Brown

There are two separate parts that you are looking at. If you are looking at the EU level, you have the invasive alien species legislation, and then you have the plant health legislation. They sit within different directorates within the EU, and as the legislation comes down into the UK, we end up with separate bits of legislation. There is legislation, obviously, for fungi and pathogens. I am a plant pathologist by training, and it is my background. They are covered; they are just covered under that legislation, as are the tree pests and the other plant pests that we get. By “pests” I mean insect pests. They are caught up under that legislation.

Chair

There are two separate laws, one governing plants and one governing animals?

Dr Brown

You have alien invasive species. That is one piece of legislation. Then you have plant health legislation. Then you have animal health legislation. Do not ask me about animal health legislation, though.

Chair

Is that a weakness?

Dr Brown

I do not think so, necessarily. At a UK level, because we have the 25-year environment plan, and we have that overarching umbrella under which the different strategies sit, it allows us in some ways a little bit of flexibility as well. If you look at the plant health world, that has a biosecurity strategy that we are looking at updating next year. We also have our tree health resilience strategy. It allows us, and my DEFRA colleagues as well, to target and shape our strategies for that industry and for that audience to make sure that we are getting the best out of it and getting into that detail. I can see where it looks a bit weird from the outside, but there are some advantages to that.

Chair

Mr Shaw, or Dr Shaw—sorry, we have all the doctors here today—what do you think about the different legislation? Is it adequate in terms of lines of responsibility?

Dr Shaw

I think that as long as they are captured by one, and it is not passing the hot potato between two different Departments, then it is okay. Many other countries have the same issues with the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Environment arguing about who is responsible for whichever new pest. Plant health regulations are very clear. The invasive species regulation in Europe is supposedly separate to plant health, but recently the EU has done a risk assessment on the box tree moth caterpillar, which is clearly a plant health issue. It is a very strange greying of the lines, in my opinion.

Chair

I have reported box tree moth into the Kew reporting portal. There are a lot of places around by me where I see it. I just wanted to get my volunteer badge. I would like my Blue Peter badge for that.

Sara Redstone

Thank you very much.

Chair

To come back to Dr Austin, is this not a problem? You are relying on the knowledge of volunteers to report in and do the right thing. It does not seem that we have the resources to create this mass eradication programme or this biosecurity programme when a new species or problem is identified.

Dr Austin

I absolutely would not want to understate the importance of surveillance by the general public—they could be canoeists, fishermen or just general walkers—but that is not the only surveillance that we do. We have our own staff out on the watercourses. If we know we have had a problem with an invasion of floating pennywort in the previous season, we will be out there doing ongoing surveillance to see if it is coming back. We also do additional scientific research. We are currently working with the University of Brighton to see how we can use remote sensing to identify the reflectance of particular species, particularly with Crassula helmsii, the swamp stonecrop, to see if we can identify where these things are. There are other mechanisms. We are not just reliant on the general public from a surveillance perspective. Environmental DNA is another thing that we have put quite a lot of work into, funding research, and that takes the opportunity to do short amounts of samples and identify what invasive species are in those water bodies too. There are quite a lot of other measures. It is not just the general public.

Chair

Your staff, we heard last year, were very busy with the heatwave and doing fish rescues, which is one of the reasons why they were not doing the spot checks on the waste exporters. You say you have staff doing it. How many dedicated staff are there in the Environment Agency for this?