This document is an output from the Devon and Cornwall Soils Alliance, delivered by Westcountry Rivers Trust.
Flood risk is a major issue for numerous communities across the Southwest and with the expected future impacts of climate change, as well as compounding factors such as population growth and development, it is a problem that is becoming all the more urgent. A number of projects are currently underway to understand the causes of flooding and investigate potential solutions. This includes the Upstream Thinking - Rapid Response Catchments project and Devon and CornwallSoils Alliance (more info on page 6).
A mapping exercise was carried out to identify all the micro-catchments (5km2 or 10km2)above flood-risk properties in Devon and Cornwall. The idea being that Natural Flood Management (NFM) measures and engagement with the local community weremost likely to be effective at this scale. These micro-catchments were then prioritised according to a number of factors. The catchment described in this report, the Beer Stream, is one of those prioritised micro-catchments.
The micro-catchment for the Beer Stream is 360 ha and highlights 67 properties potentially at risk fromfluvial and surface water flooding, many of these are in Beer. There are multiple possible contributing causes of this, including the topography, land use, and scarcity of habitats such as woodland.
A rapid walkover survey was carried out by an experienced surveyor from the Westcountry Rivers Trust (WRT) to further inform potential issues and opportunities for flood riskmitigation. During the walkover, the Beer Stream micro-catchment did display localised flood risk. There is some opportunity to effect localised flood improvement and the ability to mitigate part of a larger flood risk downstream (less localised) should not be discounted.
Implementation of Natural Flood Management (NFM) measures may have the potential to mitigate some of the flood risk and simultaneously make progress towards improved water quality that would ultimately benefit the local community. The NFM opportunities identified in this report include soils improvement through compaction mitigation and changes in land use, use of existing woodland for temporary storage, measures to slow surface water flow into watercourses, use of historic quarry sites for temporary water storage and enhance habitat networks.
Consistent messaging is required here and in neighbouring catchments to make sure residents maintain constant vigilance on the existing and proposed infrastructure (green and grey) to make sureit is operating at full capacity and ready for the next extreme weather event.
This documentisa study for causesof flooding,priorityconsiderations,and opportunitiesforNFMin the micro-catchmentforthe BeerStream, covering some of the Beerurban area in EastDevon.
The study is builton multiple layersof mapped environmentalinformationand the results of the walkoversurvey. This informationhasbeenused to explore the current state of the catchmentand its environment, and then map areasfor further investigationand actionsto make improvements. This micro-catchment scaleassessmentwillbe usedto guide efforts incommunityengagement andNFM.
The study has 5 key chapters,based on the current status of the micro-catchmentand whatopportunitiesthere mightbe.
1. Micro-catchmentOverview
2. PriorityAreasand Drivers
• Flooding
• WaterQuality
• WaterQuantity
• Designated Sites
• Tourism and Recreation
3. Existing Natural Assetsand Their Condition
• Habitats
• Soils
• Crops
4. Issues
• Abstraction,Discharges,Pollution,and Runoff
• HydrologicalConnectivity
• Issues identified during Walkovers
5. Opportunities
• Existing Opportunities
• OpportunitiesIdentified during Walkovers
It isnot possible to map all aspectsof the status of the micro-catchmentwithexisting datasets,and the true state of the catchmentmay not be fully reflected inthe datasetsforvariousreasons including the age of the data,the resolution, and the level of local knowledge takeninto consideration when the data has beencollected and mapped.
Assessing the qualityand conditionof natural assetsin particularischallenging due to the level of detail required.Nonetheless,the availabledata has beenreviewed and the bestdata currently availablehasbeenused. A full set of referencescan be found on pages53 - 56.
OverviewFlooding isa problem thatis experienced widelyacrossDevonand Cornwall,witha large portionof caseslinked to rivers(fluvial flooding as opposed to surface wateror sea).Riverwaterqualityisalso a key issue in the region,withall 381assessed rivers failing to achieve “good” statusin 2019.One importantreasonfor waterqualityfailure islinked to soil erosion.Soil erosioncan also contribute to increased fluvial flood riskdue to reduced channel capacitiesand blockages.Therefore,waterqualityand floodriskdriversare often interlinked and the solutionsto alleviate these pressures are often multifunctional.Two projectscurrentlyunderwayare aiming to tackle these issues by working withlocal communitiesto deliver small-scale,land-basedmeasures(“nature-basedsolutions”).These projectsare Devonand Cornwall SoilsAlliance (DCSA) and Upstream Thinking Rapid Response Catchments(UST-RRC).
Afteritwas found that over 40%of soilsacrossDevonand Cornwall are degraded,the collaborativeprojectof the DCSA waslaunched inJune 2019. This aimsto build the capacityand capabilityinsoilsadvice forthe projectpartnersacrossthe 2 counties to work towards restoring degraded soils. One significantbenefitof improving soil healthisgreatersurface waterinfiltrationinto the ground before itreachesand overwhelmswatercourses, thereby reducing flood riskand preventing potential pollutantsfrom entering the water.Thisalso has the potential to make considerable Water FrameworkDirective (WFD) improvementsto waterquality.
AcrossDevonand Cornwall there are hundreds of Rapid Response Catchmentsthat are characterised byquicklydraining catchmentareasunder 10km2 (and under 5km2), where during high rainfall eventssurface flowsand overland run off overwhelm small communities(1-50propertiesin flood zone 1).Flood eventshave increased inthese types of catchmentdue to degraded soilsthatno longerhave the infiltrationcapacity,simplified drainage patternsand more variable and extreme weatherpatternsassociated witha changing climate.UST-RRCwill focusonworking withsmall communitiesinthese rapid response catchments to help them develop and delivertheirownclimate resilience plansbyrestoring some of the hydrological functionalitywithinthe landscape.
The DCSA isworking in partnership with the UST-RRCprojectacrossDevonto develop 24preparatoryinvestigationsonprioritised microcatchmentsto identifylikelyareasfornature-based solutionsand NFM (Natural Flood Management) interventionswhere land ownership showsa willingnessand waterqualitycanbe improved.Communityengagementwill be criticalwhenimplementing NFMasmeasures need to be numerous and spread out across the catchmentto provide the greatestbenefits.If propertyowners and landownerscan work togetherand share perspectives, then measures canbe designed thatare agreeable to all stakeholdersinvolved.Thisalso helpsto fostera sense of community stewardship overtheir catchmentand NFM measuresthat would enhance theirlongevityand resilience.
There may be opportunitieseverywhere forNFM measures and other nature-based solutionsatlow cost that also bring additional benefits to human health,biodiversity,and the aestheticsof the landscape. However,the scattered and fragmented locationsof propertiesat flood riskand the limited accessible fundsrequiresidentifying only the largestclustersof flood riskpropertieswiththe smallestupstream micro-catchmentsto deliverthe mostimpactwiththe resources available.
The processof identifying priorityareasforopportunitiesto deliver improved waterqualityand quantityforclimate change resilience wasundertaken in four steps.
1. The Southwestareasof Devonand Cornwall were modelled using GIS (Geographic InformationSystems) to identifywhere opportunityareaswere located.
2. The modelled opportunityareaswere ground-truthed in theory using desk-based studies
3. The top prioritised opportunityareaswhere ground-truthed physicallyusing rapid walkoversurveys
4. Internal evidence reviews,external evidence reviews,and 2pagers summary documentswill be writtenfor24 trial investigationareas where physical interventionscan take place.
For more informationonthe first 3steps please see the appendix.
The final 24micro-catchments,including BeerStream whichisshown in red.
Themicro-catchment was selectedin theGISmodelling step becauseit contains alarge numberof properties that are potentially at flood riskin Beer.
The map below showswhichbuildingsoverlap withthe EA’s modelled “Flood Zone 2” area,specificallyareasatriskof flooding from rivers,as identified during the micro-catchmentmapping process.
There are 47buildingspotentiallyatriskout of 424 in the catchment, approximately11.08%of them.Most of the propertiesinthe catchmentsare residential.
The catchment’ssize of 3.61km2 givesanarea of 0.08km2 perbuilding atrisk.
The catchmentiscoastal and wasnot assessed inCycle 2of the Water FrameworkDirective (WFD),butthe status in the adjacentwaterbody catchment,the Branscombe Stream,isModerate.
If property ownersare willing to workwithlandownersand vice versa, then small-scale NFMmeasuresupstream in the catchmenthave the potential to benefita large numberof propertiesand improve water quality.
The only river present in the micro-catchment is the Beer Stream that begins near the center of the catchment, adjacent to Bovey Lane, and flows southeast through the Beer urban area and to the sea just after the catchment outlet. There are no other streams present, inferring that flood risk may be arising from surface water. The total river length present in the catchment is 1.16km.
The map on the right shows the steepness of slopes. The higher areas of the catchment to the north, west, and south are relatively flatter compared to the center and east. Three relatively steep-sided valleys run horizontally across the catchment into Beer with the roads Bovey Lane, Quarry Lane, and Park Road running along their bottoms. The Beer quarry in the center accounts for the steepest slopes. It is possible the steep slopes with flat bottoms on either side of the northern valley are also former quarry land.
The way the land is used has significant impacts on flood management. Land use has been mapped here using the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology’s (CEH) Land Cover Map 2019. This is a model derived from satellite imagery at 25m resolution.
The land use here is primarily arable and horticulture, accounting for 54% of the catchment, followed by the urban area of Beer village which covers 16%. The grassland is mostly comprised of calcareous grassland on the valley slops closer to Beer with some patches of improved and neutral grassland. The woodlands in the catchment are all broadleaved woodland falling mainly on the upper and middle valley slopes.
It should be noted that this land cover map model is not a perfect representation of land use. The model simplifies UK land cover into very broad classes and as such it has no classification for quarries and mining sites.
Land use observed during the catchment walkover mostly matched the land use mapped here using the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology’s (CEH) Land Cover Map 2019 above.
Land use here is more grassland than arable, though there is a fair bit of arable grown in rotation as part of the main holding's organic rotation. This means the arable is shorter lived within the rotation than the improved grassland, therefore the proportion will change over time.
There is no mention on the Land Use map regarding the rearing of outdoor pigs which are located on the eastern edge of this catchment. Historically pigs were more prevalent but have mostly been moved to catchment 696 (see report).
Some of the Land Use that is labelled arable is actually permanent pasture and there is a greater amount of calcareous grassland than indicated, but it isn't always treated the same.
There is also a significant amount of equine ground on this side of Beer (and 696) where the horses are kept in paddocks for prolonged periods and there was significant compaction found.
Photo taken on western edge of the catchment looking East over Beer village.
Flooding hasthe potential to negativelyaffectpeople and communities. Byconsidering boththe vulnerabilityof communitiesand the opportunitiesforland managementinterventions,actionscanbe targeted to have a positive impactoncommunitiesmostatrisk.
Flooding isone of a number of natural hazardswhichcan cause harm to people,the environmentand the economy.The primarydriverfor targeting thiscatchment isflooding.However,there are otherpriorityareasand driverswhich will be affected byNFMand candetermine the mostappropriate type of NFM forthe catchment. These are mapped inthe following pages.
Sunken 'Devon' lanes are prevalent in this catchment and act as conduits to the flow of water down into the village centre below.
The Neighbourhood Flood Vulnerability Index (NFVI) characterises vulnerability as communities likely to experience losses in wellbeing during flood events. This is based on their susceptibility, preparedness, responsiveness, and ability to recover, all without significant support from emergency services.
Roughly all of Beer’s buildings in the catchment are classed as “Relatively Low” in the Neighbourhood Flood Vulnerability Index (NFVI), meaning they are slightly less vulnerable than the UK average. The buildings towards Sidmouth in the east outside of the catchment boundary are classed as “Average”.
The Social Flood Risk Index (SFRI) is a geographic measure of flood disadvantage. It identifies communities who are both exposed to flood risk by living on a flood plain and who are more vulnerable to the effects of flooding, due to factors such as health, preparedness and the availability of community support. Higher numbers of people living in a flood plain coinciding with high social vulnerability result in higher index values. The map highlights neighbourhoods identified as at riskof fluvial flooding higher than the national average. Please note that this is based on flood risk from rivers and the sea, so coastal areas may not be affected by changes in land management upstream.
Just outside the eastern boundary of the catchment is an area classed as low in the SFRI for river and coastal flooding, though this doesn’t increase in future projected scenarios of 2- and 4-degree temperature increases by the 2050’s. This is the same area identified as “Average” on the NFVI on the previous page. Within the catchment boundary is classed as ‘Exposed” but the NFVI remains below the UK mean in all scenarios.
When considering flooding, it is necessary to investigate records of previous flood events and combine this with modelled scenarios of what could happen, particularly in the face of the uncertainty of climate change affecting weather patterns.
There are no recorded flood outlines in the catchment, but this doesn’t mean it has never flooded. It is possible that previous flood waters have receded or flowed out to sea before an outline could be recorded.
There are a series of linear but unconnected natural high grounds running parallel to the Beer Watercourse from its source on Bovey Lane down to the catchment outlet on Sea Hill that act as flood defenses. All are owned by the local authority, were last inspected in May 2021, and are next due to be inspected in September 2022 or February 2023.
The EA’s modelled fluvial Flood Zone 2 dataset show areas predicted to flood from rivers in a storm event so severe it is likely to occur only once every 1000 years. There are 47 properties in Flood Zone 2 within the Beer Stream catchment. This is also known as a 0.1% Annual Exceedance Probability. Flood Zone 2 was used to identify buildings potentially at flood risk as shown previously on page 8. This covers the full length of the Beer Stream to the sea at the catchment outlet.
The EA’s Risk of Flooding from Surface Water (RoFSW) dataset shows the extent of flooding caused by rainwater flowing across the ground towards the nearest water course in a 1 in 1000-year storm event. There are 40 properties at Risk of Flooding from Surface Water within the Beer Stream Catchment. This overlaps frequently with Flood Zone 2, but also shows depressions in the ground where surface water will accumulate. This identifies the roads at the bottoms of the valleys are channels for surface water runoff that eventually feed into the Beer Stream. The runoff in the northern valley starts as far up as the farm buildings in the northwest of the catchment. Runoff in the central valley on Quarry Lane starts at the bend of the road before the quarry. Runoff in the southern valley starts before the road and path does at the tip of the valley when it begins to slope downwards.
Flooding has occurred on several occasions in the last century.
A brief history of flooding in Beer is available from the government website (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/exhibition-of-beer-s-flood-historyto-open-in-devon).
Beer has been recorded as flooding ten times since 1926 with the most recent flooding occurring in June and October 2021.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/exhibition-of-beer-s-flood-historyto-open-in-devon
To increase resilience the community have put in place:
• Neighbourhood plan outlining measures to prevent flooding (https://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/2427855/beer-submission-plan-v9feb2018ad.pdf)
There is a Beer Emergency Response Team (BERT) and Emergency Plan that outlines the riskof flooding.
Clean and plentiful water is vital for a huge variety of our activities, and for supporting healthy ecosystems. Good water quality supports an efficient water supply, healthy natural habitats and cultural ecosystem services. A plentiful water supply is important for drinking water and household use, irrigation, industrial use and for maintaining habitats. Water quality is a key underpinning for the Water Framework Directive.
There are no Water Framework Directive monitoring sites, priority wetlands, or aquatic habitats in the catchment. The entire catchment falls within the Branscombe Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) for ground water. In the mid northern region of the catchment is a Ground Water Source Protection Zone I – Inner Protection Zone surrounded by a Zone II – Outer Protection Zone which covers the northern two thirds of the area.
There is a Drinking Water Safeguard Zone for Ground Water overlapping the Zone I, identified as being at risk of failing the drinking water protection objectives due to contamination by Nitrate.
For more information on water quality go to page 26.
The amount of water available for abstraction is an indicator of how much drinking water is available for people. The catchment sits within an area not assessed for licensed water abstraction (left map) but is bordered to the east by areas where water is available for licensed abstraction
In the context of NFM, it is also necessary to consider water availability for plants and wildlife. Drought can cause vegetation to die back, leaving bare soil exposed and more vulnerable to erosion and runoff when it eventually rains. The Vegetation Health Index (VHI) uses satellite data to combine temperature and vegetation condition to characterise vegetation health. Areas are scored between 0 and 1 with lower values indicating low drought risk to plant health and higher values indicating higher risk. The catchment scores low at 0.27 on a scale of 0 to 1 on the Vegetation Health Index, meaning that vegetation is at low risk of stress from drought. North of the catchment however scores higher at 0.40, though this is still below the mean.
Designated habitat sites, from small local nature reserves all the way up to large national parks, need to be protected for the wealth of benefits they provide to people and the environment, including already providing some degree of NFM. A site being designated can be an indicator of habitat health.
The Beer Quarry and Caves Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC) is located to the East of the village of Beer. Beer Beach outside of the catchment outlet is also a SSSI and SAC, each separated into 2 by the beach and the waterline. The SSSIs are both named “Sidmouth to Beer Coast”, while the SAC beach is “Sidmouth to West Bay” and the SAC coastal water is “Lyme Bay and Torbay”.
Clean air is important for people’s health and for healthy ecosystems. Air quality is the term used to describe the levels of pollution in the air. When air quality is poor, pollutants in the air may be hazardous to people, particularly those with lung or heart conditions. In the past, the main air pollution problem was smoke and sulphur dioxide from fossil fuels such as coal. Now, the major threat to clean air is from traffic emissions. Petrol and diesel motor vehicles emit a variety of pollutants, principally carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and particulate matter (PMx).
A growing body of researchsuggested that smaller particles, in particular PM less than 2.5μm in diameter (PM2.5), is a metric for air pollution which is closely associated with the adverse health effects of poor air quality. Therefore, this section will use data relating to PM2.5 where relevant.
Improvements to the soil and surrounding environment have the potential to also deliver improvements to air quality through natural filtering processes.
The Beer urban area has the poorestair quality in the catchment at 6.85PM2.5, though this isn’t significantly higher than the rest of the catchment. The best air quality is to the southwest, measuring at 6.44PM2.5.
Areas and features important for tourism and recreation may also be at flood risk and it is necessary to protect them for a healthy society and environment.
The catchment contains several greenspaces in the urban area. There are two play spaces on the roads Underleys and Mare Lane. There is a cemetery in the centre of Beer and at the western end the urban area at the end of Park Road. The surface water flooding area starts before this cemetery and runs directly through it on the road. There is also a religious grounds greenspace surrounding St Michael’s Church on Fore Street. Lastly, there is a large playing field greenspace north of the urban area on Stovar Long Lane belonging to a local football club. Allotments are adjacent to the beach but just outside of the catchment boundary.
There are multiple PRoWs in Beer spread amongst the roads and buildings. Three PRoWs lead almost directly to Beer Beach. The Southwest Coast Path also crosses into the catchment at the outlet. One PRoW leads the entire length of Bovey Lane from the northwestern tip of the urban area nearly up to a farm in the northwest of the catchment. This follows the surface water flood risk route.
Biodiversity,the varietyof life of earth,is valuable initsown right. Italso supports recreation,food,flood protection and climateregulation. This sectionwill predominantlyexplore whathabitatsand othernatural assetsare presentin the catchmentthat will already be contributing to NFM and could be improved withfurther NFM measures.Water, soilsand crops are natural assets in themselvesand will also be investigated.
The natural assets mapped below are habitats which have the potential to support thriving plants and wildlife. Thriving vegetation is very valuable for NFM as it roughens the ground, thereby slowing down surface water flow, meaning water courses are less likely to be overwhelmed in a storm. In addition, plant roots provide structural support for the soil and prevent surface water washing soil into water courses.
Where the assets are present the landscape is likely to be contributing to the provision of habitats, biodiversity and even NFM. Where assets are absent there may be a lack of habitats which contribute to or support thriving plants and wildlife. Assets may still be present however in the form of crops and soils which are mapped in the following pages.
There are patches of woodland scattered throughout the catchment, except the urban area of Beer. These are mainly comprised of broadleaved and conifer trees. There are also areas of lowland calcareous grassland scattered throughout the catchment and a large area of good quality semi-improved grassland just south of the Beer village urban area. Most of the Beer Quarry and Caves SSSI has been classified as in Favourable condition but the inner northern section has been classified as Unfavourable. The site failed due to sub-optimal condition for bats.
It is important to determine the current condition of water quality. Poor water quality can be detrimental to people, wildlife, and may cause other negative effects during a flood event. Good water quality should always be protected. A key set of evidence used to assess the water quality in a catchment is the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The status of a waterbody is measured using a series of parameters and is recorded on the scale: high; good; moderate; poor; bad (with moderate and worse being regarded as a failure).
The Beer Stream is a coastal waterbody and was therefore not assessed in Cycle 2 of the Water Framework Directive. However, the adjacent Branscombe Stream to the west has been assessed and may provide some insight into this neighboring catchment.
The Branscombe Stream is overall classed as Moderate meaning it is failing WFD regulations. It is currently classed as Moderate for macrophytes and phytobenthos combined and Failing on chemical status but is ranked good or high for most other classes. In 2019, 100% of waterbodies in the UK failed on chemical status after the EA included monitoring “mercury and its compounds” and “Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE)” into its water quality monitoring methodology.
The Branscombe stream waterbody is classed as Moderate for macrophytes and phytonbenthos, giving it a Moderate overall ecological status, meaning it is failing the WFD regulations on ecological grounds. It is failing due to diffuse source pollution from septic tanks and poor livestock management. The waterbody is classed as Good or High for all other ecological elements including phosphate but has not been assessed for fish.
The waterbody is classed as Good for nearly all chemical classifications, except for mercury and its compounds, and PBDEs, where it is classed as Failing. The waterbody’s overall chemical status is consequently Failing and is therefore failing WFD regulations on chemical grounds as well as ecological.
There are over 60 metrics that the EA can use to monitor waterbody catchment statuses. For more information and a breakdown of this catchment’s status go to https://environment.data.gov.uk/catchmentplanning/WaterBody/GB108045008630?cycle=2
Crops can be a natural assetin themselves, providing the food we eat and storing carbon. Some crops, however, could be considered natural liabilities. One such crop is maize which is planted in wide rows, leaving bare soil exposed and without structural support from roots. Furthermore, it is often harvested in late-Autumn when the weather becomes wetter, meaning little to no vegetation can regrow to protect it over Winter. This leaves the soil much more susceptible to being carried away by surface water runoff. Despite this, maize can be successfully managed to grow and harvest while minimising runoff.
The Crop Map of England (CROME) dataset is derived from satellite data and generalised to hexagons. It identifies the village of Beer and the quarry as non-vegetated with the majority of the catchment classed as grassland. There are scattered clusters of trees that broadly match the habitat and landcover maps. Barley is grown directly south of the quarry and in the north, adjacent to several fields of maize.
The nature of the soil can determine how much surface water infiltrates into the ground, as well as what plants will growand where. Understanding soils is vital to providing effective NFM and improving water quality. The aim with water quality improvements is to keep the soil on the land and improve groundwater infiltration and recharge, therefore allowing a slower and more naturally filtered water route to the river.
Degraded soil structure, where the soil profile is compacted at shallow depths or capped at the surface and impermeable can lead to excessive unnatural run-off of surface water instead of percolation and infiltration. More than 60% of soils in Devon and Cornwall are naturally well-drained and should rarely become saturated.
The Farming Rules for Water (FRFW) were introduced at the start of 2018 as legislation to help protect surface water quality. The regulations are designed to help manage cultivated agricultural land well, without over-management, nutrient run-off, or waste affecting surface water.
The diagram above shows good soil structure on the left and compacted soil structure on the right. In compacted soil, little surface water can infiltrate into the soil subsoil due to surface capping or compacted layers, while vegetation can be deprived of oxygen due to compression of pores that normally transport air and water (sourced from SEPA NFM Handbook).
The NATMAP soils dataset from Cranfield University shows that the higher areas in the catchment are primarily composed of the soil series BATCOMBE – deep loam to clay, whilst the village and valleys are composed of COOMBE 1 – silt over chalk.
Soils in this area do roughly fit within these soil associations, but there is considerable variation within. The soils are very stoney and make investigative work very difficult.
Soil health in the catchment was considered adequate through observations made during soil assessment work in February and March 2022. Soils were often tight where they had been under the same land use for many years. Some of the more recently ploughed fields had generally good structure under cereals, but this could be compromised when under new grass leys, if they were grazed during wet periods.
The above map was created using the NATMAPvector dataset from Cranfield University in March 2022
Geological conditions impacts groundwater and soil type. When rocks are sufficiently permeable it can lead to groundwater flooding. If local flooding is caused be groundwater levels, then it is unlikely that changes to land management and NFM will improve flood resilience.
The catchment’s geology follows a similar spatial distribution to the soils. The area surrounding the village of Beer and the bottom of the valleys is comprised of chalk. The area immediately surrounding the Beer stream and in the central valley is formed from sandstone whilst the higher outer areas of the catchment are colluvium.
Multiple issues have already been mentioned and mapped that could be contributing to flood risk and WFD failures. However, there are further potential issues that may be influential which will be explored in the following pages.
Pigs naturally turn over the soil and when wet the soils are easily compacted. Reductions in numbers and improved planning of the paddocks will help reduce the risk but will not eliminate it.
Soil loss and compaction can occur whilst under outdoor pigs
Pollution incidences themselves will directly affect water quality, but consented discharges into watercourses and chemical runoff from roads exacerbated by rainwater may also be sources of pollution.
There are no recorded pollution incidences in the catchment, nor are there any sources of consented discharges. There is one discharge just outside of the catchment for treated sewage by the local water company into the sea at Beer beach which could impact bathing water quality.
Licensed water abstraction points may serve as sources of risk to ground water quantity and availability. There is an agricultural abstraction point in the northern valley, and an abstraction point for public water supply further down the valley at the start of the Beer Stream. Both of these abstraction points fall within the drinking water safeguard zone for ground water and Ground Water Source Protection Zone I.
Surface flow pathways are the routes rainwater accumulates and follows when it lands to the nearest depression or watercourse. As it flows, surface water can pick up any number of chemicals, soil, and debris and carry them into the watercourse with it. This serves to demonstrate why community engagement and working with landowners is so important, as the effects of practices upstream in the catchment cascade down via these routes. Pathways have been modelled in 2 different ways here.
The first are modelled using topographic data and software called SCIMAP (left). Only the routes with above average wetness are shown. The flat topography of floodplains and the unnatural topography of quarries can skew the modelling process and pathways in these areas should be considered unreliable.
The second method uses SCALGO Live (right). Flow routes with at least 1km2 upstream area are shown. Areas that would be flooded if 15cm of rain were to fall during a storm event are also mapped. Flooded areas are coloured by their water volume from light to dark.
During the walkover surveys, experienced surveyors at WRT recorded points of interest and concern, as well as potential natural flood management opportunities.
Looking NW. Situated below the road this site has the potential to intercept both land and road drainage. As the area is currently mixed woodland and scrub it does offer an opportunity to enhance the lands societal value, without impacting upon its current biodiversity.
Looking NE. After the water has been redirected off the lane this field offers multiple areas (approx. 300m) where the water could be stored offline, before the excess water is allowed back onto the lane lower down. This could be bunds, extra trees, sediment ponds etc. This would also be reliant on the Devon hedge down the RHS holding the water on the field where appropriate.
There are many options to reduce flood and coastal erosion risk across the country which involve implementing measures that help to protect, restore and emulate the natural functions. These options are known as Working With Natural Processes (WWNP) or Natural Flood Management (NFM). These measures increase flood resilience by slowing the flow of water and disperse energy to keep the water at the top of the catchment or to improve groundwater infiltration and recharge, therefore allowing a slower and more naturally filtered water route to the river.
Where rapid surface water run-off has been noted there may be opportunities for WWNP to mitigate both water quality and to regulate flow. An example of some NFM interventions are given below. They are intended to slow water, store water, increase infiltration and intercept rainfall.
The illustration above shows various natural flood management techniques (sourced from CIRIA).
The Environment Agency have mapped potential opportunities for WWNP to reduce flood and coastal erosion risk across the country. These include opportunities for different types of woodland planting, floodplain reconnection features like restored riverside wetlands and meadows, and runoff attenuation features which aim to slow pathways of water across the land, like storage ponds or leaky barriers. Anumber of areas are also excluded from the woodland maps such as urban areas and existing woodland. These are mapped separately on page 40.
The only opportunity identified in the WWNP datasets in the catchment is a small area of floodplain reconnection at the south-eastern end of Bovey Lane at the start of the Beer Stream. This does not mean no other opportunities for NFM exist though.
There may be current habitat creation and river restoration projects where opportunities exist to work together with organisations to provide simultaneous benefits to habitats, rivers, and flood resilience.
Natural England have also identified opportunities to expand on existing habitats to create habitat networks across the landscape.
There are two habitat restoration-creation zones. One at the Beer quarry and another to the Northwest of Beer stream. There are also significant opportunities for expanding habitat networks around existing priority habitats (see page 24). There is an area of restorable habitat in the centre, defined as “an area of land, predominantly composed of existing seminatural habitat where the primary habitat is present in a degraded or fragmented form, and which are likely to be suitable for restoration.”
There are Fragmentation Action Zones around Beer village and the valleys which extend eastward. Natural England defines these as “Land immediately adjoining existing habitat patches that are small or have excessive edge to area ratio where habitat creation is likely to help reduce the effects of habitat fragmentation.”
Much of the south and northern boundary of the catchment is classed as Network Enhancement Zone 1, defined as “Land within close proximity to the existing habitat components that are more likely to be suitable for habitat re-creation for the particular habitat. These areas are primarily based on soils but in many cases has been refined by also using other data such as hydrology, altitude and proximity to the coast.”
In the Northwest is the Network Expansion Zone, defined as “Land within relatively close proximity to the Network Enhancement Zones that are more likely to be suitable for habitat creation for the particular habitat and identifying possible locations for connecting and linking up networks across a landscape.”
There are several areas, including the urban area of Beer village classed as Network Enhancement Zone 2, “Land within close proximity to the existing habitat components that are unlikely to be suitable for habitat re-creation but where other types of habitat may be created or land management may be enhanced including delivery of suitable Green Infrastructure.”
Agri-environment schemes are government initiatives that aim to financially compensate farmers for providing benefits to wildlife on their land. Areas under agri-environment scheme agreements may provide opportunities simultaneously for the landowner to meet the agreement’s objectives and deliver NFM to benefit the catchment community.
The majority of the land parcels in the catchment outside of Beer village are under Environmental Stewardship Scheme Agreements. In the southwest boundary area of the catchment is an area also under an Organic Farming Scheme Agreement.
There may be opportunities for landowners in and around the village of Beer to enter into agri-environment schemes. Habitat creation in the village may be facilitated in the Habitat Enhancement Zone as identified on page 38 if landowners were to enter into an agri-environment scheme.
A further consideration for the targeting of NFM via soil improvement, habitat enhancements, restoration or creation is existing areas which may not be suitable for changes in land use or land management. This may be because they are already valuable sites for wildlife (e.g. designated wildlife sites), because the land use is difficult to change (e.g. urban land) or because the land is highly valuable for farming (high grade agricultural land). There may be further historic or natural heritage designations to consider.
The Beer Quarry and Caves SSSI and SAC designation (see page 20) in the catchment’s centre may provide administrative challenges, as will the woodland and grassland priority habitats scattered throughout the catchment. However, there is still the opportunity to improve these habitats and designated sites further by getting more partner organisations involved in the process and even access additional sources of funding.
The WWNP woodland constraints dataset highlights any urban areas and existing woodlands (including woodlands not listed as priority habitats not shown here) where additional tree planting may be difficult. This excludes much of the urban area of the catchment, most of the quarry and several patches in the Northeast. This does not mean urban tree planting is impossible and would also provide another avenue to get the community involved the closer the planting is. The northwest and southern areas of the catchment on the other hand have few to no restraints.
The agricultural land grade is grade 3 across the catchment which is considered average and there is therefore no high-grade land present.
There is a single small Scheduled Monument of a bowl barrow at Bovey Fir Cross on the catchment's western boundary.
During the walkover surveys, experienced surveyors at WRT identified opportunities for NFM measures and improvements to other key considerations mentioned.
Evidence shows that water is often running down the side of the road towards Beer. The gateway here is raised to prevent additional water entering the field. One option would be to culvert under the hedge (below the gateway) and create a drainage channel within the field with check dams. This water could then be diverted into the woodland below (subject to constraints).
This photo show where field drainage is being channelled around the periphery and not fully engaging with the potential storage below. Until wet weather surveys are carried out it would be difficult to ascertain whether some drainage water is entering the depressions, but initially it appears some is being diverted away. Two of the depressions below this field could potentially store 1500m3 .
Opportunities Identified During Walkover Surveys
There are some opportunities to improve flood resilience in the Beer Stream catchment through changes to soil management.
The further reduction of pig numbers could help and avoid the soil damage and soil loss into the catchment.
Managing the grass leys after establishment could make significant improvements in run-off reduction. Being flexible around grazing times and the weather could help enormously.
Additional land for the equine businesses to reduce the intensity of grazing could help reduce soil compaction and associated run-off. A reduction in the number of horses could also help, but it's more to do with the fields having time to restand recover post livestock.
The calcareous grasslands could do with increased periods between grazing to allow the roots to fully exploit the soil profile. At present many of the fields were tightly grazed and moss was taking over. There was significant soil compaction which was reducing rainfall infiltration and also hindering rootdevelopment.
NaturalFlood Management (NFM) or Working withNaturalProcesses (WWNP)
Potential benefit in catchment
Potential provider identified
Locationof opportunity matches GISmaps
Improve soil healthand rainfall acceptance potential ✓ Na
Sub-soil,aeration,ordecompaction ✓
Contour ploughing or cross slope working Change land use ✓
Interspersed woodland or agroforestryforinfiltration ✓
There are many opportunities to improve flood resilience in the Beer Stream catchment through water pathway interruption.
As mentioned previously the better use of existing woodland would help control flows. This would reply upon holes being excavated into the Devon banks to allow water to flow into woodlands in a controlled way and not by-pass the woodland and be fast tracked towards the streams via field drainage ditches.
Water run-off on the tracks/roads is currently by-passing potential opportunities for slowing the flow. In some cases, the road water could be diverted into the woodlands, and in others, the water could be diverted into the valley bottom and additional bund storage put in place that allowed the water to build up during high flows and then drain away slowly postevent. Some of this can be as simple as either maintaining existing drainage, or augmenting drainage so that the water is channelled into areas where it can be managed in a controlled way.
Cross-slope planting of treesor hedges ✓ Gatewayrelocation
Cross-slope buffer(beetle bankor cross-drain) Timber/stone instream deflectors ✓
Attenuation Opportunities Identified During Walkover Surveys
There are many opportunities to improve flood resilience in the Beer Stream catchment through water attenuation on non-floodplain wetland.
Many of the historic quarry pits could be used as soak-aaways or semi-permanent ponds if the upstream catchment and drainage was suitable. As mentioned previously this does come with some caveats; primarily that the water is clean enough that it wouldn't have a detrimental effect upon local ground water supplies and secondly the transition of water downstream once the feature is full (Assuming inputs outstrip outputs).
NaturalFlood Management (NFM) or
Working withNaturalProcesses (WWNP)
Potential benefit in catchment
Potential provider identified
Locationof opportunity matches GISmaps
Attenuationpond / farm pond / wildlife pond
Run-off scrape or swale / temporarypond ✓ ✓
Run-off bunded storage oroff-line storage ✓ ✓
Blind ditching indrainage ditches
Headwaterdrainage management ✓ ✓
Attenuationpond / farm pond / wildlife pond
Slow the Flow Opportunities Identified During Walkover Surveys
There are some opportunities to improve flood resilience in the Beer Stream catchment through increasing channel and floodplain roughness to slow the flow.
Above Beer Quarry the amphitheatre shaped fields do channel water to the lowest point. This then runs close to the public foot path. If this water could be intercepted and diverted away into the woodland that would help maintain the public footpath and slow the flow of water through the catchment.
NaturalFlood Management (NFM) or
Working withNaturalProcesses (WWNP)
Potential benefit in catchment
Potential provider identified
Locationof opportunity matches GISmaps
Channel restoration,sinuosity
Large/coarse woodeddebris introduction
Floodplainreconnection (palaeochannelreconnection) ✓
Riparianbufferstripsor woodland (sloped)
Floodplainwoodland orwet woodland ✓ Peak flow leakybarriers
Bed renaturalisation– armour/ gravel augmentation
There are 11 landowners in the catchment. This catchment is not in an UST area, but several landowners have been engaged under a soil improvement project. The 3 largestlandowners own 70.69% of the catchment.
WRT has also engaged the catchment community in other projects. There has been Landowner Engagement. As of 30th June 2022, WRT has had no engagement with this catchment under FCRIP.
As well as the opportunities identified in the previous section, there may be opportunities for you to get involved as an individual.
WRT runs a Citizen Science Investigation (CSI) team of volunteers across the southwest, whereby volunteers receive a testing kit and training to procure water samples from a watercourse. Westcountry CSI aims to engage people with their local environment and produce water monitoring data that can identify pollution events quickly and target improvement work.
There are currently no active sampling points in the catchment. There may be the potential to start new sampling sites along the Beer Stream if there is suitable access to the water.
For more information about Westcountry CSI, including instructions on what’s involved and how to sign up, visit our website at wrt.org.uk/westcountry-csi
Another opportunity for you to get involved in is the Riverfly Partnership’s Anglers’ Riverfly Monitoring Initiative (ARMI). This recognises that anglers are very well placed to monitor river water quality and facilitates communication between them and their local Environment Agency contact.
There are no riverfly survey sites within the micro-catchment, but, as with CSI sites, it may be possible to start a new site if there is suitable access to the water and with communication with the Environment Agency.
For more information on ARMI, visit their website at riverflies.org/anglersriverfly-monitoring-initiative-armi
Multiple reasonsforthe possible causesand remediesforflooding inthe micro-catchmentforthe BeerStream have been mapped inthisstudy, as have other factorsthat are key to considerwhen making NFM decisions.
It islikelythat a combinationof causesare at playhere contributing to there being propertiesatflood risk,including the topography,land use and absence of habitatsincertainareasof the catchment.
The nextsteps are to engage and empowerthe communityin the catchmentto discuss and work towardsbuilding flood resilience throughsome of the opportunitiesmapped inthe previouspages.It is imperative thatpropertyownersand landownersshare perspectivesand worktogetherto find solutionsagreeable to all sides.Some opportunitiesmayprovide secondarybenefitstowardsimproving the catchment’sWFD chemical status.
The processforidentifying the highest-impacting locationsof NFMmeasures acrossDevonand Cornwall involved several stepsin a Geographic InformationSystem (GIS).The first step was to identifywatercourseswithan upstream watershed less than 10km2 and less than 5km2 in size,then to identifypropertiesadjacentto these watercoursesthat overlapped withthe EnvironmentAgency’s (EA) fluvial “Flood Zone 2”dataset.Next,pour pointswere placed onthe watercoursesin front of the furthest downstream flood riskproperties.These pourpoints were thenused to delineate the upstream micro-catchmentboundaries.A total of 1270micro-catchmentswithpropertiespotentiallyatriskwere identified across the 2counties.
For every micro-catchmentidentified,itsarea wasdividedbythe number of flood risk propertieswithinitto calculate the area perproperty atrisk foreach micro-catchment.Those withthe lowestarea perpropertyindicated higherpotential forsmall-scaleNFMmeasuresto benefitthe greatest number of flood riskproperties. Lastly,additional factors,suchas WFD classificationsand previousWRT engagementwithfarmers,were considered alongsidethe area perproperty atflood risk toprioritise a small numberof micro-catchmentsto targetcommunityengagementand NFM delivery.
➢ Due to the large geographic extent(Devonand Cornwall)and the manual elementof the mapping (bothcausing the mapping processto be time-consuming),the resolution/accuracyof some datasetsmaybe compromised.
➢ The buildingsdataset(OS VectorMap Buildings) isnotasaccurate as OS MasterMap - some propertiesare amalgamatedinto a single polygon and very small buildingsare notshown. Therefore propertiesatriskof flooding maybe underestimated.
➢ Potential flood-riskisidentifiedbyselecting building polygonsthatintersectthe flood zones;no detailed local information (e.g.drainage or defences) ormodelling hasbeenused.
➢ The spatial resolutionof the topographydata iscoarse (50m).Thisisused to calculate the upstream catchmentarea foreach communityat-risk. Therefore,some errors mayoccur (additionsoromissions) whenidentifying micro-catchments.
➢ The mapping method involvesanelementof manual validation,whichhasthe potential to be subjective and/orpossible errors.
Once catchmentswere modelled and the informationtabulated to show theoretical flood risk in conjunctionwithWFD failures, a systematic approach to ground-truthing was adopted.
Catchmentsthat were perceived to have elevated water quality and water quantity risks were discussed with local land management advisors and regulators to determine if the modelled risk was likely to be correct.
Upon a theoretical, or desk-based ground-truthing,the catchmentswere then surveyed using a rapid walkover survey to observe run-off pathways and confirm if useful managed interventions could be implemented to reduce flood risk locallyand improvewater quality in the process.
A further modelling process using SCIMAP was undertaken to identify high risk run-off pathways of the specific micro-catchmentbeingsurveyed to assist the surveyor in locating issues within a <10km2 area.
Where possible, surveyors reacted to high rainfall predictions and went out to observe the catchmentwhen the conditions were right.
Walkover surveys were undertaken noting observations about surface water run-offand taking photographs of key areas and issues. All walkovers aimed to provide:
➢ Dry or Wet weather photos,
➢ Identify stakeholder PROVIDERS where NFM can be instigated,
➢ Identify stakeholder BENEFICIARIES by property and number people,
➢ Establish opportunities in each catchmentand feasibility of action.
Georeferenced photos were taken to provide a visualoverview of issues, opportunities, and as general reference notes.
Where issues and opportunities existed, further investigation was made or attempted to establish the realistic chances of further action. This was achieved by either speaking withthe localcommunityor contacting communitygroupsor key landowners.
All 1270 micro-catchments with properties potentially at risk were identified across the 2 counties.
CIRIA (Slide 36)
The Construction Industry Research and Information Association’s (CIRIA) Natural Flood Management Manual (C802) (PDF)
https://www.ciria.org/Books/Free_publications/C802F.aspx
FRFW (Slide 28)
Statutory guidance for Farming Rules for Water (FRFW) (Webpages)
Handbook describing various natural flood management interventions and case studies (PDF)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/applying-thefarming-rules-for-water/applying-the-farming-rules-for-water
https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/163560/sepa-natural-floodmanagement-handbook1.pdf
Dataset
Source AttributionStatement
Agricultural Land Classification Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
Air Quality Management Areas UKAIR © Crown copyright and database rights licensed under Defra's PublicSectorMapping Agreementwith Ordnance Survey(licence No. 100022861) and the Land andProperty Services Department(Northern Ireland) MOU206.
Ancient Woodland Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
AONB Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
Areas Benefitting fromFlood Defences EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2018. Allrights reserved.Some features of this mapare based on digital spatial data from the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology,© NERC (CEH) © Crowncopyright anddatabase rights 2018Ordnance Survey 100024198
Bathing Water Monitoring Locations EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2015. All rights reserved.
Country Parks NaturalEngland © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
Countryside StewardshipScheme Agreements Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
Crop Map of England Rural Payments Agency © Rural Payments Agency
CRoW Access Land NaturalEngland © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
CRoW RegisteredCommonLand NaturalEngland © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
DetailedRiver Network EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency Crown copyrightand databse right 2022.
Drinking Water Safeguard Zones (Ground Water) EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency and/ordatabase rights. Derivedfrom BGSdigital data under licence from British Geological Surveycopyright NERC.
Drinking Water Safeguard Zones (Surface Water) EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right.All rights reserved. Derived fromBGS digitaldata underlicence fromBritish Geological Survey ©NERC. Derived fromCentre of Ecology andHydrology data ©CEH
Energy Crop Scheme Agreements NaturalEngland © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
Flood Defences EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2020. Allrights reserved.
Flood Zone 2 EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2018. All rights reserved.Some features of this map are basedon digital spatial data from the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology,© NERC (CEH). © Crown copyrightand database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100024198
Greenspaces Ordnance Survey Contains OS data © Crown copyrightand database right 2022
HabitatNetworks Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
HistoricLandfill Sites EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2018. All rights reserved.Contains information © Local Authorities
Dataset Source AttributionStatement
Land Parcels Rural Payments Agency © Crown copyright and database rights 2020 OS
LCM2019 25m Parcels Centre for Ecology and Hydrology Morton, D., Marston, C. G, O’Neil, A. W., & Rowland, C. S. (2020). Land Cover Map 2019 (25m rasterised land parcels, GB) [Data set]. NERC Environmental Information Data Centre. https://doi.org/10.5285/F15289DA-6424-4A5E-BD92-48C4D9C830CC
LNR Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
MCZ Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
National Forest Inventory Forestry Commission Contains Forestry Commission information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0
National Trails Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
NATMAPvector Cranfield University Soil data © Cranfield University (NSRI) and for the Controller of HMSO 2019
Nitrate Vulnerable Zones 2021 Combined Environment Agency
© Environment Agency copyright and/or database right. Derived in part from geological mapping data provided by the British Geological Survey © NERC. Derived in part from data provided by the National Soils Research Institute © Cranfield University. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2016. Derived in part from data provided by the Department for theEnvironment, Farming and Rural Affairs © Crown 2016 copyright Defra. Derived in part from data provided by the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology © NERC. Derived in part from data provided by UK Water Companies.
National Parks Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
Organic Farming Scheme Agreements Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
OS Open Datasets Ordnance Survey Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2022
Permitted Waste Sites Environment Agency © Environment Agency copyright and/or database right 2015. All rights reserved.
PM2.5 2020 UKAIR © UKAIR crown copyright
Pollution Incidents Environment Agency
Priority Habitat Creation and Restoration Projects Environment Agency © Environment Agency copyright and/or database right 2015. All rights reserved.
Priority Habitat Inventory Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
Priority Habitats (Aquatic and Wetlands) Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
Priority Roads for Catchment Management of Runoff Highways England
Priority Roads for Catchment Management of Surface Water Highways England
Public Rights of Way Ordnance Survey Contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2022
Ramsar Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2022.
Recorded Flood Outlines Environment Agency © Environment Agency copyright and/or database right 2018. All rights reserved.
River Restoration Projects The River Restoration Center
Dataset
Source AttributionStatement
RoFSW Extent 1in 1000 EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2015. All rights reserved.
RPA Land Parcels Rural Payments Agency © Crown copyright and database rights 2020OS
SACs Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
SCALGO Live
Scheduled Monuments HistoricEngland © HistoricEngland2022. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022
SCIMAP Flow Pathways SCIMAP SCIMAP modelling system- SCIMAP was developed atDurham andLancasterUniversities as part of a NERCgrant
Slope TellusSW Ferraccioli,F.; Gerard,F.; Robinson, C.; Jordan,T.;Biszczuk,M.; Ireland, L.; Beasley,M.; Vidamour,A.; Barker, A.; Arnold, R.; Dinn, M.; Fox,A.; Howard, A. (2014). LiDAR based Digital Terrain Model (DTM) data for SouthWestEngland. NERC Environmental InformationData Centre. https://doi.org/10.5285/e2a742df-3772-481a-97d6-0de5133f4812
Source ProtectionZones EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2016. All rights reserved.
SPAs Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
SSSI Units Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
SSSIs Natural England © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crowncopyright anddatabase right2022.
Vegetation Health Index Centre for Ecology and Hydrology © UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology
Water Resource Availability and Abstraction Reliability Cycle 2 EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2015. All rights reserved.
WFD Monitoring Sites EnvironmentAgency
WFD River Waterbody Catchments EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2015. All rights reserved.
WFD River Waterbody Status EnvironmentAgency
WIMS Locations EnvironmentAgency Uses Environment Agency waterquality data from the WaterQuality Archive (Beta)
WWNP Datasets EnvironmentAgency © EnvironmentAgency copyrightand/or database right 2015. All rights reserved.
