Consultation outcome

Summary of responses and government response

Updated 10 April 2023

Executive summary

Defra held a consultation on proposals to designate 4 new sites as bathing waters under the Bathing Water Regulations 2013 (S.I. 2013/1675) (the ‘regulations’). The consultation ran from 10 March 2023 to 24 March 2023.

Water quality is monitored at bathing waters by the Environment Agency during the bathing season, which in England runs from 15 May to 30 September. Bathing waters are classified annually as excellent, good, sufficient or poor.

If water quality does not meet the legally required standards, the Environment Agency will investigate the sources of pollution and recommend remedial measures to make improvements.

The proposed bathing waters were:

• Sykes Lane Bathing Beach, Rutland Water
• Whitwell Creek, Rutland Water
• Firestone Bay, Plymouth
• an area of the River Deben at Waldringfield, Suffolk

The consultation asked respondents whether they agreed, disagreed, or neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal to designate each site as a bathing water. The consultation also invited them to provide reasons for their view if they wished to. Respondents only had to respond about one site to have their response counted. But respondents were able to comment on more than one, or all, of the sites if they wished to.

This was a national consultation, following local consultations that were held by the applicants as part of the evidence gathering process for their applications. This document summarises the responses to the national consultation.

Summary of responses

Defra received 1,547 responses to the consultation, with some respondents giving their views on more than one site.

Many responses related to the sites with which the respondents were familiar, while some respondents gave generic support to the designation of all 4 sites. Most respondents gave more than one reason for why they agreed, disagreed or neither agreed nor disagreed with a proposed designation.

Organisations were mainly swimming and other water sport organisations, environmental non-governmental organisations and societies, industry organisations and water companies. A list of organisations which submitted a response is included in Annex A.

Some national organisations made general comments about bathing water designation in their responses, or made comments that applied to all or several of the sites. These responses are summarised below and are included in the figures provided for each site.

The Outdoor Swimming Society (OSS) supported the proposal to designate an area of the River Deben at Waldringfield. They said this would benefit swimmers and other water users, giving them information on bathing water quality so that users can make a decision on whether to enter the water. The OSS said it was not opposed to the proposals to designate Sykes Lane and Whitwell Creek. They recognised that, while they had some reservations about the individual proposals, designation would benefit swimmers by giving them information about bathing water quality. The OSS did not comment on the proposal to designate Firestone Bay.

Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) supported the designation of the 4 sites as bathing waters and pointed to a report they had published in 2021 which indicated an increase in the public’s use of waterways. Their response stated that designation of bathing waters is one of the main mechanisms by which there is a legal obligation to test and improve water quality, with significant benefits to both human health and the health of ecosystems.

Swim England supported the designation of the 4 sites as bathing waters and highlighted the health and wellbeing benefits of swimming outdoors. Swim England said that designation can act as a catalyst for water quality improvements. They also said efforts should be made to improve access to outdoor swimming opportunities at locations not classified as bathing waters, as well as simplifying the application process for bathing water designation.

British Canoeing supported the designation of the 4 sites as bathing waters. They highlighted the health and wellbeing benefits of access to blue spaces and the negative impact of pollution to the health of recreational water users and water ways. British Canoeing’s response also highlighted that designation will lead to monitoring of water quality at the sites and the provision of information for users during the bathing season.

Anglian Water said it supported the designation of the 4 sites as bathing waters and highlighted that 3 of the sites (Sykes Lane Bathing Beach, Whitwell Creek and an area of the River Deben at Waldringfield) are in the Anglian Water region. Anglian Water’s response said there has been a significant increase in swimmers at its Rutland Water reservoir in recent years, and that achieving designation at both sites would help promote open water swimming in the region.

South West Water (SWW) said it was broadly neutral with regard to the designation or de-designation of bathing waters and that it recognised the economic benefits of designated bathing waters in the SWW region. SWW’s response recognised there appeared to be local community support for the designation of Firestone Bay and that SWW would promote any necessary investment identified following any designation of the site, while recognising that there could be cost impacts for customers.

The National Farmers Union (NFU) did not support any of the 4 designations. The NFU said they would need a longer amount of time to consult their local members to determine the make-up of farming businesses within the upstream catchments of the proposed designations. They pointed out that consultation with farming businesses is important to understand the impact of bathing water designation, particularly where any required improvements to water quality identified following designation require engagement with local farmers.

Table 1: Responses for each site

Table 1 shows the breakdown of the number of responses that agreed with, disagreed with, or neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal to designate each of the sites.

Proposed bathing water	Total number of responses	Agreed with the proposal to designate	Disagreed with the proposal to designate	Neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal to designate
Sykes Lane Bathing Beach	196	168	2	26
Whitwell Creek	183	158	3	22
Firestone Bay	513	499	1	13
River Deben at Waldringfield	655	626	7	22

Sykes Lane Bathing Beach, Rutland Water

Of the 196 responses received:

• 168 agreed with the proposal to designate Sykes Lane Bathing Beach as a bathing water
• 2 disagreed with the proposal
• 26 neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal

The most cited reason given by those in support of designating this site was water quality and the improvements to the water quality at the site that bathing water designation could bring (68 respondents). Some respondents (46) cited public health benefits as a reason for supporting the proposal. A total of 25 respondents mentioned water safety as a reason they agreed with the proposal to designate the site. Smaller numbers of respondents mentioned high levels of usage of the site, the location of the site, promotion of open water swimming, environmental and wildlife benefits and benefits to the local community as reasons they were in favour of the proposal.

Of the respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal to designate this site, 5 said they were unfamiliar with the area and 1 respondent said they did not understand what benefits designation would offer. Some respondents stated they neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal but did not provide a reason.

Whitwell Creek, Rutland Water

Of the 183 responses received:

• 158 agreed with the proposal to designate Whitwell Creek as a bathing water
• 3 disagreed with the proposal
• 22 neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal

The most cited reason given by those in support of designating this site was water quality (52 respondents). 51 respondents mentioned that designation of the site could support public health and provide wellbeing benefits. Some respondents (36) mentioned water safety as a reason they agreed with the proposal to designate the site, and 31 respondents mentioned that the site has good facilities for outdoor bathing.

In addition, 26 respondents said they felt there was a need to designate more bathing waters and cited this as one of their reasons for supporting the proposal. Smaller numbers of respondents mentioned the high levels of usage of the site, environmental and wildlife benefits, and the fact that they already use the site for bathing as reasons they were in favour of the proposal.

Of the respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal to designate this site, 7 said they were unfamiliar with the site, and smaller numbers mentioned water quality, charges to use the site and access to the site as reasons for their view. Some respondents stated they neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal but did not provide a reason.

Reasons given by respondents who disagreed with the proposal included that they felt the site has limited public access (1) and that designation would primarily benefit the landowner (1).

Firestone Bay, Plymouth

Of the 513 responses received:

• 499 agreed with the proposal to designate Firestone Bay as a bathing water
• 1 disagreed with the proposal
• 13 neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal

The most cited reason given by those in support of designating this site was water quality and the improvements to the water quality at the site that bathing water designation could bring (264 respondents). A slightly smaller number (233 respondents) cited the local demand for a bathing water as a reason for agreeing with the proposal. Many respondents cited public health and wellbeing benefits (149 respondents) and access to a bathing water (141 respondents) as a reason they were in favour of the proposal. Smaller numbers of respondents mentioned community benefits, biodiversity and nature conservation as reasons they were in favour of the proposal.

Of the respondents who neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal to designate this site, 3 said they did not have a detailed enough understanding of the proposal to decide whether they agreed with it, and 5 said they were unfamiliar with the area. Some respondents stated they neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal but did not provide a reason.

The River Deben at Waldringfield

Of the 655 responses received:

• 626 agreed with the proposal to designate the River Deben at Waldringfield as a bathing water
• 7 disagreed with the proposal
• 22 neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal

The most cited reason given by those in support of designating this site was local demand (248 respondents), closely followed by the public health benefits designation could offer (247 respondents). Another frequently cited reason was the improvements to the water quality at the site that bathing water designation could bring (220 respondents), as well as reducing pollution at the site (135 respondents). Access to a bathing water was given as a reason by 176 respondents who agreed with the proposal. Smaller numbers of respondents mentioned community benefits, biodiversity and nature conservation as reasons they were in favour of the proposal.

The reasons given by respondents for disagreeing with the proposed designation included risks to wildlife at the site (1 respondent), concerns about a lack of adequate facilities at the site (2), concerns about an increase in litter left by users of the bathing water (1 respondent), and concerns about sewage at the site even if it were designated (1 respondent). Another respondent mentioned they had been ill after previously swimming at the site.

Reasons given by respondents who disagreed with the proposal to designate the site included concerns about a lack of suitable facilities at the site such as lifeguarding (2 respondents). Responses included concerns about potential negative impacts on wildlife (1 respondent), concerns about an increase in litter at the site following designation (1 respondent) and concerns that there would be sewage at the site even if it were designated (1 respondent). Some respondents stated they neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal but did not provide a reason.

Government response

Defra would like to thank all those who responded to this consultation. Defra recognises that it is important for all relevant stakeholders to have the opportunity to be consulted before a site is designated as a bathing water. We have noted a number of other points that have been raised in some responses to this consultation. We continue to engage with Natural England to ensure that any bathing water designation is compatible with any provisions in place at a given site to protect wildlife, habitats and features of interest.

We recognise that some respondents have mentioned safety in bathing waters in their responses to this consultation. The Bathing Water Regulations 2013, which set out the legal duties of Defra, the Environment Agency and local authorities, focus specifically on water quality. The management of the physical risks in bathing waters is beyond the legal scope of the regulations because they do not include any provision for physical safety. It should also be noted that Defra considers only adults swimming and children both swimming or paddling as bathers for the purposes of bathing water designation.

We acknowledge that any beach, lake or river is potentially hazardous for bathers. Bathing water monitoring measures the level of bacteria in the water but does not imply that the area is safer than any other water body. The objective of the regulations is to protect bathers’ health by driving improvement to water quality. Water quality at bathing waters is monitored for intestinal enterococci and E. coli, which are faecal indicator organisms showing whether pollution from sewage, livestock or urban sources such as misconnected drains is present in the water. The regulations also include provisions for managing any proliferation of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) by requiring local councils to inform the public about the health risk. The Environment Agency investigates sources of pollution at bathing waters so that remedial measures can be put in place.

Decision and next steps

Following this consultation, the 4 sites will be added to the list of designated bathing waters in England and monitored by the Environment Agency with effect from the 2023 bathing season.

The Environment Agency will prepare bathing water profiles and identify a sampling point for each site, based on where the greatest number of bathers go into the water. Monitoring will commence in May 2023.

During the bathing season, the relevant local authority will be responsible for providing public information about water quality and potential pollution sources at the bathing water. They are also responsible for taking management measures, usually in the form of providing warning signage, as advised by the Environment Agency, during pollution incidents. Defra will provide funding towards the cost of information signage.

Bathing water designation will not affect or alter any protections already in place at the sites under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended).

The relevant local authorities for the 4 sites are:

• Sykes Lane Bathing Beach - Peterborough City Council
• Whitwell Creek - Peterborough City Council
• Firestone Bay - Plymouth City Council
• River Deben at Waldringfield - Suffolk County Council

Defra reviews the list of designated bathing waters annually by writing to the Chief Executives of every local council in England and to other organisations, including tourism bodies and swimming organisations. We encourage applications from local councils, private operators and other organisations for beaches and inland bathing areas that meet the criteria set out in the application guidance on bathing water designation. The focus is specifically on usage for bathing because the microbial standards set by the regulations are designed to assess the water quality over a limited area that can be covered by swimmers. The standards are less suitable to provide information on water quality over the distance covered by a kayak or other watercraft.

Annex A - List of responding organisations

This list of responding organisations is not exhaustive. Rather, it is based on those that declared their organisation. This may include responses from individuals who are members of specific organisations and therefore does not necessarily reflect that organisation’s views. This list also does not include those that asked their response to be kept confidential or those that did not include the name of the organisation.

• Anglian Water
• British Canoeing
• Clean Rivers Trust
• Deben Blue Tits
• Deben Rowing Club
• Deben Yacht Club
• Dora Brown
• Greener Waldringfield
• Inspire2tri CIC
• NFU
• Outdoor Swimming Society
• South West Water
• Splash Swim Academy Halifax and Huddersfield
• Suffolk Wildlife Trust
• Surfers Against Sewage
• Swim England
• Waldringfield Sailing Club
• Woodbridge Boatyard
• Woodbridge Coastal Rowing Club
• 5th Woodbridge Sea Scouts