Dairy farmer gets suspended sentence for allowing slurry to run into stream

A Wellington dairy farmer has been given a suspended prison sentence for allowing slurry to run into the Westford Stream.

70-year-old David Bartlett, of Upcott Dairy Farm, Sampford Arundel, Wellington, has been given 14 weeks in prison suspended for a year and ordered to pay £10,000 costs after he persistently allowed slurry to run off into a stream near his farm.

Bartlett appeared for sentencing before District Judge Brereton at Taunton magistrates’ court on yesterday (Thursday, July 18).

He had previously pleaded guilty to three offences relating to pollution to the Westford stream, a tributary of the River Tone. He was also ordered to pay £154 victim surcharge.

In a case brought by the Environment Agency, the court heard that the farm had a long history of failing to properly contain slurry and had been warned several times in the past for causing pollution of the Westford stream.

Pollution

In October 2022, officers installed remote monitoring equipment on the stream which confirmed regular pollution events were continuing to occur.

Using the data from the remote monitoring, officers went to the monitoring site in December 2022 where they found significant amounts of sewage fungus contaminating the bed of the watercourse, an indication of persistent pollution.

Continuing upstream towards Upcott Dairy Farm, colonies of bloodworm were evident. These are a species of pollution tolerant organism associated with poor water quality.

No invertebrate life forms were noted when stones in the stream bed were turned over, further indicating the poor quality of the water, the Environment Agency said.

Near the farm, one of the officers saw a nearby ditch had suddenly started to discharge a significant amount of effluent with the appearance and smell of slurry.

The source was quickly traced to an overflowing underground slurry tank on Upcott Dairy Farm.

Officers also investigated the system used for applying slurry to fields. Bartlett was using a simple pipe to dispose of slurry in a single location.

Although not discharging slurry at the time of the pollution event inspection, the Environment Agency said it was clear there was significant contamination of slurry around the end of the pipe and evidence that slurry had tracked down the field toward the Westford stream.

A subsequent visit found slurry being pumped on to waterlogged land with no attempt to use the slurry for crop benefit. The slurry was several inches thick in the field indicating it had been pumped over a prolonged duration in the same location.

Toward the bottom of the field there was a significant build-up of mud and slurry either side of the gateway crossing the stream and this too presented a risk of further runoff pollution into the stream.

2.5km of stream impacted

A biologist’s survey and report confirmed that there had been “a significant negative impact on the aquatic invertebrate community and water quality along 2.5km of Westford stream.”

It stated that the Westford stream had experienced repeated, acute and sustained chronic pollution events by slurry.

Lack of slurry storage had led to slurry being pumped inappropriately on to a single patch of land where it was likely to run-off and cause pollution.

Bartlett had failed, despite repeated warnings, to install slurry storage facilities that would allow slurry to be stored during winter when ground conditions were unsuitable.

Bartlett submitted a statement to the Environment Agency in which he made limited admissions, implying others, such as his neighbour and the local authority were responsible. He denied deliberately pumping slurry into the watercourse.

Judge Brereton said there were significant aggravating features in the case, including Bartlett having previously been warned over causing pollution.

As well as this, there was his failure to carry out proper checks or make structural improvements by way of an adequate, compliant slurry storage system which is capable of storing slurry having received funds from the Rural Payments Agency to pay for infrastructure that would improve the environment and not cause significant, sustained pollution incidents.

‘Repeatedly failed to acknowledge advice’

David Womack of the Environment Agency said: “This farmer has, over the years, caused numerous pollution incidents and he has repeatedly failed to acknowledge the advice given or to improve the facilities for storing or properly using slurry.

“For over 30 years there has been legislation in place requiring all livestock farmers to have storage facilities capable of storing a minimum of four months’ slurry production.

“The 2018 Reduction and prevention of Agricultural Diffuse Pollution Regulations now also require farmers to plan all applications of slurry in order to reduce the risk of pollution.