Report to the Gedney Parish Council Re: Elgood S Field and the Polluted Dyke at Dawsmere

Report to the Gedney Parish Council Re: Elgood’s Field and the Polluted Dyke at Dawsmere Road, Gedney Drove End.

Elgood’s Field

The flooding and pollution in Elgood’s Field reported to the Gedney Parish Council in February 2008, did not come from a leak in the outflow from the Anglian Water Sewage Treatment Plant behind Holborn Site in Dawsmere Road, as originally suggested

As far as I am aware, the flooding of the field was the result of blocked land drains laid in the field. The land drains were laid to empty into the dyke along the northern edge of the field, from where the water was intended to flow west into the dyke alongside Dawsmere Road, but the dyke had not been cleared or maintained for some years and the flow had stopped.

The flooding in the field prevented the ground water outflow from the septic tank soak-aways of the neighbouring properties from functioning. This was caused by the abnormally high sop level caused by poor dyke maintenance.

I understand that the dyke has now been cleared and these land drains are thought to be working again. If they are the water level in the field should not rise to a level where it will prevent or slow down the outflow from the various septic tanks. That should solve the pollution problem and the rats etc which have been reported.

Polluted Dyke alongside Dawsmere Road.

The pollution was found when I and a SHDC officer visited the dyke in February 2008. The eastern end of the dyke was polluted and evil-smelling and enquiries made of the residents revealed that it had been in this state for a number of years.

Enquiries made have revealed the following situation:

1. The field dyke alongside Dawsmere Road is a private field dyke, originally intended to drain the field to the south, now part owned by the various landowners whose fields adjoin it. It is not the responsibility of either the South Holland Internal Drainage Board or the South Holland District Council, although the Land Drainage Act gives power to both to clear a drain that is blocked and charge the relevant landowner.
2. Owing to the lie of the land water tends to flow east along the first part of Dawsmere Road and as a result the field drain has never worked particularly well.
3. When the sewage treatment plant behind Holborn Site was built, it was decided that the out flow should be piped underneath the footpath west of Elgood’s Field and across the front of Holborn Site and empty into the dyke. The use of the dyke must have been with the landowner’s permission, but it has not been possible to trace a copy of the agreement, and thereby establish who originally agreed to meet the cost of keeping the dyke in good order, now that it was to carry the effluent as well.
4. At some stage after the sewage treatment plant outflow was added it was decided on the advice of South Holland IDB to lower the level of the dyke and thereby improve the flow for both the land drains and the sewage treatment plant. It did not succeed because landowners further west along the line of the dyke did not lower their levels to match. Indeed the flow stopped except when there was a high level in the dyke.
5. If the effluent entering the dyke had been up to standard at all times, the lack of flow might not have caused a problem, but it was not and complaints were made by residents.
6. It was during my visit to establish the cause of the flooding in Elgood’s field, that I discovered the condition of the dyke next to Dawsmere Road.
7. At my request, SHDC officers contacted the EA who visited the site and tested the outflow. They advised that the outflow was below standard and the smell was unpleasant but it was questionable whether an offence had been committed.
8. Anglian Water decided to tanker the outflow until such time as they had completed improvements to their plant to the satisfaction of the EA. I believe these are now complete and the outflow should now meet required standards.
9. I have not received any further complaints about the condition of the water in the dyke, but the flow has not been restored.
10. Recently I chaired a meeting between SHDC officers, the EA, South Holland Internal Drainage Board and Anglian Water to discuss the situation and see what could be done to improve the flow along the dyke. It was agreed that a further assessment of the dyke’s condition was needed and an assessment of the work needed to put it in good working order. There is of course a cost to this.
11. Anglian Water wants to resume using the dyke because the alternative of tankering is costly. So, they have an interest in putting the dyke in good order. I am hopeful that they will agree to work with the landowner to bring the dyke up to standard and perhaps meet some of the cost.
12. I am waiting for a further report from SHDC officers with regard to the progress being made.

Stamford Mathews

SGM/5/9/09