Apologies for the silence on the campaign, we have had to wait for some information before we could come out to you.............
Below is a letter issued from Shepperton Open water recently about an update on the Scheme.
Please can you all make your comments known to the consultation on "just the lake area" of the scheme. The consultation closes on Monday 7th October so we have little time but its hugely appreciated.
After reading the below letter from SOWS please submit your feedback to the RTS here:
Sadly the scheme is still hard wired to continue to travel continually into this beautiful body of clean water. Atrocious, considering the plight of our rivers and the sewage issues.
River Action, Joe Wicks, Steve Backshall, Surfers Against Sewage to name a few, have all have shown support to our campaign just like you and that says it all!! We couldn't be more grateful but now is time for a real call to answer.
THE SCHEME MUST BE REDIRECTED AROUND THE LAKE!
Ferris Meadow is used by many for fitness and mental health and nature to take a rest while it emigrates or travels the land.
Do please read below - it is long but will explain what is happening.
Letter from Shepperton Open Water to its community:
Dear swimmer,
You may or may not be aware of the River Thames Scheme (RTS) and the devastating effect that it will have on the future of Shepperton Open Water Swim but please read on because we desperately & urgently need your help…..
This is Emma and Hannah getting in touch with you to ask for your help following the decision by the RTS to disregard the importance of swimming in reliably clean water – Option 1 has been chosen which will mean a continual flow of river water into the lake which will degrade the water quality over time. Clean water is a fundamental part of our safety and many of our swimmers cannot swim in lower grade water because of health issues. We have a duty of care and pride ourselves on keeping you safe so without confidence in the water quality we would have to close SOWS. We apologise for the amount of information that is in this email but it is hard to reduce it down when every point is key and we have only scratched the surface of the issues we face.
Many of you will have received communication from the RTS asking for feedback on this current supplementary consultation which is solely focused on Ferris Meadow Lake the home of Shepperton Open Water Swim. This consultation is only open for less than a month closing on 7th October 2024 and your feedback is VITAL.
For your information the feedback that you all gave in support of us during the first consultation in 2023 has been pretty much dismissed as part of an organised automated campaign which is extremely frustrating. NOW is your time to give them your individual genuine feedback and to explain the importance of clean water to swim in - not just for now but for future generations.
It is important that you are fully aware of the impact that the chosen option 1 will not only have on the water quality, our swimmers health and wellbeing but also the biodiversity of the lake. At the bottom of this email is a link that will take you to the supplementary consultation information which we strongly recommend you read. There is also a link to the official RTS feedback form. We want you all to give your own opinion even if it is just why you value clean water. For those with limited time, we have picked out some areas you may wish to focus your research and feedback on that directly affect the lake’s water quality and may cause irreversible environmental damage.
Water Quality
Ferris Meadow lake consistently achieves “excellent water quality” results. Each band of grading is wide and currently the lake sits at the very top of excellent which is the best achievable. The RTS have estimated that following the works the lake’s water quality would drop down to sufficient. This may not sound a lot but if you consider that the River Thames within that band you may understand our concerns. The RTS testing can only allow for known factors and during the works other contaminants will be disturbed that could easily pollute the water further.
So with that in mind - How important is the cleanliness of the water to you? Would you be happy to swim in the lake if option 1 goes ahead? Do you still or would you swim in the River Thames?
These water quality testing results are from 2023 water which was carried out by Surfers Against Sewage in the River Thames and by Swim Safety in Ferris Meadow.
Historic Landfill Contamination
The scheme route travels through a huge area of historic landfill just prior to entering Ferris Meadow lake. Historic landfill sites are parcels of land that were dug for gravel and then filled with uncontrolled waste before any control legislation was in place therefore there are no records of what is in the ground. Literally everything was tipped into the vast pit and buried including commercial, chemical, engineering, industrial, military and household waste. The RTS have been testing the landfill through a number of boreholes and by examining the leachate that leaks through the soil but this investigation work is still ongoing. In the final summary of the water quality assessment document (appendix F) the information that is available is very vague but the RTS state that without mitigation there could be increases in concentrations of pollutants such as aluminium, arsenic, cadmium, ammonia, lead, mercury, nickel, chromium and copper to name a few.
How do you feel about the level of information available about the landfill disruption? Would you like more certainty about what they are digging through? What mitigations can be put in place to ensure that the contamination of land and water is prevented? How would we know if they got into the water?
Ferris Meadow lake is an independent body of water which is filled via the water table underground. Essentially water filters up through the ground and also the lake is topped up by rain. In it’s current format that means there are no outside influences on the water quality and because we have managed the lake for over 50 years we know how it behaves. Option 1 means River water entering the lake continually which brings new and unpredictable variables which in turn directly affects our ability to provide a safe place for you to swim. The added risk of other newly released contaminants entering the lake via groundwater or the channel would make it impossible for us to manage. It is with heavy (broken) hearts that we have decided that we are not willing to operate under those conditions nor risk your health so we would be left with no choice but to close.
What impact would the lake closing have on you? How will that affect your health and wellbeing? Why do you use the lake now? What is it about SOWS that keeps you coming?
Variants to Option 1 – Using the lake only during flood conditions
We agree with the RTS as a scheme and know it is needed but if there was a way to achieve flood relief without destroying the water quality– we would not have to close. If the water entering the lake could be redirected during the summer months and Ferris Meadow was only used during flood conditions that should help preserve the water quality. Diverting the augmented flow through the summer months would help us maintain and manage the water quality. In the documentation you will see there was an option to do just that. The RTS have failed to adequately account for the diversity of swimmers in the lake. Currently in Ferris Meadow lake it is safe to submerge your whole head and introduce water via the ears, nose and throat so the lake is suitable for all swimmers, whether amateur or athletes. Countless swimmers will tell you that you cannot safely do this in the Thames and other river users such as rowers are advised to shower even though they are not fully submerged. Many of our swimmers also have underlying disabilities and have compromised immune systems, making them vulnerable to waterborne bacteria. They cannot swim in water which is anything less than Excellent. We, as lake operators cannot test the water every day which is what would need to happen to reassure swimmers - it is not possible to get the lab results back in time and with such variable water quality (even with current river pollutants let alone hazardous landfill waste) the operators would not be able to give swimmers any reassurance, making the business unviable." Since 2018 Emma has been meeting with the RTS team and has repeatedly asked for the swimming to be taken into consideration which has been duly ignored.
What do you think about diverting the flow? Would that make you feel more confident in the water quality? Do you think that the RTS should take the importance of the swimming more seriously? Do you think diverting the augmented flow is a necessary consequence of the RTS scheme which may save the lake for our swimmers?
Maintenance of the RTS
The long term future of the scheme is an additional and grave concern. In the Options appraisal report the reason for not choosing option 6b is “While Option 6b meets the flood risk performance required of the Scheme, it requires a major structure with future maintenance and management risk, which makes it less resilient and was therefore assessed as medium impact from a climate resilience perspective”. This statement by the RTS should strike fear into us all. If they cannot be sure that one additional structure within the scheme will be maintained correctly, then what about the whole structure? If the existing Jubilee channel has not been adequately maintained with sections now closed due to degradation what hope is there for the RTS? Digging through historic landfill is risky enough but we are looking at an environmental catastrophe should the structure fail due to lack of maintenance. Combine that with an ever changing political landscape, uncertain funding and climate change it's a complete storm building up.
“Move the swimming to another lake”
The RTS and other people suggest that we can simply move the swimming to another lake and it will be the same. Their perception is that as long as you are swimming in a lake - the rest does not matter.
Do you agree with that statement? What makes Ferris Meadow lake different or special to you?
Keep the lake intact for as long as possible
We want to ask the RTS if Ferris Meadow Lake works can be the last section to be dug and that work starts only when the rest of the scheme is nearing completion. The RTS work is due to start in 2027 and will be nearing completion in 2030. If the lake works can be the last section to be dug we can keep the swimming open with it’s excellent water quality for as long as possible.
With funding of other projects being scrapped by government (HS2,A27 Arundel bypass) and local councils struggling financially we are fearful that the lake may become victim to another scrapped scheme but once the diggers move in there is no going back.
Do you think it is reasonable to ask the RTS to leave the lake intact for as long as possible? Do you think that stipulation/caveat should be integrated into the DCO application and enforced by government?
CALL TO ACTION!
We urge you to read the supplementary consultation documentation so that you understand why they have chosen option 1 over the alternatives. There is a lot of information within the brochure with a number of additional appendixes but it is also very interesting and sets out all of the reasoning behind their decisions. That being said, the information also helps us formulate a much more robust knowledge base on which to question, query information and give intelligent feedback which we hope you will do.
The thought of having to close the lake for swimming breaks our hearts and we, as a family, are devastated. We do know that we are not willing to take a gamble with your safety, your health nor will we hope for the best so to close the swimming is the only option we are left with.
We cannot thank you enough for your continued support and we promise we have not and will not give up on the fight but please know that we cannot do this without you. Please please please send your feedback to the RTS using the link below.
With kindest regards and big thanks for reading this very long email,
Emma Pattinson & Hannah Pym