Severn Trent Water pollute another Sandwell park

 

 

So in April, this abysmal environmental polluter were once again responsible for a faecal attack on another Sandwell Park- this time the upper pool at Redhouse in Great Barr. This has happened before at this “green flag” park, and to cut a long story short, a local resident has supplied me with bundles of letters he sent to this company over many years, the consumer council for water, and Ofwat about related matters. All of this has been forwarded to Sarah Coombes MP , who has advised me that she has still to receive an official response from STW after all this time.

Like all previous events , the pollution arose from a STW asset which feeds into the pool and serves a large catchment area. A penstock valve operates flow into the upper pool, and it was apparent that a billowing soup of shite was pouring out of here and spreading outwards, once again threatening wildlife, though STW like to pretend that this is down to something else.

Friends of Redhouse Chair, Dave Fisher was quick to post a video showing this which can be viewed below. He also contacted the council, and calls were put in to the EA from day one, including those I made myself.

Facebook

Unlike the dismally slow attendance at Smethwick Hall park in 2019, on this occasion more stops appear to have been pulled out, perhaps only because they knew that social media was watching. This however was not immediate, and there is some dispute as to when STW were actually informed and responded, with my location report being inaccurately plotted.

A boom was put in place around the offending stench and then pumps installed to oxygenate the water.

These pumps ran for some days with 24/7 attendance by contractors Adler and Allen. Following this I made communication with STW asking for answers. I eventually got a response, which was more inflated pr and denials. The full responses are set out below, STW response in red, my rebuttal in black, and their subsequent response to this in blue. Judge for yourself if you believe them.

#”We were first altered about a suspected pollution in this area yesterday when the Environment Agency contacted us.  We attended quickly to find all our assets operating normally and no environmental impact.  As with all pollutions, we reported this information back to the EA. “

And yet Sandwell council claim to have contacted the EA a week earlier about this incident- so can you confirm if you attended then and you also failed to identify the correct location at this time- thus the issue has been happening for at least two weeks? 

“This was first reported to us by the EA on the 17/03/2025 at 14:55 and we attended site at 16:27.

We are made aware of pollutions through a number of routes:

We identify them ourselves and self-report them.  This is formally measured by the EA, and we have been green on this measure since 2013, self-reporting 89% of our incidents.

·                     EA officers spot them and call us directly.

·                     Customers call the EA who then call us

·                     Customers call us directly.

All pollutions are picked up by our 24/7 control centre who dispatch a crew immediately.  We attend the majority of pollutions within 2 hours”

SO EITHER SANDWELL COUNCIL OFFICERS WERE LYING OR SEVERN TRENT ARE HERE. 

#“Following your mail and helpful videos and photos, we realised this was actually a different location but in the same area so we re-attended and found a blockage in our sewer.  This is quite common in this area, and we often find the cause to be third party – either damage to our pipes or things being put in the sewer that we are not bound to receive.  Sometimes these items alone can create a restriction, but it is often made worse by mis-use of the sewer (fats, wipes, nappies, etc).  We complete extensive CCTV work to identify the cause and then use our team of Network Protection Officers (residential properties) or ECAS (commercial) to help educate customers and hopefully prevent future incidents.”

This is very generalised PR spin and I have to tell you that my BS detection limits are calibrated to very low. Why is it common in this area? What frequency of surveying is carried out by STW in this area or catchment, when was the last occasion this was carried out and found to be no issues or clear and why is there only ever reaction to events like this? Why do you always blame the public, rather than consider if your investigations or even detection of the reported pollution location arisings are accurate, as was not in this case? 

“Across our network we removed 28,062 blockages last year and we survey 30,000-40,000 pipes per year to proactively cleanse and fix pipes where needed. The number of blockages is improving every year due to proactive inspections and cleansing areas where historical data tells us we have a problem plus the extensive work we do to educate customers through our network protection team and in local schools.  On average we clear 59 blockages a year in the B43 postcode.  

Last year, of the 1,256 pollution incidents we attended, 274 were caused by Severn Trent assets and resulted in a minor impact on the environment. Any pollution is one too many and we are investing in our assets and our response capability to significantly improve this.  We remain sector leading, but are constantly striving to be better.

In the B43 area we have attended 24 reported pollutions since 2017 and 1 was attributable to Severn Trent.  The rest were either confirmed as ‘no impact’ or 3rd party.”

I AM NOT BELIEVING WHAT STW CLAIM TO BE “MINOR IMPACTS” GIVEN THEIR FAILURE TO ADMIT THAT THEIR RAW SEWAGE CAUSES ALL AVIAN BOTULISM ISSUES WHERE IT OCCURS. THEY MAY NOT WANT TO MAKE THE LINK, BUT I WILL. 

“This particular blockage resulted in a minor trickle of discharge into the pond which has now been stopped and we have started investigations upstream to identify the cause.  I will personally review the outcome of these investigations and ensure all appropriate actions are taken to ensure we prevent further blockages.”

What volume of “discharge” as you conveniently describe human excrement and toilet flushings do you estimate went into the lake, and how are you able to measure this please? Is this a combined sewer overflow and do you have ANY discharge consents, yes or no will do. 

What were the oxygen readings in the lake on your first attendance? What were the ammonia/nitrate levels? 

What are they now, and what do you expect them to reach following this minor incident as you appear to claim it was, when pumps have now been operating for over one week by Adler and Allen? 

“In regard to this specific incident, it was caused by third-party misuse of a sewer on a nearby road. A circular concrete pipe cap (not related to any Severn Trent work) was removed from the sewer by our operatives which was causing a restriction on the line. The event did not take place on a combined sewer nor any combined sewer overflow as the sewer system is separated in this area – foul water and surface water is carried through different systems.

In terms of measuring the volume or flow of discharge, there is no monitoring in the area to be able to provide a specific number or total volume.

In reference to the oxygen readings and ammonia levels on the lake, these were collected at the time and over the subsequent days to help track the health of the waterbody. As we don’t manage the lake we don’t hold information in terms of background levels. As you mention, we did instruct Adler and Allen to support as a specialist Environmental Consultant to ensure our response was adequate and to leave the waterbody in an improved condition.

Whilst the incident was caused by a third-party, it is still under review with the EA as part of the categorisation process. This process is usually concluded relatively quickly so would be happy to share more specific readings and levels with you at that point.”

 

NB NO FURTHER INFO HAS BEEN SHARED WITH OR COMMUNICATD BY STW TO MYSELF. 

“We are proud of our Environmental performance.  We have been awarded the Environment Agency’s highest standard of 4 star status for the last 5 years.  Our teams are committed to not only protecting but improving the environment.  So, whilst on site, we carried out a further assessment and noticed the water body was being impacted by a clean water leak. which we have raised to South Saffs (SIC) Water who are on site currently. We also noted an algal bloom and whilst we wait for the EA to attend, we have instructed our own contractors to complete an environmental assessment.  We will also work with all parties to ensure the pond is left clean.”

I substantially beg to differ in opinion to yours on your company’s environmental -performance having reported dozens of incidents over the last 20 years- particularly in Smethwick. How convenient it is that you cannot find pollution when reporting back to the EA, and then only when people persist and keep ringing them do you come back and find it down the line. I wish I could mark my own work, but that is the state of how dire the privatised water industry is in that this is allowed to happen with weak political regulation. 

What does “clean water” have to do with this, it appears to be a rather desperate attempt to drag another water company into your pollution. One may take the view that clean water is probably doing good to combat your company’s sewage rather than causing harm? 

Algal bloom- do you think that people are that stupid that they do not associate this with raw sewage, and that this event has obviously bee going on for some time and has caused this bloom to occur, or is a substantive causal factor? 

“The Environment Agency (EA) measure our, and the other water companies’ Environmental performance using a set of 7 metrics. In addition to reporting the total number of pollutions that we’re accountable for, we also are measured on how many of our incidents we “self-report” i.e. we tell the EA about before they’re informed by anyone else. We have been “green” for this metric since 2013, self-reporting 89% of our incidents in 2023 and 89.7% in 2024.  We have achieved the highest level of performance against these 7 metrics – receiving the top 4* award for the last 5 years. 

In relation to the clean water leak that we’ve reported to South Staffs Water, the Chlorine used to make sure the water is good to drink, can disrupt ecosystems as it reacts with organic matter in the water to form harmful by-products and subsequently degrade water quality.

Whilst sewage escaping into a watercourse can create algal blooms (commonly known as sewage fungus), it’s not the only cause of algal blooms, other nutrient rich discharges also can create algal blooms (i.e. fertilisers) and that’s why we need to explore all contributors to this watercourse.”

“Thanks you again for raising.  I will be back in touch when we have understood the true cause of the blockage and will happily share the work we undertake to prevent this happening again.”