Political nonsense gradually being allowed to overtake this board since the Russian war echo chamber was given dispensation

Rowls wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:29 am

We completely agree on the desire to keep sewage out of our water, Lancs. But how best to do that?

That's the thing that you're (almost deliberately) failing to understand. Nobody wants to discharge sewage into the water, it's just that sometimes the cost of keeping sewage out of the water is prohibitively high. Are you saying you would set zero upper limit on the taxpayer cost?

I do wish you'd stop projecting your failures to understand stuff and assume I have the same issues mate

I don't

What you are refusing to accept (and this is because of 100% of who you are, and your lack of ability to understand anything that clashes with your world view) is that its the job of the water companies to keep the sewage out of our rivers

They charge us for water, and in return they keep the **** out of it

They are not, and its getting worse, while their investors make record sums because they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing

Have I put it in simple enough terms so it gets through to you or would you prefer it in pictures?

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 23, 2022 5:41 pm

But not yours you smart cookie!

Maybe living reasonably local to Windermere and knowing people who work in the environment of the LDNPA and on the water I know that UU's words should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Good to see you're not slow to be condescending just because you believe their spokesperson though.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:08 am

Maybe living reasonably local to Windermere and knowing people who work in the environment of the LDNPA and on the water I know that UU's words should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Good to see you're not slow to be condescending just because you believe their spokesperson though.

Reading the article linked:

“United Utilities said it had implemented measures to significantly reduce the phosphate contribution from its systems including a £40m project at Windermere completed in 2020 and the upgrading of sewage treatment plants there and at Ambleside”.

Did UU complete the project? Have they upgraded the plant at Ambleside?

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:40 am

Reading the article linked:

“United Utilities said it had implemented measures to significantly reduce the phosphate contribution from its systems including a £40m project at Windermere completed in 2020 and the upgrading of sewage treatment plants there and at Ambleside”.

Did UU complete the project? Have they upgraded the plant at Ambleside?

Sewage is still regularly dumped into Windermere when it rains from UU facilities. So if they have completed their upgrades, they weren't sufficient but I guess that depends on what they are classifying as 'significantly reduce'.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:43 am

Sewage is still regularly dumped into Windermere when it rains from UU facilities. So if they have completed their upgrades, they weren't sufficient but I guess that depends on what they are classifying as 'significantly reduce'.

So the work that they have stated has been done? What about:

“Our treatment works are meeting their Environment Agency permits, not just for phosphorus removal, which is currently at the lowest achievable limits, but also for bacteria which is removed by the UV treatment we have on our treatment plants and storm overflows at Ambleside and Windermere”.

Is that statement correct?

"The factors affecting water quality in Windermere are complex and, without targeted action by multiple sectors, including agriculture, we will not see the changes we all want."

I don’t think anyone can argue that’s not correct (can they?)

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:50 am

So the work that they have stated has been done? What about:

“Our treatment works are meeting their Environment Agency permits, not just for phosphorus removal, which is currently at the lowest achievable limits, but also for bacteria which is removed by the UV treatment we have on our treatment plants and storm overflows at Ambleside and Windermere”.

Is that statement correct?

"The factors affecting water quality in Windermere are complex and, without targeted action by multiple sectors, including agriculture, we will not see the changes we all want."

I don’t think anyone can argue that’s not correct (can they?)

Do you work for them?

There are often literally turds floating in the lake from their facilities. I'm not sure how you can argue that there isn't more they could do.

As for this bit

"The factors affecting water quality in Windermere are complex and, without targeted action by multiple sectors, including agriculture, we will not see the changes we all want."

I don’t think anyone can argue that’s not correct (can they?)

multiple sectors includes UU and they need to do more.

For the former, maybe the EA need to do more too. I don't think any party sounds good here, and cannot understand how any will defend UU.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:54 am

Do you work for them?

There are often literally turds floating in the lake from their facilities. I'm not sure how you can argue that there isn't more they could do.

As for this bit multiple sectors includes UU and they need to do more.

For the former, maybe the EA need to do more too. I don't think any party sounds good here, and cannot understand how any will defend UU.

So there is nothing in the statement UU made that is incorrect. That’s not defending them that’s just factual information that was in the article. Everyone can do more but let’s not pretend (or deliberately mislead) that UU haven’t done anything.

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:46 pm

So there is nothing in the statement UU made that is incorrect. That’s not defending them that’s just factual information that was in the article. Everyone can do more but let’s not pretend (or deliberately mislead) that UU haven’t done anything.

Let’s not pretend they’ve done enough. I’ve never said they don’t do anything have I? Just that they dump sewage in the lake, which they do.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:15 pm

Let’s not pretend they’ve done enough. I’ve never said they don’t do anything have I? Just that they dump sewage in the lake, which they do.

Quite specifically you said “ United Utilities have pulled the wool over your eyes at least” when I just pointed out some facts that would appear to be correct.

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:40 pm

Quite specifically you said “ United Utilities have pulled the wool over your eyes at least” when I just pointed out some facts that would appear to be correct.

Because you used it in response to me saying they dump sewage in the lake, presumably meaning you think they’ve done enough, which they clearly haven’t. Since you love ‘facts’ so much, the fact there’s turds in the lake on a regular basis that would suggest they haven’t done enough.

You seeming content with what they say they have done would say they’ve pulled the wool over your eyes imo. You’re always free to feel otherwise though.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 12:35 am

And the other question being: Are you prepared for the alternative?

That's having turds floating down our high streets BTW

Sorry to be graphic but that IS the alternative.

I see human turds floating down the high street every night

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:30 pm

Because you used it in response to me saying they dump sewage in the lake, presumably meaning you think they’ve done enough, which they clearly haven’t. Since you love ‘facts’ so much, the fact there’s turds in the lake on a regular basis that would suggest they haven’t done enough.

You seeming content with what they say they have done would say they’ve pulled the wool over your eyes imo. You’re always free to feel otherwise though.

No, it was in response to you only referring to the part of the article that served your agenda, deliberately misleading those that didn’t follow the link to the article.

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:07 pm

No, it was in response to you only referring to the part of the article that served your agenda, deliberately misleading those that didn’t follow the link to the article.

My agenda? A clean Windermere. That should be everyone’s agenda.

I wasn’t referring to any part of the article. I was referring to the facts of the situation. You seem to want to pretend it isn’t happening.

Stop defending UU, they’re not going to give you a discount for it but they will keep dumping sewage in waterways.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 8:35 pm

My agenda? A clean Windermere. That should be everyone’s agenda.

I wasn’t referring to any part of the article. I was referring to the facts of the situation. You seem to want to pretend it isn’t happening.

Stop defending UU, they’re not going to give you a discount for it but they will keep dumping sewage in waterways.

Whatever

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 9:31 pm

Whatever

I’ll take that as acceptance you were having a completely different debate to me.

Hope you enjoy working for UU

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:51 pm

I’ll take that as acceptance you were having a completely different debate to me.

Hope you enjoy working for UU

All I’ve being doing is correcting you.

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:27 pm

All I’ve being doing is correcting you.

You haven’t corrected anything. Just repeatedly quoted their statement which doesn’t say they don’t allow sewage into Windermere.

They’ve upgraded some facilities, fantastic. They still dump sewage in Windermere, awful.

What they said in their statement is correct, you deliberately tried to mislead people by implying there statement was false. I corrected you.

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 25, 2022 1:39 pm

What they said in their statement is correct, you deliberately tried to mislead people by implying there statement was false. I corrected you.

I’m not saying their statement is false. I said they dump sewage in Windermere. Both statements are true. You were defending them, not correcting me.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:17 pm

I’m not saying their statement is false. I said they dump sewage in Windermere. Both statements are true. You were defending them, not correcting me.

As I said “Whatever” you know what you wrote and I know what you wrote, if anyone is bothered they can just read it for themselves, it’s on the first page.

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 25, 2022 5:39 pm

As I said “Whatever” you know what you wrote and I know what you wrote, if anyone is bothered they can just read it for themselves, it’s on the first page.

Judging by what you’ve more recently written you don’t understand what I wrote.

I know what I wrote, and I know how what I wrote and what’s in the article can both be true. The fact you can’t is your problem, not mine and certainly doesn’t mean you’ve been “correcting” me.

You say “whatever” but you still can’t help replying can you

I understand exactly what you wrote and what you implied, you got caught out that’s all. Are you one of these people that always needs the last word?

Burnley Ace wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 25, 2022 8:38 pm

I understand exactly what you wrote and what you implied, you got caught out that’s all. Are you one of these people that always needs the last word?

If I am then there’s clearly two of us…

I got caught out? How so? You’ve not referenced anything that counters what I said. I didn’t imply anything. I stated it.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 25, 2022 9:31 pm

If I am then there’s clearly two of us…

I got caught out? How so? You’ve not referenced anything that counters what I said. I didn’t imply anything. I stated it.

Fun reading your too and fro chat as it is, can you two please get a room

<< Je vais juste laisser ca la>>

Rowls wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 23, 2022 1:57 pm

I'm not inclined to turn it into a silly political point scoring opportunity.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 23, 2022 3:49 pm

I don't recall seeing much from Labour on the problem that went down well with the public.

Jeremy Corbyn said he'd renationalize the water companies. The public weren't persuaded enough to buy into his ideas on how to run the country.

Rebecca Pow, Environment Minister, has resigned this week, with many of her colleagues. Just about the last action she took was to refuse to grant the River Wye Special Protection Zone status as requested by Herefordshire council. It wasn't a surprise, just consistent with the governments stance of protecting the money over the environment.

https://www.herefordtimes.com/news/2024 ... tion-plan/

The whole Lake District has been a catastrophe since so many people have been going to visit there in the last 20 years or so.

Most of them would and should be at Blackpool Pleasure Beach or Alton Towers if it wasn't so expensive.

30/40 plus years ago you got the benefit of one of England's wonders, but not now.

Bin Ont Turf wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 08, 2022 9:24 pm

The whole Lake District has been a catastrophe since so many people have been going to visit there in the last 20 years or so.

Most of them would and should be at Blackpool Pleasure Beach or Alton Towers if it wasn't so expensive.

30/40 plus years ago you got the benefit of one of England's wonders, but not now.

You still get it, but you have to get away from the roads and up fells that are hard to reach

Recommend the fells other side of the M6 to be honest, no one is ever there and you get a great view of the Eastern Lake District

Try crowdfunding if you really want to go to Alton Towers that bad but cant afford it. I'll stick in a quid if it helps protect the Lake District by keeping you out.

If you go to Ambleside, Grasmere, Windermere, Keswick, then you are going to hate it

If you try to climb the popular mountains, then ditto

But Haweswater is quiet, anywhere on the Eastern side, anywhere at least one peak away from a road, and if you go early

Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 08, 2022 9:27 pm

You still get it, but you have to get away from the roads and up fells that are hard to reach

Recommend the fells other side of the M6 to be honest, no one is ever there and you get a great view of the Eastern Lake District

But Coniston and Derwent are mine, and everyone needs to f**k off from going there.

Bin Ont Turf wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 08, 2022 9:38 pm

But Coniston and Derwent are mine, and everyone needs to f**k off from going there.

Christ, you might as well rock up in Windermere

Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 08, 2022 9:40 pm

Christ, you might as well rock up in Windermere

You can't take away the memories of a young boy,

I think that all cars should be stopped at Lancaster in a big car park and everyone is made to walk the rest of the way.

The M6 should have a toll at Carnforth and redirect tw*ts through the Yorkshire Dales. All the other roads should be mined and you're only let in if you know the difference between 'their' and 'there'.

And we should be able to shoot dead anyone who talks too loudly.

Bin Ont Turf wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 08, 2022 10:06 pm

You can't take away the memories of a young boy,

I think that all cars should be stopped at Lancaster in a big car park and everyone is made to walk the rest of the way.

The M6 should have a toll at Carnforth and redirect tw*ts through the Yorkshire Dales. All the other roads should be mined and you're only let in if you know the difference between 'their' and 'there'.

And we should be able to shoot dead anyone who talks too loudly.

100%

This.

I was up there for a long weekend with the lad recently. Top of the Old Man was like Burnley McDonald's on a Saturday lunchtime (with similar clientele).. Striding Edge was like walking along the M62 and Scafell Pike wasn't much better. Much of Pavey Ark is grossly over-used.

Agree with Lancs on the Eastern fells..or at a pinch the Bow Fell/Crinkle Crags area still offers some solitude.

When I lived in the UK, even on bank holidays, I could find any number of walks away from the popular ones. The only problem could be parking but if you arrived early enough it wasn’t difficult.
Smaller fells like Silver Howe. Helm Crag, Barf and Lords seat are really enjoyable walks with good views and no crowds. You don’t have to just look at the 3000ft fells to enjoy yourself.

It's a sign of the times. We travel much more.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48401491

To return to the OP, interesting reading for those who think the utilities are doing all they should:

https://anglingtrust.net/2022/07/14/wat ... ur-rivers/

The environment agency pulling no punches
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... s-foreword

In 2021, the environmental performance of England’s 9 water and sewerage companies was the worst we have seen for years.

The sector’s performance on pollution was shocking, much worse than previous years.

Guess they just need someone to explain to them that the alternative is too expensive.

aggi wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 15, 2022 7:45 pm

The environment agency pulling no punches
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... s-foreword

In 2021, the environmental performance of England’s 9 water and sewerage companies was the worst we have seen for years.

The sector’s performance on pollution was shocking, much worse than previous years.

Guess they just need someone to explain to them that the alternative is too expensive.

The Environment Agency say they are doing more but it's obvious lots more needs to be done. Years of cuts have resulted in a lack of resources to deal with these issues and private firms will exploit whatever and whenever they can.... Like someone said above, this government in particular prioritises economy over environment

Rowls wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 23, 2022 1:32 pm

Share price or utility bill price?

They're linked, you see.

And you've demonstrated perfectly what I mentioned earlier about the standard of debate we are capable of in this country these days.

We could stop ALL sewage getting into our water systems virtually overnight - but what we need to discuss very sensibly is the cost/benefit analysis and what we are prepared to pay.

Our water sytems are generally healthier than they have been since we became an industrial nation but we need to work tirelessly to improve them and make them cleaner.

You can fo quite a lot with these sort of profits

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.busine ... 257162.amp

aggi wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 15, 2022 7:45 pm

The environment agency pulling no punches
https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... s-foreword

In 2021, the environmental performance of England’s 9 water and sewerage companies was the worst we have seen for years.

The sector’s performance on pollution was shocking, much worse than previous years.

Guess they just need someone to explain to them that the alternative is too expensive.

Weird that Burnley Ace isn't along to UU's defence this time...