Members of the River Torridge Heritage Group took part in the March for Torridge last Saturday, drawing attention to pollution from various sources in the river Torridge and what we can do about it. The river is, of course, fundamental to our maritime heritage and a vital part of what we want to protect and promote.  

Veteran councillor David Brenton reminded us that campaigns to save the Torridge from pollution are part of our history too. In 1981, he set up an action group with the woodcarver John Butler which also involved the poet, Ted Hughes. The then MP, Tony Speller, described in Parliament the noxious impact of untreated sewage emptying into the river: ‘there is often an unpleasant slick carried up through the town on the flood and it is by no means uncommon to see faeces in the estuary itself’. He drew attention to the ‘high amenity value’ of the river, its use for sailing, bathing, fishing, and water skiing, and the importance of the coast for tourism. 

Speller’s main concern, reflecting that of his government headed by Margaret Thatcher, was the impact on the economy. Because of the lack of sewage treatment, Devon County Council had in 1970 put a complete embargo on all new development at Bideford and Northam, meaning that neither residential nor industrial land could be developed. 

The water authority wanted to instal ‘fine screening’ to remove solid waste, while allowing everything else to go into the river untreated. Neither Speller, nor Torridge council, nor large swathes of the public who supported David Brenton’s campaign, thought this was acceptable. Sewage should be treated, not sieved. 

However, the Environment Minister supported the water authority’s solution because it was cheaper, saying that although the estuary had not passed European bathing water standards, people could still swim in the ‘luscious waters’ of the Torridge if they felt like it, and the plan went ahead.

It took until the early 2000’s before South West Water’s Taw Torridge Sewage Treatment Project saw those fine screening plants converted to pumping stations and a proper sewage treatment works built at Cornborough. The question now being asked by campaigners, given the frequency of sewage ‘spillages’, is whether this has enough to capacity to cope with the development that has taken place since then. 

Meanwhile, agricultural policies have led to a different type of pollution in our rivers from run-off, but that is another story. 

TT