Farm at centre of pollution incident co-owned by Meurig Raymond, whose organisation has lobbied to weaken environmental regulations on pollution

A family farm co-owned by the president of the National Farmers’ Union, which has consistently lobbied against a tightening of farm pollution regulations, was the source of river pollution in 2013.

Polluting material is thought to have spilled into a local river at the Welsh farm, causing damage over a kilometre of land and water.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Meurig Raymond, president of the NFU, at his farm in Pembrokeshire, Wales. Photograph: Aled Llywelyn/Athena Pictures/Aled Llywelyn/Athena

Jordanston Hall farm, near Haverfordwest, is the family farm inherited by Meurig Raymond, president of the NFU, and his twin brother Mansel. It was Mansel who was prosecuted in 2014 and was fined for polluting a tributary of the Cleddau river, with a fine of £665 and costs of more than £3,000 for the incident.

The case highlights the relatively small fines that are levied on farmers who pollute waterways, as well as problems with pollution from farms. The union that Meurig presides over has consistently called on ministers to weaken proposed new environmental regulations on pollution.

The NFU submitted a response to a government consultation on diffuse agricultural pollution last November, calling proposals to tighten regulations “inappropriate” and “disproportionate” and urging a “non-regulatory” approach instead.

A spokesman for the NFU said: “The National Farmer’s Union engages in lobbying of the relevant authorities on any issue that concerns its members, including environmental regulation, which is an area of significant concern to its membership. It has done so consistently over a period of years. Farmers take their environmental responsibilities seriously and care about the environment, as does the NFU, but the NFU’s consistent position on behalf of its members is that any regulation must be proportionate and evidence-based.”

“The [NFU] does not pass comment on the private farming interests of its members, employees or officeholders, or their families.”

River pollution from slurry and agricultural run-off is believed to be a much bigger problem than government records show, with many instances going unreported or unprosecuted.

With further government cuts to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) - whose budget cuts were some of the heaviest in Whitehall - this is likely to continue as over-stretched Environment Agency inspectors struggle with the impacts of flooding as well as their farm duties. Environment secretary, Liz Truss, recently said farmers will face thousands fewer inspections.

The pollution incident at Jordanston Hall farm was only discovered when environmental inspectors from Natural Resources Wales, the Welsh equivalent of the Environment Agency, visiting the farm for a routine enquiry related to fencing, noticed a strong smell in a ditch on the farm at a special conservation site. It is not known how long the pollution had been occurring.

One related charge, of failing to keep slurry properly, which Mansel Raymond denied, was dropped from the 2014 prosecution, and Mansel Raymond argued that the source of the pollution was not slurry from a large repository, but the draining of dirty water from the farmyard and the nearby road. The Raymond brothers are also estimated to have spent tens of thousands of pounds on remedial work.

Meurig Raymond was not prosecuted and denies any connection to the incident.

Has the NFU president's farm led by example when it comes to bad practice in the countryside? Read more



On 30 November 2015, the NFU mounted a strong opposition to a Defra consultation on new basic rules on pollution.

Mark Pope, chairman of the NFU environment forum, said: “The proposed catch-all regulatory approach is disproportionate as it takes no consideration of the intensity of farming activity and locations. If a decision to implement the proposed rules is taken the NFU urges that Defra consider an exemption for low-intensity holdings.”

He added: “The proposed rules also shift the burden of proof for pollution away from the Environment Agency and on to the land manager. This is unjust as the land manager will have to prove pollution has not occurred rather than the EA proving it has. This will add significantly to the already large burden on time-pressed farmers.” He concluded: “Our preferred option, and the best way to support the environment, would be to adopt a non-regulatory and advice-led approach.”

Andrew Clark, director of policy at the NFU, said: “There has been a long-term trend showing a decline in the number of serious water pollution incidents from the agricultural industry. This is down to a number of factors including the take-up of advice, the implementation of good practice and investment in storage capacity and machinery.”

Wildlife and water groups did not want to comment on the Jordanston Hall farm incident but said farm pollution was a serious issue for the UK, and good regulation was vital for protecting waterways.

A spokesman for the Canal and Rivers Trust said: “[Pollution from farms is] a very serious problem for the UK, based on Environment Agency figures from 2013 which put agriculture as the sector with more impacts on our waterbodies than any other, including the water industry. Our experience with the Environment Agency on major incidents has been good and we hope that continues.”

Richard Benwell, head of government affairs at the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, said: “There will always be accidents, but wilful breaches of the law should be taken extremely seriously wherever they occur, and proper regulation is vital to keep our countryside safe and thriving. Farmers should be the frontline of defence for nature – stewards of our land and water – and many play that part well. It’s a shame that a few don’t respect the land they rely on and turn a blind eye to pollution.”

Jordanston Hall farm is one of the largest in Pembrokeshire, and had a value of £1m according to Land Registry documents, though the current value of the farm as a working business may be higher.





