Stop the Spreading of Toxic Sludge

We responded to the Government’s consultation on sewage sludge and we’re calling for urgent change.

Sewage sludge must be properly regulated under the Environmental Permitting system. But regulation alone won’t fix the sludge scandal.

The companies that create the toxic chemicals ending up in sludge must pay to remove them. Farmers and water customers should not be left footing the bill for pollution they didn’t cause.

And we must not replace one problem with another. The answer isn’t simply to burn sludge and create more pollution through incineration. The focus must be on stopping contamination at source and cleaning it up properly — so sludge can be safely treated as a valuable resource, not a toxic liability.

We made sure the Government heard loud and clear that the public wants change. We mobilised over 530 supporters across the country to respond to the sewage sludge consultation and demand tougher protections for our soil, food and water.

To make it easy to take part, we produced a clear, simple guidance on how to respond.

The ‘stop toxic sludge’ petition was handed to Minister Hardy outside DEFRA, the day before River Action’s Agricultural Strategy was launched in Parliament.

With a sluggly looking Christmas pudding and presents wrapped in toxic substance warning logos we took the opportunity to brief the Minister and her advisors on the impact of toxic sludge on our soils and waterways.

The petition harnesses the shared public outrage over toxic sewage sludge, and asks Secretary of State to:

– Stop the spreading of toxic sewage sludge on farmland

– Make water companies pay the true cost of disposing of this toxic waste safely

– Properly regulate and set legal limits on sewage sludge passed to farmers

Over 60,000 people have signed and it remains open – make your voice heard.

The long-awaited report from Sir Jon Cunliffe’s Water Commission mentions tougher regulatory oversight of sludge.

Greenpeace’s investigative arm exposes serious weaknesses in the Environment Agency’s controls on an industry that spreads millions of tonnes of sewage sludge on farmland each year.

In June 2025, after years of campaigning and legal action, DEFRA strengthened the Farming Rules for Water. However, the new rules left loopholes that allowed manure to be spread when crops didn’t need it, which often leads to unnecessary pollution in rivers like the Severn. The update rules fell short on:

1) Autumn manure spreading: It didn’t go far enough to clarify the rules around autumn manure spreading – a practice often linked to river pollution.

2) A lack of clarity around enforcement thresholds: I.e., how are the rules actually going to be enforced.

A month later, following River Action’s letter to DEFRA seeking urgent clarification on the loophole, the government confirmed that manure must only be applied when it meets crop or soil needs at the time of application. This long-overdue change marks a major step towards reducing agricultural pollution, protecting our waterways, and holding regulators and polluters to account.

Jonah Fisher reports on growing concern in the UK over the widespread practice of spreading treated sewage sludge (known as biosolids) on farmland as a fertiliser. Around 3.5 million tonnes of sludge are applied to fields each year, but scientists, farmers and campaigners warn it contains a mix of contaminants that are not covered by current regulations and can accumulate in soil and water with potential long-term impacts on soil health, crop safety and human health. Critics argue that UK rules governing sludge use are outdated, with testing requirements set decades ago and no legal limits on many modern pollutants.

Environmental leaders and former regulators say repeated calls for stricter regulation have been ignored by government, prolonging a “regulatory gap.” Some farmers express alarm about the unknown effects on soil and food safety, while water companies warn that tightening the rules could force them to incinerate or landfill the waste, increasing costs for bill payers.

A judicial review, brought against the Environment Agency by the environmental campaign group, Fighting Dirty, concerns the agency’s strategy for safe and sustainable sludge use.

Although the Environment Agency was found to not be at fault for the delay in introducing rules on testing sludge for long-lasting harmful chemicals before it is used as fertiliser, the case spurred UK ministers to prioritise the issue.