Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Thousands join biggest-ever UK environmental lawsuit over river pollution

News Feed
Wednesday, October 8, 2025

Thousands join biggest-ever UK environmental lawsuit over river pollutionSteffan MessengerEnvironment correspondent, BBC WalesBBCThe Wye Valley is a designated Area of Outstanding Natural BeautyThe biggest legal claim ever brought in the UK over environmental pollution in the country has been filed at the High Court.Almost 4,000 people have signed up to the lawsuit against major poultry producers and a water company over allegations of "extensive and widespread pollution" in three rivers - the Wye, Lugg and Usk.They argue the state of the rivers in recent years has severely affected local businesses, property values and people's enjoyment of the area, and are seeking "substantial damages".The firms being sued - Avara Foods Limited, Freemans of Newent Limited and Welsh Water - all deny the claims.Celine O'Donovan, from the law firm Leigh Day, said the case was the largest brought in the UK over environmental pollution in the country on three counts – the number of claimants, the geographical scale of the damage and the total damages claimed.Those who have joined the group legal claim all either live or work alongside the rivers or use them regularly for leisure activities like swimming and canoeing.They want the court to order a clean-up of the rivers as well as compensation.A combination of chicken manure and sewage spills are blamed for harming water quality and suffocating fish and other wildlife.The Wye in particular has become symbolic of widespread concerns over the worsening state of the UK's waterways in recent years.As many as 23 million chickens, a quarter of the UK's poultry production, are raised in the river's catchment area.Justine EvansJustine Evans used to love swimming and canoeing on the River Wye but is now worried polluted water might make her illIt flows for 155 miles from its source in the Cambrian Mountains of mid Wales along the border with England to the Severn Estuary.The River Lugg is a major tributary of the Wye, flowing predominately through Herefordshire.The River Usk runs through the Bannau Brycheiniog National Park, also known as the Brecon Beacons, as well as the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site before reaching the Bristol Channel at Newport.All three rivers are protected for their importance to rare wildlife, including otters, freshwater pearl mussels and the Atlantic salmon.Wildlife filmmaker Justine Evans is acting as the lead claimant and said she had noticed a "stark decline" in the Wye's condition in recent years.The once clear river had turned murky and slimy, completely changing how she felt about living alongside it, she said."It's horrible to think what has happened to the wildlife it is home to," she added.Friends of the lower WyeCampaigners have been raising concerns over the state of the river Wye for several yearsFormer Olympic swimmer Roland Lee moved to live near the Wye in order to have access to open water for swimming."But now I'd actually go as far as to warn people against going in," he said.Another claimant, Gino Parisi from Raglan, Monmouthshire, was worried about the state of the River Usk."Having grown up around the River Usk in the 1980s, I know just how beautiful the river and surrounding area can be," he said.Now the water had become "mucky and cloudy" and "you can see build-ups of foam in a number of spots"."Not only would I feel uncomfortable going in, but I'd also have concerns for my health."Why is the River Wye polluted?The claimants allege pollution has been caused by run-off from farmland containing high concentrations of phosphorus, nitrogen and bacteria from the spreading of poultry manure and sewage bio solids used as fertiliser.They also blame discharge of sewage directly into rivers.The companies being sued are accused of negligence, causing private and public nuisance and even trespass where the riverbed has been affected on a claimant's property.One part of the claim is brought on behalf of people affected by what is known as the Lugg Moratorium - restrictions on building brought in by Herefordshire County Council to protect the River Lugg from further pollution.Oliver Holland from Leigh Day said the claim was "the culmination of an extraordinary effort by local community members and campaign groups to research, monitor and advocate for their rivers"."This is the largest legal action concerning environmental pollution ever brought in the UK. In a context where government and regulators have failed to prevent the degradation of our rivers the court has become the last avenue for justice," he added.Gino ParisiGino Parisi has "many happy memories" of swimming and paddling in the River UskAvara Foods Limited is one of the largest poultry processors in the UK. Its subsidiary, Freemans of Newent, based in Hereford is also named as a defendant in the case. A spokesperson for Avara Foods told the BBC it shared concerns over the condition of the River Wye."But we believe that this legal claim is based on a misunderstanding, as no manure is stored or spread on poultry-only farms that supply Avara Foods."Where poultry manure is used as fertiliser, it is for other produce in other agricultural sectors," the company said, adding individual farmers were responsible for how nutrients were used in their arable operations. The company said it employed about 1,500 people in the Wye catchment area and all its poultry was produced "to standards that are amongst the highest in the world"."The focus instead needs to be on solutions that will improve the health of the river, addressing all forms of pollution and the effects of climate change, and for action to be taken accordingly," it said.Welsh Water said the company had made "significant investments over recent years", achieving "real improvements in water quality".These included spending £70m over the last five years to improve sites along the River Wye, work that was delivered "ahead of the target set by our regulators", and £33m for the River Usk."Unfortunately, the water pollution caused by other sectors during this period has increased significantly, reducing the overall impact of the water quality improvements we have achieved," a spokesperson said.The company intended to "defend this case robustly", they added."The fact that we are a not-for-profit company means that any payments to these claimants would necessarily reduce the amount that we can re-invest in delivering further improvements for the benefit of all of our customers and the environment."Environmental campaigners lost a high-profile legal challenge against the UK government over pollution in the river Wye in 2024.Ministers in Westminster and Cardiff Bay have since set up a joint £1m fund to investigate the sources of pollution in the river.

Livestock and water companies are accused of “extensive” pollution in the Wye, Lugg and Usk rivers.

Thousands join biggest-ever UK environmental lawsuit over river pollution

Steffan MessengerEnvironment correspondent, BBC Wales

BBC The River Wye, seen from Symonds Yat Rock in Symonds Yat, Herefordshire, near the border with Gloucestershire and Monmouthshire, Wales. On the left is Huntsham Hill, and Coppet Hill is on the right, with the village of Goodrich just visible in the background.BBC

The Wye Valley is a designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

The biggest legal claim ever brought in the UK over environmental pollution in the country has been filed at the High Court.

Almost 4,000 people have signed up to the lawsuit against major poultry producers and a water company over allegations of "extensive and widespread pollution" in three rivers - the Wye, Lugg and Usk.

They argue the state of the rivers in recent years has severely affected local businesses, property values and people's enjoyment of the area, and are seeking "substantial damages".

The firms being sued - Avara Foods Limited, Freemans of Newent Limited and Welsh Water - all deny the claims.

Celine O'Donovan, from the law firm Leigh Day, said the case was the largest brought in the UK over environmental pollution in the country on three counts – the number of claimants, the geographical scale of the damage and the total damages claimed.

Those who have joined the group legal claim all either live or work alongside the rivers or use them regularly for leisure activities like swimming and canoeing.

They want the court to order a clean-up of the rivers as well as compensation.

A combination of chicken manure and sewage spills are blamed for harming water quality and suffocating fish and other wildlife.

The Wye in particular has become symbolic of widespread concerns over the worsening state of the UK's waterways in recent years.

As many as 23 million chickens, a quarter of the UK's poultry production, are raised in the river's catchment area.

Justine Evans Wildlife filmmaker Justine Evans takes a selfie while canoeing on the river Wye.  She is sat in a black kayak, wearing a dark blue hoodie, a red life jacket and a pink baseball cap.  Justine Evans

Justine Evans used to love swimming and canoeing on the River Wye but is now worried polluted water might make her ill

It flows for 155 miles from its source in the Cambrian Mountains of mid Wales along the border with England to the Severn Estuary.

The River Lugg is a major tributary of the Wye, flowing predominately through Herefordshire.

The River Usk runs through the Bannau Brycheiniog National Park, also known as the Brecon Beacons, as well as the Blaenavon Industrial Landscape World Heritage Site before reaching the Bristol Channel at Newport.

All three rivers are protected for their importance to rare wildlife, including otters, freshwater pearl mussels and the Atlantic salmon.

Wildlife filmmaker Justine Evans is acting as the lead claimant and said she had noticed a "stark decline" in the Wye's condition in recent years.

The once clear river had turned murky and slimy, completely changing how she felt about living alongside it, she said.

"It's horrible to think what has happened to the wildlife it is home to," she added.

Friends of the lower Wye People form the letters SOS on the banks of the River Wye. There are trees either side of the riverFriends of the lower Wye

Campaigners have been raising concerns over the state of the river Wye for several years

Former Olympic swimmer Roland Lee moved to live near the Wye in order to have access to open water for swimming.

"But now I'd actually go as far as to warn people against going in," he said.

Another claimant, Gino Parisi from Raglan, Monmouthshire, was worried about the state of the River Usk.

"Having grown up around the River Usk in the 1980s, I know just how beautiful the river and surrounding area can be," he said.

Now the water had become "mucky and cloudy" and "you can see build-ups of foam in a number of spots".

"Not only would I feel uncomfortable going in, but I'd also have concerns for my health."

Why is the River Wye polluted?

The claimants allege pollution has been caused by run-off from farmland containing high concentrations of phosphorus, nitrogen and bacteria from the spreading of poultry manure and sewage bio solids used as fertiliser.

They also blame discharge of sewage directly into rivers.

The companies being sued are accused of negligence, causing private and public nuisance and even trespass where the riverbed has been affected on a claimant's property.

One part of the claim is brought on behalf of people affected by what is known as the Lugg Moratorium - restrictions on building brought in by Herefordshire County Council to protect the River Lugg from further pollution.

Oliver Holland from Leigh Day said the claim was "the culmination of an extraordinary effort by local community members and campaign groups to research, monitor and advocate for their rivers".

"This is the largest legal action concerning environmental pollution ever brought in the UK. In a context where government and regulators have failed to prevent the degradation of our rivers the court has become the last avenue for justice," he added.

Gino Parisi Gino Parisi and his dog pictured alongside the river Usk.  Gino Parisi

Gino Parisi has "many happy memories" of swimming and paddling in the River Usk

Avara Foods Limited is one of the largest poultry processors in the UK.

Its subsidiary, Freemans of Newent, based in Hereford is also named as a defendant in the case.

A spokesperson for Avara Foods told the BBC it shared concerns over the condition of the River Wye.

"But we believe that this legal claim is based on a misunderstanding, as no manure is stored or spread on poultry-only farms that supply Avara Foods.

"Where poultry manure is used as fertiliser, it is for other produce in other agricultural sectors," the company said, adding individual farmers were responsible for how nutrients were used in their arable operations.

The company said it employed about 1,500 people in the Wye catchment area and all its poultry was produced "to standards that are amongst the highest in the world".

"The focus instead needs to be on solutions that will improve the health of the river, addressing all forms of pollution and the effects of climate change, and for action to be taken accordingly," it said.

Welsh Water said the company had made "significant investments over recent years", achieving "real improvements in water quality".

These included spending £70m over the last five years to improve sites along the River Wye, work that was delivered "ahead of the target set by our regulators", and £33m for the River Usk.

"Unfortunately, the water pollution caused by other sectors during this period has increased significantly, reducing the overall impact of the water quality improvements we have achieved," a spokesperson said.

The company intended to "defend this case robustly", they added.

"The fact that we are a not-for-profit company means that any payments to these claimants would necessarily reduce the amount that we can re-invest in delivering further improvements for the benefit of all of our customers and the environment."

Environmental campaigners lost a high-profile legal challenge against the UK government over pollution in the river Wye in 2024.

Ministers in Westminster and Cardiff Bay have since set up a joint £1m fund to investigate the sources of pollution in the river.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

EPA urged to classify abortion drugs as pollutants

It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the drug.

(NewsNation) — Anti-abortion group Students for Life of America is urging the Environmental Protection Agency to add abortion drug mifepristone to its list of water contaminants. It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the abortion drug. “The EPA has the regulatory authority and humane responsibility to determine the extent of abortion water pollution, caused by the reckless and negligent policies pushed by past administrations through the [Food and Drug Administration],” Kristan Hawkins, president of SFLA, said in a release. “Take the word ‘abortion’ out of it and ask, should chemically tainted blood and placenta tissue, along with human remains, be flushed by the tons into America’s waterways? And since the federal government set that up, shouldn’t we know what’s in our water?” she added. In 2025, lawmakers from seven states introduced bills, none of which passed, to either order environmental studies on the effects of mifepristone in water or to enact environmental regulations for the drug. EPA’s Office of Water leaders met with Politico in November, with its press secretary Brigit Hirsch telling the outlet it “takes the issue of pharmaceuticals in our water systems seriously and employs a rigorous, science-based approach to protect human health and the environment.” “As always, EPA encourages all stakeholders invested in clean and safe drinking water to review the proposals and submit comments,” Hirsch added. Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump’s EPA' in 2025: A Fossil Fuel-Friendly Approach to Deregulation

The Trump administration has reshaped the Environmental Protection Agency, reversing pollution limits and promoting fossil fuels

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration has transformed the Environmental Protection Agency in its first year, cutting federal limits on air and water pollution and promoting fossil fuels, a metamorphosis that clashes with the agency’s historic mission to protect human health and the environment.The administration says its actions will “unleash” the American economy, but environmentalists say the agency’s abrupt change in focus threatens to unravel years of progress on climate-friendly initiatives that could be hard or impossible to reverse.“It just constantly wants to pat the fossil fuel business on the back and turn back the clock to a pre-Richard Nixon era” when the agency didn’t exist, said historian Douglas Brinkley.Zeldin has argued the EPA can protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. He announced “five pillars” to guide EPA’s work; four were economic goals, including energy dominance — Trump’s shorthand for more fossil fuels — and boosting the auto industry.Zeldin, a former New York congressman who had a record as a moderate Republican on some environmental issues, said his views on climate change have evolved. Many federal and state climate goals are unattainable in the near future — and come at huge cost, he said.“We should not be causing … extreme economic pain for an individual or a family” because of policies aimed at “saving the planet,” he told reporters at EPA headquarters in early December.But scientists and experts say the EPA's new direction comes at a cost to public health, and would lead to far more pollutants in the environment, including mercury, lead and especially tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs. They also note higher emissions of greenhouse gases will worsen atmospheric warming that is driving more frequent, costly and deadly extreme weather.Christine Todd Whitman, a Republican who led the EPA for several years under President George W. Bush, said watching Zeldin attack laws protecting air and water has been “just depressing.” “It’s tragic for our country. I worry about my grandchildren, of which I have seven. I worry about what their future is going to be if they don’t have clean air, if they don’t have clean water to drink,” she said.The EPA was launched under Nixon in 1970 with pollution disrupting American life, some cities suffocating in smog and some rivers turned into wastelands by industrial chemicals. Congress passed laws then that remain foundational for protecting water, air and endangered species.The agency's aggressiveness has always seesawed depending on who occupies the White House. Former President Joe Biden's administration boosted renewable energy and electric vehicles, tightened motor-vehicle emissions and proposed greenhouse gas limits on coal-fired power plants and oil and gas wells. Industry groups called rules overly burdensome and said the power plant rule would force many aging plants to shut down. In response, many businesses shifted resources to meet the more stringent rules that are now being undone.“While the Biden EPA repeatedly attempted to usurp the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law to impose its ‘Green New Scam,’ the Trump EPA is laser-focused on achieving results for the American people while operating within the limits of the laws passed by Congress,” EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch said. Zeldin's list of targets is long Much of EPA’s new direction aligns with Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation road map that argued the agency should gut staffing, cut regulations and end what it called a war on coal on other fossil fuels.“A lot of the regulations that were put on during the Biden administration were more harmful and restrictive than in any other period. So that’s why deregulating them looks like EPA is making major changes,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of Heritage's Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment.But Chris Frey, an EPA official under Biden, said the regulations Zeldin has targeted “offered benefits of avoided premature deaths, of avoided chronic illness … bad things that would not happen because of these rules.”Matthew Tejada, a former EPA official under both Trump and Biden who now works at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the revamped EPA: “I think it would be hard for them to make it any clearer to polluters in this country that they can go on about their business and not worry about EPA getting in their way.”Zeldin also has shrunk EPA staffing by about 20% to levels last seen in the mid-1980s. Justin Chen, president of the EPA’s largest union, called staff cuts “devastating.” He cited the dismantling of research and development offices at labs across the country and the firing of employees who signed a letter of dissent opposing EPA cuts. Relaxed enforcement and cutting staff Many of Zeldin's changes aren't in effect yet. It takes time to propose new rules, get public input and finalize rollbacks. It's much faster to cut grants and ease up on enforcement, and Trump's EPA is doing both. The number of new civil environmental actions is roughly one-fifth what it was in the first eight months of the Biden administration, according to the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. “You can effectively do a lot of deregulation if you just don’t do enforcement,” said Leif Fredrickson, visiting assistant professor of history at the University of Montana.Hirsch said the number of legal filings isn't the best way to judge enforcement because they require work outside of the EPA and can bog staff down with burdensome legal agreements. She said the EPA is “focused on efficiently resolving violations and achieving compliance as quickly as possible” and not making demands beyond what the law requires.EPA's cuts have been especially hard on climate change programs and environmental justice, the effort to address chronic pollution that typically is worse in minority and poor communities. Both were Biden priorities. Zeldin dismissed staff and canceled billions in grants for projects that fell under the “diversity, equity and inclusion” umbrella, a Trump administration target.He also spiked a $20 billion “green bank” set up under Biden’s landmark climate law to fund qualifying clean energy projects. Zeldin argued the fund was a scheme to funnel money to Democrat-aligned organizations with little oversight — allegations a federal judge rejected. Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert and former director of the Environmental Law School at Vermont Law & Graduate School, said the EPA's shift under Trump left him with little optimism for what he called “the two most awful crises in the 21st century” — biodiversity loss and climate disruption.“I don’t see any hope for either one,” he said. “I really don’t. And I’ll be long gone, but I think the world is in just for absolute catastrophe.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.