Beaches around the country achieved top water quality standards this year as millions flocked to the coast to enjoy the record-breaking hot weather.

97.9% of bathing waters passed tough standards following a programme of water quality testing at 420 bathing spots carried out by the Environment Agency (EA) from May to September.

The results coincided with a boost to tourism as visitors to the seaside enjoyed England’s hottest summer on record.

The results, released today, also show that 92.4% of the beaches and inland lakes tested were give the top rating of ‘Excellent’ or ‘Good.’ Beaches at Whitby (Yorkshire), Sidmouth Jacobs Ladder (Devon) and Skegness (Lincolnshire) have all kept their Excellent rating for the fourth year in a row.

In the early 1990s just 28% of bathing waters would have met today’s standards but dramatic improvements have been made to water quality over the last two decades, in part due to EA regulation reducing pollution from water companies and industry, and the work of local councils and communities.

Environment Minister Thérèse Coffey said:

This is great news for anyone who enjoys a trip to the seaside. We want everyone to be confident in the quality of our bathing waters and that’s why the Environment Agency carry out regular tests to protect the health of visitors.

Britain’s beaches are visited around 130 million times each year, generating over £7 billion for the economy. Working together we can all keep driving up standards to reduce pollution, ensuring everyone can continue to enjoy our iconic coastline.

Emma Howard Boyd, Chair of the Environment Agency said:

Seaside tourism is worth over £7 billion to the economy and good water quality is essential for people to visit and enjoy our beautiful beaches.

The Environment Agency’s hard work has helped 388 beaches achieve the top Excellent or Good ratings this year and at beach cleans throughout the summer I’ve seen the commitment of local communities and campaigners to reduce pollution and protect our environment.

Everyone can take small steps to help us protect water quality as we continue work with water companies, councils and local communities to maintain high bathing water standards.

Throughout the bathing water season from May to September, staff from the Environment Agency take up to 20 samples at each designated bathing spot. These are tested in Environment Agency laboratories and the results are published online.

This year, more people than ever checked out the EA’s bathing water website the Bathing Water Data Explorer which includes a searchable map allowing you to check the water quality at beaches and bathing waters before making a visit. The website, featuring the latest test results available was visited 109,400 times – more than double the amount from 2017.

The general public can help keep bathing waters clean by following this advice:

Always put litter in the bin at the beach or take it away with you to dispose of at home;
Check your drains at home aren’t misconnected, sending dirty water from toilets, showers and dishwashers into the wrong pipes and into rivers and the sea. Use a ConnectRight accredited plumber;
Wet wipes, cotton buds and sanitary items should go in the bin not be flushed.
Don’t pour fats, oils and grease down the sink, these can pollute rivers and coastal waters and can set hard in pipes which causes blockages.

You mean the "field"

We do have several good opticians in the town, if the environmental agency are interested.

The Chair of the Environment Agency should come and look at what is classed as GOOD, maybe the water is fit to dip your toe in but the 2 mile hike across what USED to be the beach to reach the water would be a struggle still you could then wash all the mud off your wellies before struggling back through the mud again. Sefton's beach management team is obviously way way way out of their depth (that's were they should be buried up to their necks).

Originally Posted by Little Londoner

The Chair of the Environment Agency should come and look at what is classed as GOOD, maybe the water is fit to dip your toe in but the 2 mile hike across what USED to be the beach to reach the water would be a struggle still you could then wash all the mud off your wellies before struggling back through the mud again. Sefton's beach management team is obviously way way way out of their depth (that's were they should be buried up to their necks).

There are many other contaminants in the water (if you can find it) and in the "sand?".
There used to be regular checks taken regarding the radioactivity of the water, but not the "sand", following nuclear incidents at Sellafield, but that seems to have ceased many years ago.
But what about the radioactivity levels of the "sand" itself, or, should I more accurately say, MUD?
Most importantly, what about to the health of those people who eat the shrimps, cockles and fish which feed on the creatures which inhabit this water and mud?
It is reckless to fail to monitor this situation but that is exactly what Sefton Council are now doing, unless someone knows different.

Environment Agency = Tree hugging eco bureaucrats. They wouldn't know a good beach if they saw one. Clearly Southport no longer has a good beach to any sane observer. It's mud and marsh.

We have about 3 days each June when the sun is shining and - a person can get away to guaranteed sun, on an all inclusive break for a week, for the cost of 3 nights B & B in this town.
Not enough visitors are interested in the flippin beach or 'Southport's Golden Sands' as we often hear them described as whilst a nostalgic tear is shed.

I for one prefer it reverting back to it's natural state, with birdsong and the sound of the wind.
The alternative is some wally revving the cojones off their car to free it from the sand or - young parents, (and I use the term with some reluctance), screaming in a nasal tone at the kids to stop messing around, (playing to the rest of us). Or dodging other wallys in cars because they're being distracted by those oh so important messages on their phones.
Incidentally the part shown in the photograph only looks like that after vehicles have been on it.

Originally Posted by MargeSimpson

There are many other contaminants in the water (if you can find it) and in the "sand?".
There used to be regular checks taken regarding the radioactivity of the water, but not the "sand", following nuclear incidents at Sellafield, but that seems to have ceased many years ago.
But what about the radioactivity levels of the "sand" itself, or, should I more accurately say, MUD?
Most importantly, what about to the health of those people who eat the shrimps, cockles and fish which feed on the creatures which inhabit this water and mud?
It is reckless to fail to monitor this situation but that is exactly what Sefton Council are now doing, unless someone knows different.

That is all the Environment Agencies remit, Southport does have miles of Golden Sands, it's just a little further out now.

Originally Posted by Alikado

That is all the Environment Agencies remit, Southport does have miles of Golden Sands, it's just a little further out now.

I don't recognise Blackpool as Southport.

Originally Posted by gazaprop

We have about 3 days each June when the sun is shining and - a person can get away to guaranteed sun, on an all inclusive break for a week, for the cost of 3 nights B & B in this town.
Not enough visitors are interested in the flippin beach or 'Southport's Golden Sands' as we often hear them described as whilst a nostalgic tear is shed.

I for one prefer it reverting back to it's natural state, with birdsong and the sound of the wind.
The alternative is some wally revving the cojones off their car to free it from the sand or - young parents, (and I use the term with some reluctance), screaming in a nasal tone at the kids to stop messing around, (playing to the rest of us). Or dodging other wallys in cars because they're being distracted by those oh so important messages on their phones.
Incidentally the part shown in the photograph only looks like that after vehicles have been on it.

Well as you missed this years summer the rest may well go over your head,

The "beach" is not in its natural state nor is it reverting to it, what you see is a former beach that has had its golden sand sold for peanuts.
The sand winning spoil is what lines the shore and the lower level gets silt washed on to it.
I presume with your myopia and forgetfulness you work for the council ?

For amusement only;

https://amumtrackmind.com/travel/southport/

Originally Posted by MargeSimpson

There are many other contaminants in the water (if you can find it) and in the "sand?".
There used to be regular checks taken regarding the radioactivity of the water, but not the "sand", following nuclear incidents at Sellafield, but that seems to have ceased many years ago.
But what about the radioactivity levels of the "sand" itself, or, should I more accurately say, MUD?
Most importantly, what about to the health of those people who eat the shrimps, cockles and fish which feed on the creatures which inhabit this water and mud?
It is reckless to fail to monitor this situation but that is exactly what Sefton Council are now doing, unless someone knows different.

Well, a quick google revealed that the Environment Agency are involved in monitoring radioactivity in this area, and lots of other places around the coast. Radioactivity in Food and the Environment, 2017 (published October 2018) gives the details: link is here...https://assets.publishing.service.go...17_RIFE_23.pdf.

It includes details for 'sediment' at Crossens (I think they mean mud), sand at Ainsdale, shrimps, wildfowl, cockles and mussels from the Ribble estuary, as well as sea water in the Irish sea.