Half of farms fail Environment Agency inspections as checks ramp up

More than half of farms inspected by the Environment Agency last year were found to be non-compliant, as the regulator steps up efforts to tackle water pollution.

According to official figures, 51% of farm inspections identified some form of breach, with more than 4,500 visits carried out on non-permitted farms in 2024/25. That figure is set to rise to over 6,000 inspections annually by 2029.

The increase forms part of a wider push to improve river water quality and reduce agricultural diffuse pollution, amid growing scrutiny of nutrient runoff into watercourses.

Advisers say farmers should expect more visits — and prepare accordingly.

Alice Johnson, from the farming team at Strutt & Parker, said inspection notifications are currently arriving “thick and fast in some catchments”.

“It can be a stressful time for farmers,” she said.

However, she stressed that being selected does not automatically mean wrongdoing. Inspections may be linked to concerns about rising levels of nitrates or phosphates in local rivers rather than specific allegations against an individual business.

Common failings include insufficient slurry storage capacity, a lack of nutrient management planning and the inability to produce up-to-date soil analysis results.

Yard infrastructure is also under increasing scrutiny, particularly following periods of heavy rainfall.

“An issue we are also seeing come up a lot – particularly given the amount of rain we have had recently – is a lack of a drainage plan for yards, particularly where people have taken advantage of the Capital Grants scheme to lay new concrete,” Ms Johnson said.

Without adequate planning, new concrete areas can increase surface water runoff, raising the risk of contaminated water entering drains and watercourses.

Inspectors will look closely at whether clean and dirty water are kept separate and whether rainwater harvesting systems are appropriately sized and located.

“It is worth remembering that slurry is defined as water which contains any level of faecal matter,” she said, warning that even small levels of contamination can constitute a breach.

The Environment Agency generally adopts what it describes as an “advice-led approach” in the first instance, allowing farmers time to rectify issues. However, enforcement notices and further action remain options where problems are not addressed.

Ms Johnson advised businesses to review systems before an inspection letter arrives.

“The letter from the Environment Agency will explain all the paperwork that the inspector will want to see,” she said.

“But, in our experience, it can be very reassuring to have addressed any potential weaknesses well in advance, rather than under pressure.”

She recommends carrying out a pre-inspection audit to identify gaps and, where improvements are required, exploring available grant funding.

“A pre-inspection audit can help to identify if there are any obvious gaps and be a springboard for exploring opportunities for grant funding if there are problem areas,” she said.

A new round of the Capital Grants scheme is expected in 2026, offering funding for infrastructure such as slurry store covers, farmyard manure stores and silage clamps designed to reduce dirty water volumes.

However, farmers are being urged to start planning early, as projects aimed at improving air and water quality typically require approval from a Catchment Sensitive Farming Officer.

“Farmers should engage with their local CSFO as soon as possible,” Ms Johnson said.

With inspection numbers rising sharply and regulatory scrutiny intensifying, advisers warn that preparation — not reaction — will determine how smoothly farms navigate the next wave of compliance checks.