Fly-tipping national database: Flycapture: 2008-2009 data

Headline statistics from the fifth year (2008-2009) of Flycapture were published October 2008.

2008-2009 data

Initial headline statistics from the fifth year of Flycapture indicate:

Local Authority breakdown

This year we have published a local authority breakdown of incidents, enforcement actions and prosecutions for the fifth year of Flycapture. While all local authorities are registered on the database, the amount and type of information being provided can vary between them.

Regional breakdowns

The following are regional data sheets produced from the Flycapture data reported by local authorities within each of the Government Office regions. Care has to be taken not to make comparisons between regions.

While all local authorities have now registered on the database, the amount and type of information being provided can vary between them.

Regional Flycapture headline sheets April 2008 - March 2009

East Midlands
(PDF 157 KB)

  • 61,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • 14% fewer reported incidents than 2007-08.
  • 65% of incidents involved household waste.

East of England
(PDF 158 KB)

  • 76,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • A 5% increase in reported incidents from 2007-08.
  • 63% of incidents involved household waste.

London
(PDF 149 KB)
  • 526,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • 4% fewer reported incidents than 2007-08.
  • 62% of incidents involved household waste.

North East
(PDF 171KB)

  • 58,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • 28% fewer reported incidents than 2007-08.
  • 68% of incidents involved household waste.

North West
(PDF 208 KB)

  • 141,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • 23% fewer reported incidents than 2007-08.
  • 65% of incidents involved household waste.

South East
(PDF 167 KB)

  • 90,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • 24% fewer reported incidents than 2007-08.
  • 52% of incidents involved household waste.

South West
(PDF 162 KB)

  • 41,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • 11% fewer reported incidents than 2007-08.
  • 58% of incidents involved household waste.

West Midlands
(PDF 167 KB)

  • 60,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region
  • 5% fewer reported incidents than 2007-08
  • 57% of incidents involved household waste.

Yorkshire and Humber
(PDF 179 KB)

  • 107,000 incidents were dealt with by local authorities in the region.
  • A 2% increase in reported incidents from 2007-08.
  • 73% of incidents involved household waste.
Environment Agency

The Environment Agency (EA) has a very important role in dealing with fly-tipping. The Environment Agency deals mainly with the larger illegal dumping incidents – termed as 'Big, Bad and Nasty'. Most of these illegal dumps are bigger than a ‘tipper load’. Incidents involving organised crime and drummed hazardous waste can involve multiple incidents less than a tipper load in size. The EA also submits data to the Flycapture database. In England during 2008-2009:

  • The Environment Agency dealt with a total of 676 illegal waste dumping incidents (a drop from 700 in 2007-08) 
  • Estimated to have cost the Environment Agency £ 96,000 to clear up incidents of illegally dumped waste
  • The Environment Agency took 169 prosecutions forward in relation to illegal waste activities, resulting in over £ 800,000 in fines (the total fines awarded have doubled since 2007-8.The Environment Agency continues to investigate and enforce increasingly serious and more organised waste crimes and this is reflected in the penalties awarded by the Courts). 
  • Average fine per prosecution was £6,000 where a fine was the outcome  (this has doubled since 2007-08) 
  • The Environment Agency prosecutes about 25% of the incidents it investigates.
  • Offenders found guilty of waste crime offences taken by the Environment Agency have received a range of penalties from custodial sentences, curfew orders and had in some cases had their assets seized. 

Page last modified: 1 October 2009
Page published: 9 October