White Mere Water Body Moderate ecological status
Attributes Water Body ID GB30935091 Water Body Type Lake Hydromorphological designation heavily modified NGR SJ4145732926 Mean depth 5.6 m Surface area 0.235 km2 Altitude 96 m Surveillance Water Body No Surface area 23.525 ha Catchment area 201.75 ha Classifications Classification Item 2019 2022 Ecological Moderate Moderate Biological quality elements Moderate Moderate Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined Macrophytes Sub Element Poor Poor Phytoplankton Moderate Moderate Physico-chemical quality elements Moderate Moderate Salinity High High Total Nitrogen Moderate Moderate Total Phosphorus Bad Bad Hydromorphological Supporting Elements Supports good Supports good Hydrological Regime High High Supporting elements (Surface Water) Moderate Moderate Expert Judgement Moderate Moderate Mitigation Measures Assessment Good Good Chemical Fail Does not require assessment Priority hazardous substances Fail Does not require assessment Benzo(a)pyrene Good Dioxins and dioxin-like compounds Good Heptachlor and cis-Heptachlor epoxide Good Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD) Good Hexachlorobenzene Good Hexachlorobutadiene Good Mercury and Its Compounds Good Perfluorooctane sulphonate (PFOS) Good Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) Fail Priority substances Good Does not require assessment Fluoranthene Good Other Pollutants Does not require assessment Does not require assessment
Why do all water bodies have a chemical status of fail?
Investigations into classification status No data to show
Reasons for not achieving good (RNAG) and reasons for deterioration (RFD) All reasons (RFDs and RNAGs) attributed to the classification elements in
this water body.
Reason Type SWMI Activity Category Classification Element More information RNAG Natural Natural conditions - other No sector responsible Phytoplankton Details RNAG measures delivered to address reason, awaiting recovery Not applicable No sector responsible Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) Details RNAG Diffuse source Contaminated water body bed sediments Agriculture and rural land management Total Phosphorus Details RNAG Diffuse source Poor soil management Agriculture and rural land management Total Phosphorus Details
Reasons for not achieving good status by business sector The issues preventing waters reaching good status and the sectors
identified as contributing to them. The numbers in the table are
individual counts of the reasons for not achieving good status with a
confidence status of 'confirmed' and 'probable', where the latest
classification is less than good status. There may be more than one
reason in a single water body. Note, table does not include reasons for
deterioration.
Significant water management issue Physical modifications Pollution from waste water Pollution from towns, cities and transport Changes to the natural flow and level of water Invasive non-native species Pollution from rural areas Pollution from abandoned mines Agriculture and rural land management 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 Industry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mining and quarrying 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Navigation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Urban and transport 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Water Industry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Local & central government 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Domestic general public 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Recreation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Waste treatment and disposal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No sector responsible 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sector under investigation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
Objectives Classification Item Status Year Reasons Ecological Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Biological quality elements Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined Not assessed 2015 Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Phytoplankton Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Physico-chemical quality elements Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Salinity Good 2015 Total Nitrogen Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Total Phosphorus Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Hydromorphological Supporting Elements Supports good 2015 Hydrological Regime Supports good 2015 Supporting elements (Surface Water) Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Expert Judgement Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Mitigation Measures Assessment Good 2015 Specific pollutants Not assessed 2015 Chemical Good 2063 Natural conditions: Chemical status recovery time Priority hazardous substances Good 2063 Natural conditions: Chemical status recovery time Benzo(a)pyrene Good 2015 Dioxins and dioxin-like compounds Good 2015 Heptachlor and cis-Heptachlor epoxide Good 2015 Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD) Good 2015 Hexachlorobenzene Good 2015 Hexachlorobutadiene Good 2015 Mercury and Its Compounds Good 2015 Perfluorooctane sulphonate (PFOS) Good 2015 Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) Good 2063 Natural conditions: Chemical status recovery time Priority substances Good 2015 Fluoranthene Good 2015 Other Pollutants Does not require assessment 2015
Protected areas PA Name Id Directive More information Midland Meres & Mosses - Phase 1 UK11043 Ramsar Site Natural England Tetchill Brook - source to conf R Perry NVZ S603 Nitrates Directive White Mere Eutrophic lake NVZ EL130 Nitrates Directive
Monitoring sites which have been used to classify this water body Shows which sites were used for classification for which years within
each cycle.
Monitoring Site Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 108322 108322 2009, 2013, 2014, 2012 2014, 2013, 2016, 2015, 2019 2019 WHITE MERE - WHITEMERE COTTAGES 30205290 2015, 2016, 2019 2022, 2019 164700 164700 2016, 2019 2022, 2019 LEE BROOK - WHITE MERE NORTH 30205300 2009, 2012