Grafham Water Water Body
Moderate ecological status
Get Grafham Water data
Attributes
- Water Body IDGB30538310
- Water Body TypeLake
- Hydromorphological designationartificial
- NGRTL1484767983
- Mean depth9.65 m
- Catchment area1591.5 ha
- Surface area6.316 km2
- Altitude45 m
- Surveillance Water BodyNo
- Surface area631.588 ha
Classifications
| Classification Item | 2019 |
|---|---|
| Ecological | Moderate |
| Biological quality elements | Moderate |
| Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined | |
| Macrophytes Sub Element | Poor |
| Phytoplankton | Moderate |
| Physico-chemical quality elements | Moderate |
| Salinity | High |
| Total Nitrogen | Bad |
| Total Phosphorus | Bad |
| Supporting elements (Surface Water) | Good |
| Expert Judgement | Good |
| Mitigation Measures Assessment | Good |
| Specific pollutants | High |
| Copper | High |
| Chemical | Fail |
| Priority hazardous substances | Fail |
| 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) | Fail |
| Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) | Fail |
| Priority substances | Good |
| Fluoranthene | Good |
| Other Pollutants | Does not require assessment |
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 | Point source | Sewage discharge (continuous) | Water Industry | Phytoplankton | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Poor nutrient management | Agriculture and rural land management | Phytoplankton | Details |
| RNAG | Unknown (pending investigation) | Unknown (pending investigation) | Sector under investigation | Perfluorooctane sulphonate (PFOS) | Details |
| RNAG | measures delivered to address reason, awaiting recovery | Not applicable | No sector responsible | Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Poor nutrient management | Agriculture and rural land management | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Poor nutrient management | Agriculture and rural land management | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | Point source | Sewage discharge (continuous) | Water Industry | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | Point source | Sewage discharge (continuous) | Water Industry | Total Nitrogen | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Other (not in list, must add details in comments) | Agriculture and rural land management | Total Nitrogen | 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 | 4 | 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 | 3 | 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 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 |
Objectives
| Classification Item | Status | Year | Reasons |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ecological | Moderate | 2015 | Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Biological quality elements | Moderate | 2015 | Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined | Not assessed | 2015 | Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Phytoplankton | Moderate | 2015 | Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Physico-chemical quality elements | Moderate | 2015 | Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Dissolved oxygen | Good | 2015 | |
| Salinity | Good | 2015 | |
| Total Nitrogen | Bad | 2021 | Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Total Phosphorus | Bad | 2015 | Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Hydromorphological Supporting Elements | Not assessed | 2015 | |
| Supporting elements (Surface Water) | Good | 2015 | |
| Expert Judgement | Good | 2015 | |
| Mitigation Measures Assessment | Good | 2015 | |
| Specific pollutants | High | 2015 | |
| Copper | High | 2015 | |
| Chemical | Good | 2063 | Natural conditions: Chemical status recovery time; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| Priority hazardous substances | Good | 2063 | Natural conditions: Chemical status recovery time; Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| 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 | 2039 | Technically infeasible: No known technical solution is available |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Great Ouse NVZ | S391 | Nitrates Directive | |
| Huntingdon River Gravels | G144 | Nitrates Directive | |
| Great Ouse (SWSGZ1011) | SWSGZ1011 | Safeguard Zone | |
| Grafham Water | UKGB30538310 | Drinking Water Protected Area | |
| Grafham Water | UKENLK26 | Urban Waste Water Treatment 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.