Langney Sewer at Eastbourne Water Body Poor ecological status
Get Langney Sewer at Eastbourne data Attributes Water Body ID GB107041006650 Water Body Type River Hydromorphological designation heavily modified NGR TQ6236302003 Surveillance Water Body No Catchment area 37.777 km2 Catchment area 3777.673 ha Length 9.532 km Classifications Classification Item 2019 2022 Ecological Poor Poor Biological quality elements Poor Poor Invertebrates Good Good Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined Poor Poor Macrophytes Sub Element Poor Poor Phytobenthos Sub Element High High Physico-chemical quality elements Moderate Moderate Ammonia (Phys-Chem) High High Dissolved oxygen Bad Bad Phosphate Moderate Moderate Temperature High High pH High High Hydromorphological Supporting Elements Supports good Supports good Hydrological Regime Does not support good Does not support good Supporting elements (Surface Water) Moderate Moderate Mitigation Measures Assessment Moderate or less Moderate or less Specific pollutants High High Copper High High Triclosan High High Zinc High High Chemical Fail Does not require assessment Priority hazardous substances Fail Does not require assessment Benzo(a)pyrene Good Benzo(b)fluoranthene Good Benzo(g-h-i)perylene Good Benzo(k)fluoranthene Good Cadmium and Its Compounds Good Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (Priority hazardous) Good Dioxins and dioxin-like compounds Good Heptachlor and cis-Heptachlor epoxide Good Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD) Good Hexachlorobenzene Good Hexachlorobutadiene Good Mercury and Its Compounds Fail Nonylphenol Good Perfluorooctane sulphonate (PFOS) Good Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) Fail Priority substances Good Does not require assessment Cypermethrin (Priority) Good Fluoranthene Good Lead and Its Compounds Good Nickel and Its Compounds 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 Classification Element Cycle Year Status Outcome Invertebrates 2 2014 Moderate Quite certain there is a problem Nonylphenol 2 2013 Fail Quite certain there is a problem Triclosan 2 2013 Moderate Quite certain there is a problem Nickel and Its Compounds 2 2013 Fail Quite certain there is a problem Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (Priority hazardous) 2 2013 Fail Quite certain there is a problem Cadmium and Its Compounds 2 2013 Fail Quite certain there is a problem Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined 2 2015 Poor Quite certain there is a problem Dissolved oxygen 2 2015 Bad Quite certain there is a problem
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 Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined Details RNAG measures delivered to address reason, awaiting recovery Not applicable No sector responsible Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) Details RNAG Point source Misconnections Domestic General Public Phosphate Details RNAG Diffuse source Poor nutrient management Agriculture and rural land management Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined Details RNAG Point source Sewage discharge (intermittent) Water Industry Phosphate Details RNAG measures delivered to address reason, awaiting recovery Not applicable No sector responsible Mercury and Its Compounds Details RNAG Point source Sewage discharge (intermittent) Water Industry Dissolved oxygen Details RNAG Physical modification Urbanisation - urban development Urban and transport Dissolved oxygen Details RNAG Natural Natural conditions - other No sector responsible Dissolved oxygen Details RNAG Flow No further action (Flow is below the EFI but NOT causing an ecological failure) No sector responsible Hydrological Regime Details RNAG Physical modification Other (not in list, must add details in comments) Agriculture and rural land management Mitigation Measures Assessment 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 1 0 0 0 0 0 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 1 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 2 3 0 0 0 0 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 Invertebrates Good 2015 Macrophytes and Phytobenthos Combined Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Physico-chemical quality elements Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Ammonia (Phys-Chem) Good 2015 Dissolved oxygen Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Phosphate Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Temperature Good 2015 pH Good 2015 Hydromorphological Supporting Elements Supports good 2015 Hydrological Regime Does not support good 2015 Disproportionately expensive: Unfavourable balance of costs and benefits Supporting elements (Surface Water) Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Mitigation Measures Assessment Good 2027 - Low confidence Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens Specific pollutants High 2015 Copper High 2015 Triclosan High 2015 Zinc High 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 Benzo(b)fluoranthene Good 2015 Benzo(g-h-i)perylene Good 2015 Benzo(k)fluoranthene Good 2015 Cadmium and Its Compounds Good 2015 Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (Priority hazardous) 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 2040 Natural conditions: Chemical status recovery time Nonylphenol Good 2015 Perfluorooctane sulphonate (PFOS) Good 2015 Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) Good 2063 Natural conditions: Chemical status recovery time Priority substances Good 2015 Cypermethrin (Priority) Good 2015 Fluoranthene Good 2015 Lead and Its Compounds Good 2015 Nickel and Its Compounds Good 2015 Other Pollutants Does not require assessment 2015
Protected areas 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 POLEGATE POINT O CATTLE BRIDGE F0002050 2009 2015, 2019, 2016 2019 R.WID PARK FARM FORD WD09 2012, 2010, 2013, 2011, 2009 42149 42149 2014, 2010, 2009 2013, 2016, 2015, 2014 UPPER SEWER-WILLINGDON DROVE F0002044 2016