Upper Tamar Lake Water Body
Moderate ecological status
Get Upper Tamar Lake data
Attributes
- Water Body IDGB30845277
- Water Body TypeLake
- Hydromorphological designationheavily modified
- NGRSS2856912165
- Altitude145 m
- Mean depth4.5 m
- Surveillance Water BodyNo
- Surface area0.319 km2
- Surface area31.868 ha
- Catchment area1245.25 ha
Classifications
| Classification Item | 2019 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|
| Ecological | Poor | Moderate |
| Biological quality elements | Poor | Moderate |
| Phytoplankton | Poor | Moderate |
| Physico-chemical quality elements | Moderate | Moderate |
| Salinity | High | High |
| Total Nitrogen | Moderate | Moderate |
| Total Phosphorus | Bad | Bad |
| Supporting elements (Surface Water) | Moderate | Moderate |
| Expert Judgement | Moderate | Moderate |
| Mitigation Measures Assessment | Moderate or less | Moderate or less |
| Specific pollutants | High | High |
| Copper | High | High |
| 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 | Fail | |
| 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 |
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 | Other pressures | Internal nutrient load (lakes only) | No sector responsible | Phytoplankton | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Poor Livestock Management | Agriculture and rural land management | Phytoplankton | Details |
| RNAG | Physical modification | Reservoir / Impoundment - non flow related | Water Industry | Phytoplankton | Details |
| RNAG | Point source | Farm/site infrastructure | Agriculture and rural land management | Phytoplankton | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Riparian/in-river activities (inc bankside erosion) | Agriculture and rural land management | Phytoplankton | Details |
| RNAG | Other pressures | Internal nutrient load (lakes only) | No sector responsible | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Riparian/in-river activities (inc bankside erosion) | Agriculture and rural land management | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | Physical modification | Reservoir / Impoundment - non flow related | Water Industry | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | Point source | Farm/site infrastructure | Agriculture and rural land management | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | measures delivered to address reason, awaiting recovery | Not applicable | No sector responsible | Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Poor Livestock Management | Agriculture and rural land management | Total Phosphorus | Details |
| RNAG | measures delivered to address reason, awaiting recovery | Not applicable | No sector responsible | Mercury and Its Compounds | 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 | 6 | 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 | 2 | 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 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 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 |
| 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 | Not assessed | 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 | 2027 - Low confidence | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Specific pollutants | High | 2015 | |
| Copper | 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 | |
| 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 |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower River Tamar | SWSGZ5015 | Safeguard Zone | |
| Upper Tamar Lake | SWSGZ5016 | Safeguard Zone | |
| Tamar Lakes Eutrophic lake NVZ | EL126 | Nitrates Directive | |
| Upper Tamar Lake | UKGB30845277 | Drinking Water Protected Area |
Monitoring sites which have been used to classify this water body
Shows which sites were used for classification for which years within each cycle.