Dorking North Downs Chalk Water Body
Poor overall status
Get Dorking North Downs Chalk data
Attributes
- Water Body IDGB40601G602100
- Water Body TypeGroundwater Body
- Hydromorphological designationnot applicable
- NGRTQ1567753284
- Groundwater area7498.836 ha
- Surveillance Water BodyNo
- Surface area74.988 km2
Classifications
| Classification Item | 2019 |
|---|---|
| Overall Water Body | Poor |
| Quantitative | Good |
| Quantitative Status element | Good |
| Quantitative Dependent Surface Water Body Status | Good |
| Quantitative GWDTEs test | Good |
| Quantitative Saline Intrusion | Good |
| Quantitative Water Balance | Good |
| Chemical (GW) | Poor |
| Chemical Status element | Poor |
| Chemical Dependent Surface Water Body Status | Good |
| Chemical Drinking Water Protected Area | Poor |
| Chemical GWDTEs test | Good |
| Chemical Saline Intrusion | Good |
| General Chemical Test | Good |
| Supporting elements (Groundwater) | |
| Prevent and Limit Objective | Active |
| Trend Assessment | No trend |
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 | Contaminated land | Industry | Chemical Drinking Water Protected Area | Details |
| RNAG | Diffuse source | Poor nutrient management | Agriculture and rural land management | Chemical Drinking Water Protected Area | Details |
| RFD | Point source | Contaminated land | Industry | Chemical Drinking Water Protected Area | Details |
| RFD | Diffuse source | Poor nutrient management | Agriculture and rural land management | Chemical Drinking Water Protected Area | 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 | 1 | 0 |
| Industry | 0 | 0 | 1 | 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 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Objectives
| Classification Item | Status | Year | Reasons |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Water Body | Good | 2027 - Low confidence | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Quantitative | Good | 2021 | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Quantitative Status element | Good | 2021 | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Quantitative Dependent Surface Water Body Status | Good | 2015 | |
| Quantitative GWDTEs test | Good | 2015 | |
| Quantitative Saline Intrusion | Good | 2015 | |
| Quantitative Water Balance | Good | 2021 | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Chemical (GW) | Good | 2027 - Low confidence | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Chemical Status element | Good | 2027 - Low confidence | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Chemical Dependent Surface Water Body Status | Good | 2015 | |
| Chemical Drinking Water Protected Area | Good | 2027 - Low confidence | Disproportionately expensive: Disproportionate burdens |
| Chemical GWDTEs test | Good | 2015 | |
| Chemical Saline Intrusion | Good | 2015 | |
| General Chemical Test | Good | 2015 |
Protected areas
| PA Name | Id | Directive | More information |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gibbs Brook NVZ | S500 | Nitrates Directive | |
| Mole Gap To Reigate Escarpment | UK0012804 | Special Area of Conservation | Natural England |
| Leatherhead | GWSGZ0221 | Safeguard Zone | |
| Fetcham | GWSGZ0217 | Safeguard Zone | |
| Elmer (Young Street) | GWSGZ0216 | Safeguard Zone | |
| Wandle (Croydon to Wandsworth) and the R. Gravney NVZ | S464 | Nitrates Directive | |
| Hogsmill NVZ | S450 | Nitrates Directive | |
| Leatherhead and Elmer | G725 | Nitrates Directive | |
| Dorking North Downs Chalk | UKGB40601G602100 | 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.