Evidence · Water Framework Directive status

Neither Thames water body on this reach reaches "good"

Under the Water Framework Directive, the freshwater river above Teddington is classed Poor and the tidal body below it Moderate — both failing chemical status — and both have missed "good" for three assessment cycles. This is the Environment Agency's own classification, its named reasons, and the objective it has pushed out to 2063.

GB106039023232 · River (Egham–Teddington) GB530603911402 · Thames Middle (tidal) Cycle 3 (2019) — current RAW-PULL

England Catchment Data Explorer · Cycle 3 (2019)

The headline figures

The reach spans two WFD water bodies: a heavily-modified river from Egham down to Teddington Weir, and the transitional (tidal) "Thames Middle" body below it. Neither is at "good", both fail on chemistry, and on both the Agency names sewage discharge among the reasons why.

POOR
overall status of the Egham–Teddington river (GB106039023232) — unchanged across all three cycles, 2009 · 2015 · 2019.
EA Catchment Data Explorer · classifications RAW-PULL
MODERATE
overall status of the tidal Thames Middle body (GB530603911402) — also unchanged across all three cycles.
EA Catchment Data Explorer · classifications RAW-PULL
FAIL ×2
chemical status is Fail on both bodies in the current cycle — but this is largely a national standards artefact (see caveats), not a local collapse.
Cycle 3 (2019) chemical classification RAW-PULL
2063
the year the chemical "good" objective has been relaxed to on both bodies — reason codes include "disproportionate burdens".
EA objectives (alternative-objective codes) RAW-PULL

Classification over time, 2009–2019

WFD status is reported in river-basin-management cycles. The grid below shows ecological and chemical status for both bodies at the three representative years. The ecological class has never moved — Poor on the river, Moderate on the tidal body — while chemical status flicked to Good in 2015 and back to Fail in 2019 on both bodies at once, a synchronised flip that points to a change in the standards, not the water (see "How to read this").

WFD status by cycle — both water bodies

Ecological and chemical class at 2009 (Cycle 1), 2015 (Cycle 2) and 2019 (Cycle 3, current)

Water Framework Directive status by cycle, 2009 to 2019, for both Thames water bodies A coloured status grid. The Egham to Teddington river (GB106039023232): ecological status Poor in all three cycles — 2009, 2015 and 2019; chemical status Fail in 2009, Good in 2015, then Fail again in 2019. The Thames Middle transitional tidal body (GB530603911402): ecological status Moderate in all three cycles; chemical status Fail in 2009, Good in 2015, then Fail again in 2019. The 2015-to-2019 chemical Good-to-Fail flip happens on both bodies simultaneously and is driven by ubiquitous persistent chemicals newly added to the standards in Cycle 3, not by a local deterioration. Overall status equals the ecological class throughout: Poor on the river, Moderate on the tidal body. 2009 · Cycle 1 2015 · Cycle 2 2019 · Cycle 3 CURRENT River — Egham to Teddington · heavily-modified · GB106039023232 Ecological Chemical PoorPoorPoor FailGoodFail Thames Middle — transitional / tidal · GB530603911402 Ecological Chemical ModerateModerateModerate FailGoodFail Good Moderate Poor Fail (chemical) Ecological runs High · Good · Moderate · Poor · Bad; chemical is pass/fail (Good or Fail). Overall status = the worse of the two.
Source: Environment Agency England Catchment Data Explorer, water-body classifications for GB106039023232 and GB530603911402 (/classifications.csv), pulled 2026-07-31. The 2015 → 2019 chemical Good→Fail flip is a Cycle-3 standards change (ubiquitous PBDE / PFOS / mercury-in-biota), not a measured local deterioration — see the caveats below. Provenance: RAW-PULL.
WFD status at the three representative cycle years. Overall status = the worse of ecological and chemical; here it equals the ecological class throughout. Provenance: RAW-PULL.
Water body Cycle (year) Ecological Chemical Overall
River
GB106039023232
Cycle 1 (2009)PoorFailPoor
Cycle 2 (2015)PoorGoodPoor
Cycle 3 (2019) — currentPoorFailPoor
Thames Middle
GB530603911402
Cycle 1 (2009)ModerateFailModerate
Cycle 2 (2015)ModerateGoodModerate
Cycle 3 (2019) — currentModerateFailModerate

Interims (full matrix in wfd_status_full_timeseries.csv): a Cycle-2 2013 interim briefly scored the river Moderate overall; in the Cycle-3 2022 interim the river's Invertebrates element improved Poor → High, but Macrophytes & Phytobenthos stayed Poor, so the ecological class did not move; chemical was recorded "does not require assessment" and the overall class was not re-issued. RAW-PULL

Why it isn't "good": the EA's named reasons

For Cycle 3 the Agency publishes Reasons for Not Achieving Good (RNAGs) — each failing element tied to a business sector and activity. On both water bodies, "Waste water treatment — Sewage discharge (continuous)" is a named pressure (highlighted rows below), alongside agriculture, urban runoff and legacy chemicals.

River — Egham to Teddington (POOR)

Cycle-3 RNAGs for GB106039023232. Highlighted rows are those where the water industry (sewage discharge) is a named pressure. Provenance: RAW-PULL.
Element Class EA-named pressures (sector · activity)
Macrophytes & PhytobenthosPoorWater industry — sewage discharge (continuous); Agriculture — poor nutrient management → phosphate
PhosphateModerateSewage discharge (continuous); agriculture; urban transport drainage
TemperatureModerateSewage discharge (continuous); impounded-water level management; low flow
Cypermethrin (priority)FailAgriculture — poor pesticide management; Water industry — sewage discharge → chemical FAIL
PBDE, PFOS (priority substances)FailUbiquitous / legacy — "unknown, pending investigation" (see caveat: national artefact)
Heavily-modified designationMod. or lessFlood protection; drinking-water abstraction; navigation — target is "good ecological potential"

Thames Middle — tidal (MODERATE)

Cycle-3 RNAGs for GB530603911402. Highlighted rows name sewage discharge as a pressure. Provenance: RAW-PULL.
Element Class EA-named pressures (sector · activity)
ZincModerateWater industry — sewage discharge (continuous); urban development; contaminated bed sediments
Tributyltin (TBT)FailSewage discharge (continuous); landfill leaching; contaminated land; historic antifouling / restricted-substance use
Angiosperms / SaltmarshModerateLand-drainage structures (physical modification)
Dissolved Inorganic NitrogenModerateSupporting element (nutrient enrichment)
Mercury, PBDE, PFOS, PAHs*FailUbiquitous / legacy — "unknown, pending investigation" (see caveat: national artefact)
HydromorphologyMod. or lessFlood- and coast-protection use ("Hydrological Regime does not support good")

*PAHs failing on the tidal body: benzo(g-h-i)perylene and benzo(b)fluoranthene. Chemical status is pass/fail on the worst substance, so a handful of ubiquitous compounds can carry the whole body to Fail. RAW-PULL

What the tidal "Moderate" is — and isn't

The tidal ecological Moderate is not a picture of dead biology. Under the estuarine classification tools, the living elements score well; the Moderate is driven by plants (angiosperms / saltmarsh), a supporting nutrient (nitrogen) and a specific pollutant (zinc).

Cycle-3 biological & supporting elements, Thames Middle (GB530603911402), from wfd_key_elements_cycle3_2019.csv. Provenance: RAW-PULL.
Element Status Element Status
FishGoodAngiospermsModerate
PhytoplanktonGoodSaltmarshModerate
InvertebratesGoodDissolved Inorganic NitrogenModerate
MacroalgaeGoodZinc (specific pollutant)Moderate
Opportunistic macroalgaeHighInfaunal Quality IndexGood

The "good" objective, relaxed to 2063

WFD lets the Agency set alternative objectives — a later deadline, or a lower target than "good" — where meeting good by the default date is judged technically infeasible or disproportionately costly. On this reach the chemical "good" objective has been pushed to 2063 on both bodies, and the ecological/overall objectives are set no higher than the current class. The reason codes matter for the accountability question, because they include "disproportionately expensive — disproportionate burdens".

Alternative-objective settings from wfd_objectives_targets.csv (EA reason-code fields, paraphrased). Chemical rows highlighted. Provenance: RAW-PULL.
Water body Item Objective Target year EA reason codes (paraphrased)
River GB106039023232ChemicalGood2063Technically infeasible (no known solution); natural conditions — chemical recovery time; cause of impact unknown
River GB106039023232EcologicalPoor2015Technically infeasible (no known solution); practical technical constraints prevent earlier action
Thames Middle GB530603911402ChemicalGood2063Technically infeasible; disproportionate burdens; natural conditions — chemical recovery time
Thames Middle GB530603911402EcologicalModerate2015Disproportionately expensive (unfavourable cost–benefit; disproportionate burdens); good status prevented by HMWB designated use

Read plainly: on the tidal body the Agency has formally recorded that getting to good would be "disproportionately expensive" and impose "disproportionate burdens", and has moved the chemical deadline four decades out. That is the documentary backdrop to the fines-versus-investment debate — but it is a statement about cost/feasibility judgements, not proof of any single party's culpability. RAW-PULL

How to read this

Caveats a regulator would press — stated up front

  • The chemical FAIL is largely a national artefact. The synchronised 2015 → 2019 Good→Fail flip on both bodies is driven by ubiquitous persistent, bioaccumulative toxicants — mercury-in-biota, PBDE and PFOS — newly added to the chemical standards in Cycle 3. These fail in almost every English water body, carry a documented "natural recovery time", and are not solely attributable to Thames Water. Do not read the chemical Fail as a local, present-day collapse. PUBLISHED context on the standards; RAW-PULL for the classification.
  • Tidal biology is healthy. Under the estuarine tools, Fish, Phytoplankton, Invertebrates and Macroalgae all score Good/High on Thames Middle. The Moderate is chemistry (zinc), a plant/nutrient signal (angiosperms, saltmarsh, nitrogen) and hydromorphology — not dead biology. On the river, Invertebrates even improved Poor → High by the 2022 interim, though phytobenthos (the phosphate-sensitive element) held the ecological class at Poor. RAW-PULL
  • Named pressure ≠ sole cause; correlation ≠ causation. A RNAG names sewage discharge as a pressure, but the same elements list agriculture, urban drainage and legacy contamination too. The classification identifies pressures; it does not apportion blame or prove that any one discharge caused any one failure. RAW-PULL
  • Zinc — the tidal Moderate driver — is unmonitored in open data. Zinc has zero records at all 12 public water-quality points on the reach, so the Agency's own zinc classification cannot be corroborated from the open archive. A named cause we cannot independently check. PROVEN GAP
  • Water-body codes on this reach do not line up. The tidal classification here is GB530603911402 (Thames Middle), but Mogden's sewage outfall and the tidal fish/benthic monitoring are coded GB530603911403 — an adjacent body on the same reach. The sewage RNAGs cited above belong to …402; reconcile the codes before attributing a specific outfall to a specific classification. RAW-PULL
  • Attribution and interims are Cycle-3-only / partial. RNAG pressure-attribution is published for Cycle 3 only; 2022 was an interim update (chemical "does not require assessment"; overall class not re-issued), so year-on-year "trend" reading is limited. The river is also a heavily-modified water body — its ecological target is "good potential", not a pristine reference state. RAW-PULL

Sources & provenance

  • RAW-PULL  EA England Catchment Data Explorerhttps://environment.data.gov.uk/catchment-planning/WaterBody/{GB106039023232 | GB530603911402} with /classifications.csv, /rnags.csv, /objectives.csv. Downloaded 2026-07-31.
  • Working datasets: /tmp/thames_datastore/wfd_status/wfd_status_over_time.csv, wfd_status_full_timeseries.csv, wfd_rnags_cycle3.csv, wfd_key_elements_cycle3_2019.csv, wfd_objectives_targets.csv, plus the six raw per-body CSVs.
  • PROVEN GAP  Zinc has zero observations across all 12 reach water-quality points (WIMS archive) — cross-referenced from the water-quality domain pull.
  • PUBLISHED  The Cycle-3 chemical-standards change (mercury-in-biota / PBDE / PFOS added, causing near-universal English chemical Fail) is a national methodology point, not a Thames-specific measurement.