State ranking · impaired share of definitive verdicts

States by impaired share of lake assessments

The share of each state's DEFINITIVE lake verdicts (Fully Supporting or Not Supporting) that came back Not Supporting, computed from the Integrated Report decisions state agencies and tribal nations filed with EPA ATTAINS across reporting cycles 1987-2026. A state's figures cover every organization reporting inside its borders, including sovereign tribal nations filing under Clean Water Act section 518. States assess different lakes with different intensity, so this share describes assessment outcomes, not a complete census of state water quality.

100%
Highest share: New Hampshire
48.6%
National average share
36
States above the sample floor
100
Minimum definitive verdicts

This ranking in one line

New Hampshire has the highest impaired share among qualifying states: 100% of its 2,783 definitive verdicts are Not Supporting, well above national average of 48.6%. States with fewer than 100 definitive verdicts are excluded because small samples make shares unstable.

Highest share
New Hampshire (100%)
National average
48.6%
Its definitive verdicts
2,783
Sample floor
100 definitive verdicts

It does not lead alone: one other row ties it at 100%, and nothing in the source separates them.

Assessment scale vs. impaired share

A state that assesses more lakes is not thereby a state with a better or worse verdict rate: Wisconsin carries the largest assessed corpus among qualifying states (4,718 definitive verdicts) yet sits at 10.4% impaired, while several states with far smaller corpuses post a higher share. Corpus size and verdict rate move independently.

Source: EPA ATTAINS, states above the sample floor 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 36 entities by Definitive verdicts (assessed corpus) (X) and Impaired share (%) (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Large corpus, high shareSmall corpus, high shareLarge corpus, low shareSmall corpus, low share 01,0002,0003,0004,0005,000 0%20%40%60%80%100%120% Definitive verdicts (assessed corpus) Impaired share (%) New Hampshire · 2,783, 100%Washington · 393, 100%New Jersey · 604, 96.5%Massachusetts · 718, 94.4%Oregon · 178, 92.7%California · 224, 90.2%New York · 642, 87.7%Illinois · 497, 87.3%Rhode Island · 140, 85%Oklahoma · 195, 78.5%Virginia · 231, 78.4%South Dakota · 186, 78%Kansas · 316, 76.3%Iowa · 203, 67.5%Florida · 1,003, 63.4%Nebraska · 352, 62.2%Indiana · 241, 60.2%North Carolina · 152, 59.2%Utah · 134, 57.5%Missouri · 267, 56.6%Kentucky · 129, 55.8%Colorado · 163, 54.6%Minnesota · 3,364, 53.4%Arkansas · 117, 53%Alabama · 273, 52.4%Georgia · 119, 39.5%South Carolina · 540, 39.3%Michigan · 2,339, 34.5%Connecticut · 139, 31.7%North Dakota · 176, 29.5%Texas · 433, 28.9%Pennsylvania · 516, 26.2%Vermont · 712, 21.6%Idaho · 237, 21.5%Wisconsin · 4,718, 10.4%Maine · 303, 10.2%
Source: EPA ATTAINS, states above the sample floor
NameDefinitive verdicts (assessed corpus)Impaired share (%)
New Hampshire2,783100%
Washington393100%
New Jersey60496.5%
Massachusetts71894.4%
Oregon17892.7%
California22490.2%
New York64287.7%
Illinois49787.3%
Rhode Island14085%
Oklahoma19578.5%
Virginia23178.4%
South Dakota18678%
Kansas31676.3%
Iowa20367.5%
Florida1,00363.4%
Nebraska35262.2%
Indiana24160.2%
North Carolina15259.2%
Utah13457.5%
Missouri26756.6%
Kentucky12955.8%
Colorado16354.6%
Minnesota3,36453.4%
Arkansas11753%
Alabama27352.4%
Georgia11939.5%
South Carolina54039.3%
Michigan2,33934.5%
Connecticut13931.7%
North Dakota17629.5%
Texas43328.9%
Pennsylvania51626.2%
Vermont71221.6%
Idaho23721.5%
Wisconsin4,71810.4%
Maine30310.2%
Source: EPA ATTAINS, states above the sample floor

The crosshair sits at the median across the 36 qualifying states on each axis, not the range midpoint, so it splits the group evenly. A state's quadrant reflects assessment scale and outcome rate together, not either one alone.

Data updated 2026-08-17

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's ATTAINS program, 60,590 lake-type waterbodies carry filed assessment records nationwide, and this ranking compares impaired share across the 36 states above the sample floor using the August 2026 extract. See our methodology for denominator rules and refresh cadence.

The assessed universe behind each share

Definitive lake verdicts each top-ranked state filed

definitive verdicts

What this shows New Hampshire reached this ranking on 2,783 definitive verdicts and Rhode Island on 140, a 20x difference in sample size behind two shares the ranking prints side by side.

Source EPA ATTAINS As of Reporting cycles 1987–2026

Every row

Full ranking

# Name Impaired share
1 New Hampshire 2,783 100%
1 Washington 393 100%
3 New Jersey 604 96.5%
4 Massachusetts 718 94.4%
5 Oregon 178 92.7%
6 California 224 90.2%
7 New York 642 87.7%
8 Illinois 497 87.3%
9 Rhode Island 140 85%
10 Oklahoma 195 78.5%
11 Virginia 231 78.4%
12 South Dakota 186 78%
13 Kansas 316 76.3%
14 Iowa 203 67.5%
15 Florida 1,003 63.4%
16 Nebraska 352 62.2%
17 Indiana 241 60.2%
18 North Carolina 152 59.2%
19 Utah 134 57.5%
20 Missouri 267 56.6%
21 Kentucky 129 55.8%
22 Colorado 163 54.6%
23 Minnesota 3,364 53.4%
24 Arkansas 117 53%
25 Alabama 273 52.4%
26 Georgia 119 39.5%
27 South Carolina 540 39.3%
28 Michigan 2,339 34.5%
29 Connecticut 139 31.7%
30 North Dakota 176 29.5%
31 Texas 433 28.9%
32 Pennsylvania 516 26.2%
33 Vermont 712 21.6%
34 Idaho 237 21.5%
35 Wisconsin 4,718 10.4%
36 Maine 303 10.2%

2 of the 36 rows in this table tie on the ranked value: 2 at 100% (rank 1). Tied rows share a rank and are listed in no meaningful order; where a tie reaches the top the medal is shared, because nothing separates those rows.

Share = Not Supporting / (Not Supporting + Fully Supporting) per state, over lake-type waterbodies only. The share is Not Supporting divided by definitive lake verdicts (Fully Supporting or Not Supporting) that rule on at least one of the four designated uses this site reports: lake waterbodies without a definitive verdict are excluded from both the numerator and the denominator. Verdicts recorded as Fully Supporting without a ruling on any of those four uses are excluded: some states file a placeholder unit for the lakes they have not assessed and report it as supporting on uses like irrigation and navigation, which would read as clean water in a comparison between states. States with fewer than 100 definitive verdicts are excluded because small samples make shares unstable.

Reading this ranking

  • A high share can mean worse water, targeted monitoring, or stricter standards; the state page shows the underlying mix. States hub
  • Assessment coverage differs sharply by state; raw reported counts are on the states hub. How assessment works
  • See which causes drive listings nationally. Most-listed lakes

Rankings order reported source data; they are not endorsements or safety determinations.

Rankings are computed from state assessment decisions in EPA's ATTAINS system and USGS National Water Information System daily values; the ordering metric and any exclusion floor are stated above the table, no number is typed in by an editor. Computed from per-state rollups of the full ingested ATTAINS lake-type universe; the sample floor and denominator definition are stated in the method note. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of 2026-08-17. Primary sources: EPA ATTAINS and USGS National Water Information System.