THE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM OF RIVER HEALTH FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT

  • Carolyn G. Palmer (Centre for Aquatic Toxicology, Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University) ;
  • Jang, Suk-Hwan (Department of Civil Engineering, Deajin University)
  • Published : 2002.10.01

Abstract

South Africa has developed a policy and law that calls and provides for the equitable and sustainable use of water resources. Sustainable resource use is dependent on effective resource protection. Rivers are the most important freshwater resources in the country, and there is a focus on developing and applying methods to quantify what rivers need in terms of flow and water quality. These quantified and descriptive objectives are then related to specified levels of ecological health in a classification system. This paper provides an overview of an integrated and systematic methodology, where, fer each river, and each river reach, the natural condition and the present ecological condition are described, and a level/class of ecosystem health is selected. The class will define long term management goals. This procedure requires each ecosystem component to be quantified, starting with the abiotic template. A modified flow regime is modelled for each ecosystem health class, and the resultant fluvial geomorphology and hydraulic habitats are described. Then the water chemistry is described, and the water quality changes that are likely to occur as a consequence of altered flows are predicted. Finally, the responses to the stress imposed on the biota (fish, invertebrates and vegetation) by modified flow and water quality are predicted. All of the predicted responses are translated into descriptive and/or quantitative management objectives. The paper concludes with the recognition of active method development, and the enormous challenge of applying the methods, implementing the law, and achieving river protection and sustainable resource-use.

Keywords

References

  1. Armitage, P.D. (2000). The potential of RIVPACS for predicting the effects of environmental change, In: Wright, J.F.,Sutcliffe, D.W. and Furse, M.T. (eds.) Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, Cumbria, UK.
  2. Barbour, M.T. and Yoder, C.O. (2000). The Multimertic approach to bioassessment, as used in the United States of Ameria, In: Wright, J.F., Sutcliffee, D.W. and Furse,M.T.(eds.) Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside,Cumbria,UK.
  3. Boulton, A.J. and Brock M.A. (1999) Australian Freshwater Ecology Processes and Management. Australian freshwater ecology. Cleneagles Publishing, Australia
  4. Boon P.J., Calow, P. and Petts, G.E. (EDS) (2000). River Conservation and Management. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester
  5. Chutter, F.M. (1998). Research on the rapid biological assessment of water quality impacts in streams and rivers. Water Research Commission Repot No 422/1/98, Pretoria, South Africa
  6. Davies, P.E. (2000). Development of Anational river Bioassessment System (Ausrivas) in Australia, in: Wright, J.E., Sutcliffe, D.W. and Furse, M.T.(EDS.) Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: Rivpacs and Other Techniques, Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, Cumbria, UK
  7. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (1996). National Biomonitoring Programme for Riverine Ecosystems: Proceedings of consultation planning meeting. NBP Report Series No 5. Institute for Water Quality Studies, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa
  8. Department of Water Affairs and forestry (1997). White Paper on a National Water Policy for South Africa. Department of Water Affairs and forestry, Pretoria, South Africa
  9. Department of Water Affairs and forestry (2000). Olifants River Ecological Water Requirement Assessment Report No's PB000- 00-5299-6299. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pvt Bag X313,Pretoria, South Africa
  10. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (2002a). The management of complex industrial wastewater discharges: DARFT DISCUSSION DOCUMENT Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pvt Bag X313,Pretoria, South Africa
  11. Department of Water Affairs and forestry (2002b). Proposed first edition National Water Resource Strategy Government GAzette No 23711
  12. Hughes, D.A. (2001). 'Providing hydrological information and data analysis tools for the determination of ecological instream flow requirements for South African Rivers.' Journal of Hydrology 241, 140-151 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00378-4
  13. King. J.M,, Brown, C.A., and Sabet, H. (In press). A scenario-based holistic approach to environmental flow assessments for rivers. Rivers Research and Application
  14. King, J.M. and Louw, D. (1998). 'Instream flow assessments for regulated rivers in South Arian using the Building Block Methodology.' Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 1: 109-124 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1463-4988(98)00018-9
  15. King, J.M., Tharme, R.E., and D.E. Villiers, M.S., (2000). Environmental flow assessments for rivers: Manual for the building block methodology, Water Research Commission Report No TT 131/00, Pretoria, South Africa
  16. Malan, H.L. and Day, J.A. (In press). Development of numerical methods for predicting relationships between stream flow, water quality and biotic response in rivers. Water Research Commission Report no. 956/1/02, Pretoria, South Africa
  17. Naiman, R.J., Lonzarich, D.G., Beechie, T.J., and Ralph, S.C. (1992). General principles of classification and the assessment of conservation potential in rivers. In: Boon, P.J, Calow, P., and Petts, G.E.(eds.) River conservation and management. John Wiley & Sons, England
  18. Norris, R.H. and Thoms, M.C. (1999). What is river health? Freshwater Biology 41 197-209 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00425.x
  19. O'keeffe, J., Hughes,D., and Tharme, R. (2002). 'Linking ecological response to altered flows, for use in environmental flow assessment: the Flow Stressor-Response method.' Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 28: 84-89
  20. Palmer, C.G. (1999). 'The application of ecological research in the development of a new water law in South Africa.' Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 18, 132-142 https://doi.org/10.2307/1468013
  21. Palmer, C.G., Peckham, B., and Soltau, F. (2000). The role of legislation in river conservation, In: Boon, P.J., Davies, B. R., Petts, G. E. (eds). Global Perspectives on River Conservation Science, Policy and Practice. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd, Bafins Lane, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1Ud, England
  22. Palmer, C.G., Berold, R., Muller, W.J., and Scherman, P.-A. (2002). How water ecosystems work, Water research Commission Report. Pretoria, South Africa. TT176 WRC Pvt Bag X03 Gezina, 0031, South Africa
  23. Resh, V.H., Myers, M.J., and Hannaford, M.J. (1996). Macroinvertebrates as biotic indicators of environmental quality, In: Hauer, E.R. and Lamberti, G.A. (eds.) Methods in stream ecology, Academic Press, USA
  24. Reynoldson, T.B., Day, K.E., and Pascoe, T. (2000). The development of the BEAST: a predictive approach for assessing sediment quality in the North American great lakes, In: Wright, J.F., Sutcliffe, D.W., and Furse, M.T.(eds.) Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVAPACS and other techniques, Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, Cumbria, UK.
  25. Reynoldsan,T.B., and Wright, J.F. (2000). The reference condition: problems and solutions. a predictive approach for assessing sediment quality in the North American great lakes, In: Wright, J.F., Sutcliffe, D.W., and Furse. M.T. (eds.) Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques, Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, Cumbria, UK
  26. Roux, D.J. (personal communication). Environmentek, CSIR, PO Box 395, Pretoria, 0001
  27. Rowlston, W.S., Jordanova, A., and Birkheand, A. (2000). Hydraulics, In: King, J.M., Tharme, R.E., and De Villiers, M.S. Environmental flow assessments for rivers: Manual for the building block methodology, Water Research Commission Report No TT 131/00, Pretoria, South Africa
  28. Rowntree, K. and Wadeson, R. (1998). 'A geomorphological framewrk for the assessment of instream flow requirements.' Aquatic Ecosytem Health and Management, 1, 125-141 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1463-4988(98)00020-7
  29. Rowntree, K.M., Wadeson, R.A., and O'keeffe J.H. (2000). 'The Development of a Geopmorphological Classification System for the Longitudinal Zonation of South African Rivers.' South African Geographical Journal, 3, 163-172
  30. Scherman, P.-A., Palmer, C.G., and Muller, W.J.(2002). Use of indigenous riverine invertebrates in applied toxicology and water resource-quality management. WRC Report No 955/1/02
  31. Scherman, P.-A., Muller, W.J. and Palmer,C.G. (in press). 'Links between ecotoxicology, biomonitoring and water chemistry in the integration of water quality into environmntal flow asessments.' Rivers Research and Application
  32. State of Rivers Report (2001). Letaba and Luvuvhu rivers system, Water Research Commission Report No 165/01, Pretoria, South Africa
  33. Uys, M.C., Goetsch, P.-A., and O'Keeffe, J.H. (1996). National Biomonitoring Programme for Riverine Ecosystems: Ecological indicators, a review and recommendations, NBP Report Series No 4. Institute for Water Quality Studies, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Pretoria, South Africa