Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

DOI 10.1007/s10661-009-0939-0

An implementation plan for using biological indicators

to improve assessment of water quality in Thailand
Boonsatien Boonsoong Narumon Sangpradub
Michael T. Barbour Wijarn Simachaya

Received: 30 September 2008 / Accepted: 18 April 2009 / Published online: 7 May 2009
Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009

Abstract Most national standards for assessment

of water quality include physical and chemical
indicators relevant to specific pollutants and stressors. However, biological communities reflect not
only current conditions of aquatic resources but
also change in conditions over time and impacts
from multiple stressors. Assessing the health of
the aquatic community (that is, bioassessments)
has proven to be critical in protecting and maintaining healthy surface waters under the mandates
of regulatory frameworks, such as the Clean Wa-

B. Boonsoong (B)
Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science,
Kasetsart University, Chatuchak District,
Bangkok 10900, Thailand
e-mail: fscibtb@ku.ac.th
N. Sangpradub
Applied Taxonomic Research Center,
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science,
Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
M. T. Barbour
Center for Ecological Sciences, Tetra Tech, Inc.,
400 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 200,
Owings Mills, MD 21117, USA
W. Simachaya
Air Quality and Noise Management Bureau,
Pollution Control Department, Ministry
of Natural Resource and Environment,
Bangkok 10400, Thailand

ter Act in the USA and the Water Framework

Directive of the European Union. Whereas, in
Thailand water standards, bioassessment is lacking in favor of chemical criteria, only coliform
bacteria measurement can be considered a surrogate biological parameter. Our paper argues that
incorporating bioassessment will improve water
resource condition evaluations and recommends
the use of the benthic macroinvertebrate assemblage as a bioassessment framework in Thailand.
We discuss the implementation of a bioassessment
program that consists of two major components,
(a) a scientifically valid technical approach and
(b) consideration of technical resources for a costeffective program. The technical design comprises
(1) classification of streams into similar groupings, (2) design of a biological survey, (3) a welldocumented sampling protocol, (4) calibration of
biological metrics for data analysis, (5) development of criteria for determination of ecological
condition, and (6) communication of the results
to citizens and policymakers. A cost-effective way
to develop a bioassessment program that will improve Thailands ability to measure water quality and to make good decisions to attain healthy
quality status is to establish partnerships by coordinating efforts and sharing data and technology
with adjacent regional environmental offices or
provinces. This collaboration would be fostered
through a long-term national water resources
management strategy and clear definition of goals

206

and desired outcomes that are critical components

of the overall National Plan for Ecological Health.

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

Table 1 Water quality classification and beneficial usage in
Thailand (Pollution Control Department 1997)
Classification Objectives/condition and beneficial usage
Class 1

Keywords Water quality Biological indicators

Benthic macroinvertebrates Thai streams
Water resource management Bioassessment

Background of water quality assessment

of flowing waters in Thailand
It is well known that water pollution from landbased activities in Thailand is largely associated
with urbanization, industrialization, and agricultural activities. Thus, the major sources of pollution are domestic sewage, industrial wastes, and
agricultural wastes. The major impacts of water
pollution are the degradation of water supply
sources, effect on aquatic ecosystem, and public
health. Thailand is an agriculture-based country
where water availability is crucial to supporting
water withdrawal for irrigation and water return
on a seasonal basis. In many areas of Thailand,
these agricultural activities have a substantial influence on waterways.
Therefore, water resources protection and
management has become an increasingly important issue. The Pollution Control Department
(PCD) under the direction of Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment has been monitoring
water quality (chemical) in Thai rivers since 1983.
PCD has also operated 28 automatic sampling
stations along major rivers in the country. Ambient water quality standards were established in
1994 and have served as guidelines for managing
water resources based on major beneficial uses.
The surface water quality standards are categorized into five classes (Table 1). Because there
are many water quality variables that cause water
pollution problems such as BOD, nutrients, toxic
substances, bacteria, and solids, the assessment
of water quality is based on the evaluation of
28 parameters (Table 2). From these, four main
parameters (biochemical oxygen demand [BOD],
dissolved oxygen [DO], total coliform bacteria
[TCB], and fecal coliform bacteria [FCB]) were
chosen for water quality classification and beneficial usage (Pollution Control Department 1997).

Class 2

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5

Extra clean fresh surface water resources

used for:
(1) conservation not necessary pass
through water treatment process
require only ordinary process for
pathogenic destruction
(2) ecosystem conservation where basic
organisms can breed naturally
Very clean fresh surface water resources
used for:
(1) consumption which requires ordinary
water treatment process before use
(2) aquatic organism of conservation
(3) fisheries
(4) recreation
Medium clean fresh surface water resources
used for:
(1) consumption, but passing through
an ordinary treatment process
before using
(2) agriculture
Fairly clean fresh surface water resources
used for:
(1) consumption, but requires special
water treatment process before using
(2) industry
The sources which are not classification in
class 14 and used for navigation

Therefore, the surveillance and monitoring of water resources are very important to assure the
good water quality status for aquatic ecosystems
as well as protection of human health.
In Thailand, assessment of water quality is
based on the four main parameters, which cannot reflect the response to multiple stressors to
aquatic resources. A more accurate approach to
assessing multiple and cumulative stressors to surface waters by evaluating the condition of biological communities (Karr and Chu 1999). Biological
assessments (bioassessments) are widely used in
other countries to monitor water conditions and
health of ecosystems. The use of bioassessments in
protecting and maintaining healthy surface waters
is driven by regulatory frameworks such as the
Clean Water Act (CWA) in the USA (Barbour
and Yoder 2000; Barbour et al. 2000) and the
Water Framework Directive (WFD) of the

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

207

Table 2 Surface water quality standard in Thailand (Pollution Control Department 1997)
Parameter

Units

Statistics

Standard value for class

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

1. Color, odor, and taste

2. Temperature
3. pH
4. Dissolved oxygen (DO)
5. BOD (5 days, 20 C)
6. Total coliform bacteria
7. Fecal coliform bacteria
8. NO3 N
9. NH3 N
10. Phenols
11. Copper (Cu)
12. Nickel (Ni)
13. Manganese (Mn)
14. Zinc (Zn)
15. Cadmium (Cd)

mg/l
mg/l
MPN/100 ml
MPN/100 ml
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l

P20
P80
P80
P80
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance

n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n

16. Chromium hexavalent

17. Lead (Pb)
18. Total mercury (total Hg)
19. Arsenic (As)
20. Cyanide (cyanide)
21. Radioactivity
Alpha
Beta
22. Total organochlorine pesticides
23. DDT
24. Alpha-BHC
25. Dieldrin
26. Aldrin
27. Heptachlor and heptachlorepoxide
28. Endrin

mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l

Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance

n
n
n
n
n

Becqurel/l

Max. allowance

mg/l
g/l
g/l
g/l
g/l
g/l
g/l

Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance
Max. allowance

n
n
n
n
n
n
n

n

n

Class 4

Class 5

n

n
59
6.0
1.5
5,000
1,000
5.0
0.5
0.005
0.1
0.1
1.0
1.0
0.005a
0.05b
0.05
0.05
0.002
0.01
0.005

n
59
4.0
2.0
20,000
4,000
5.0
0.5
0.005
0.1
0.1
1.0
1.0
0.005a
0.05b
0.05
0.05
0.002
0.01
0.005

n
59
2.0
4.0

5.0
0.5
0.005
0.1
0.1
1.0
1.0
0.005a
0.05b
0.05
0.05
0.002
0.01
0.005

0.1
1.0
0.05
1.0
0.02
0.1
0.1
0.2
None

0.1
1.0
0.05
1.0
0.02
0.1
0.1
0.2
None

0.1
1.0
0.05
1.0
0.02
0.1
0.1
0.2
None

Source: Notification of the National Environmental Board, No. 8, B.E. 2537 (1994), issued under the Enhancement and
Conservation of National Environmental Quality Act B.E.2535 (1992), published in the Royal Government Gazette,
Vol. 111, Part 16, dated February 24, B.E.2537 (1994)
P percentile value, n naturally, n naturally but changing not more than 3 C
a When water hardness not more than 100 mg/l as CaCO
3
b When water hardness more than 100 mg/l as CaCO
3

European Union (Moog and Chovanec 2000). The

scientific foundation is that many biological indicators have been used as tools for bioassessment such as fish, benthic macroinvertebrates,
algae, and aquatic macrophytes (Norris and
Barbour 2009). The scientific literature supports
the contention that freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates are the most commonly used assemblage to assess environmental condition for
water quality assessments in many countries,
e.g., the United States, the United Kingdom,

Australia, and other countries (Resh and Jackson

1993; Resh 1995, 2008; Norris 1995; Barbour et al.
1999; Clarke et al. 2003; Morse et al. 2007). The
results of scientific research in Thailand confirmed
that bioassessments using benthic macroinvertebrates are effective in Thai rivers and streams
(Boonsoong 2007; Boonsoong et al. 2008; Mustow
2002; Sangpradub et al. 1998; Thorne and
Williams 1997).
Through this study, a design for a scientifically viable bioassessment approach has been

208

developed as a framework for a country-wide

bioassessment program. The objectives of this
paper are to describe this bioassessment approach and to demonstrate the implementation of biological tools in Thailand as a crucial
aspect of a credible water quality monitoring
program.

Implementation of stream bioassessment

in Thailand
The first step in a biological assessment program
is the development of biological tools (bioindicators and criteria for evaluating the indicators).
These tools are important components of national
and regional water quality management programs
in addition to chemical-, physical-, and toxicitybased water quality parameters and related
standards. Note that, by themselves, traditional
chemical, physical, and toxicity assessments cannot fully answer questions about the ecological
integrity of a waterbody (Barbour et al. 2000).
An added benefit to effective bioassessments is
that data can be used to assess water quality and
physical habitat, identify multiple stressors to a
waterbody, set protection and restoration goals,
and evaluate the effectiveness of management actions for ecosystem protection or recovery.
The bioassessment approach that is the most
frequently used by water resource agencies in the
United States is a practical approach for development of bioassessment in Thailand, because it
provides ecological information that is readily
translated to water quality managers (Barbour
et al. 2000). The development of bioassessment
and implementation of associated biocriteria constitute a systematic process involving discrete
steps (Barbour et al. 1999; Karr and Chu 1999): (1)
classifying environments into similar groupings or
ecoregions to establish realistic benchmarks for
evaluation in different parts of the country; (2)
selecting measurable biological attributes; (3) developing sampling protocols and study designs; (4)
devising analytical procedures for the ecological
data; and (5) communicating the results to citizens
and policymakers to improve decision-making for
water resource.

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

Considerations for a technical approach

for Thailand
Once a bioassessment framework is established
(Table 3), a monitoring and assessment program
becomes robust in terms of determining ecological
status and condition of the water resource. Technical considerations for a bioassessment technique focus on having standardized sampling gear
and protocols, some sort of calibrated index, and
a decision or interpretive framework (Diamond
et al. 1996). How these technical considerations
are to be applied to Thai stream assessment are
briefly summarized as follows:
First considerationdata collection (field
sampling) and processing (laboratory)
Standardized and cost-effective bioassessment
protocols for benthic macroinvertebrates were
taken from the US Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBPs) (Barbour et al. 1999) and were tested
as a suitable template for bioassessment in Thailand (Boonsoong et al. 2008). The RBPs advocate
a multihabitat approach as a representation of
natural stream habitat and the associated aquatic
organisms, and were found to be optimal for Thai
streams.
To facilitate the identification of organisms in
biological samples, an illustrated key for freshwater invertebrates of Thailand was developed
by Sangpradub and Boonsoong (2006). This key
clearly provides guidance to biologists throughout the country to identify certain organisms to
genera (i.e., mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies)
and family-level keys for other insect orders (i.e.,
beetles and dragonflies). These organisms are considered to be sensitive to pollution and are used as
indicators in bioassessment (Rosenberg and Resh
1993). While this key serves as a foundation, there
is, nevertheless, still an urgent need to produce
a comprehensive Guide to Freshwater Invertebrates of Thailand which, in turn, will enhance
bioassessments and interpretation of impairment
to foster better water quality management.
Boonsoong et al. (2008) established two index periods to represent wet and dry seasons for
bioassessment. Only two index periods for sampling the biology are necessary, because organ-

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

209

Table 3 Steps for developing biological assessment in Thailand and implementing associated biocriteria for judging
impairment
Steps

Description

Rationale

1. Data collection

Collect data from reference and test sites

Monitoring program consisting of sampling
for macroinvertebrate assemblages,
design and protocols would be established
habitat characteristics, and water chemistry to procure an ecological dataset to develop
framework for scientifically valid
implementation of bioassessment
2. Stream classification
Test and confirm classification (based on
Classification partitions natural variability into
reference sites) with multivariate analysis
assessment units (for example, mountain
of fauna composition
streams versus low-gradient plains streams
are separate classes)
3. Characterization of
Determine the reference biological
From a composite of reference sites in each
reference condition
representation for each stream class
class, a biological condition can be determined
to provide the optimum condition
4. Metrics evaluation
Calibrate biological metrics for effectiveness Metrics are ecological attributes of biological
in assessing ecological condition
communities used to assess deviation from
a reference condition
5. Index development
Aggregate information of core metrics into
An aggregation of metrics provides a multiple
a biological index for each stream class
attribute foundation for sensitivity to various
stressors
6. Biocriteria development Establish benchmarks for assessment that
Impairment thresholds are used to assess
are adjusted by physical and chemical
overall condition and to set management
covariates and designated aquatic life use
priorities according to water quality standards
(see Table 1)
Adapted from Barbour et al. (1999) and Karr and Chu (1999)

isms are exposed to conditions throughout their

life cycle. More frequent water collections would
be required to evaluate fluctuation in levels of the
physico-chemical parameters adequately.
Second considerationdata summarization
and analysis
The raw data that are produced from the laboratory processing and organism identification
step are transformed into biological metrics that
have ecological relevance and facilitate the interpretation process. Core metrics are selected to
represent diverse aspects of the richness, composition, tolerance, and trophic structure of benthic macroinvertebrate assemblage (Barbour and
Gerritsen 1996). Bioassessment research in the
Loei River and adjacent catchments resulted in
nine core metrics as indicators of biological condition in the overall assessment (Table 4).
To define homogeneous sets within or across
ecoregions, classification of streams and establishing reference conditions are based on

their geophysical attributes, water chemistry, and

faunal composition (Barbour et al. 1999). Classification of streams provides a relatively homogeneous region and habitat type. Reference
conditions are determined from unimpaired sites
and reflect the natural variability in biological
data, due to the influences of climate and natural
disturbance (Stoddard et al. 2006). The Reference
Condition Approach (RCA) is well documented
(Bailey et al. 2004) and is based on identifying
the minimally disturbed condition (MDC), which
occurs in the absence of significant human disturbance (e.g., natural or undisturbed) (Stoddard
et al. 2006). This approach provides a realistic
benchmark from which an assessment of ecological condition is performed.
Thai streams are heterogeneous environments
at scales ranging from habitats to catchments (e.g.,
cascades, waterfalls, and streams). To determine a
regional reference condition in Thailand, streams
should be surveyed for biota and physical habitat
in each region. Although protected areas (e.g., national parks, wildlife sanctuaries) are conserved in

Decrease
Decrease
Decrease
Feeding measures
Habit measures

Composition measures
Tolerance/intolerance
measures

No. of Diptera taxa

% Plecoptera
% Tolerant organisms
Becks Biotic Index
(Florida Index)
% Intolerant organism
No. of shredder taxa
No. of clinger taxa

Decrease
Decrease
Increase
Decrease

Decrease
Decrease

Measures the overall variety of the macroinvertebrate assemblage

Number of taxa in the insect orders Ephemeroptera (mayflies),
Plecoptera (stoneflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies), and Coleoptera (beetles)
Number of true fly taxa, which includes midges
Percent of stonefly nymphs
Percent of macrobenthos considered to be tolerant of various types of perturbation
Weighted sum of intolerant taxa, which are classed as 1 (least tolerant) or 2 (intolerant).
Becks Biotic Index = 2 X class 1 taxa + 1 X class 2 taxa
Percent of those organisms considered to be sensitive to perturbation
Number of taxa of the macrobenthos that shreds dead leaf litter
Number of taxa of insects having fixed retreats or other adaptations for attachment
to surfaces in flowing water
No. of total taxa
No. of EPTC taxa
Richness measures

Predicted response to
increasing perturbation
Metric
Category

Definition

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

Table 4 Core biological metrics used in index development of the Loei River and adjacent catchments (from Boonsoong et al. 2008)

210

many parts of Thailand, drainage degradation and

deforestation are evident throughout the country.
Identifying the least disturbed condition (LDC)
could be done throughout the regions of the country to establish regional reference conditions for
Thai streams. A scientific model, the Biological
Condition Gradient (BCG) that describes the biological responses to increasing levels of stressors,
communicates the existing and potential condition
of aquatic ecosystems (Davies and Jackson 2006).
This approach would be useful in Thailand, because the regional reference conditions, based on
the LDC, could be placed on the BCG model to
articulate a better assessment of conditions and to
establish restoration goals.

Third considerationdecision or interpretive

framework
Boonsoong et al. (2008) developed a narrative
assessment from Poor to Very Good for the
Loei River catchment using biological data. The
assessment narratives are divided into five categories based on the range of index values among
all reference sites. Greater than or equal to the
75th percentile of that range is rated as Very
Good and greater than or equal to the 25th percentile of that range is rated as Good. Biological
index values from a site compared to the reference condition falling below the 25th percentile
are rated in three condition categories as Fair,
Poor, and Very Poor. These ordinal rating
categories were used to assign impairment rating
to all sampling sites.
As a comparison, the assessment of water quality of sites in the Loei River Basin based on the
evaluation of two chemical parameters (Standard
Water Quality = BOD and DO) and six parameters (Water Quality Index = BOD, DO, pH,
3
NO
3 , PO4 , and SS) suggested that water quality
in the river basin was generally in Good condition (Fig. 1). Conversely, ecological condition
was generally Fair based on the biological index
score. This comparison illustrates that measuring
physico-chemical parameters alone does not provide a true picture of condition.

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

211

Fig. 1 A comparison of
the ecological condition
assessment of sites in the
Loei River Basin between
a surface water quality
standards in Thailand
(SWQ Standard Water
Quality; WQI Water
Quality Index) and
b biological index scores

Implementation of a national bioassessment

program
The National Environmental Quality Plan of
Thailand for 20072011 emphasizes the rehabilitation of natural resources and the environment by
strengthening environmental management and increasing local and community participation. Policies for water environment aim to accelerate the
rehabilitation of water quality in major water
resources and to reduce and control water pollution originating from domestic, industrial, and
agricultural activities. The goal of water quality
was established to comply with the ambient water
quality standards under fair and good condition of
not less than 85% of water bodies in the country.
The national water vision of Thailand was established in 1999 and is as follows (Sethaputra et al.
2001):

By the year 2025, Thailand will have sufficient water of good quality for all users
through an efficient management, organizational and legal system that would ensure
equitable and sustainable utilization of its
water resources with due consideration on

the quality of life and the participation of all

stakeholders.
However, management in Thailand has been
separated between the quantity and quality of
water due to agency responsibilities and their respective regulations. Thus, there is no such integrated approach applied to water environment
management. Without an established action plan
and interim timeline and a plan for integration
and communication, attaining the goal of good
quality waters by 2025 is problematic. One of five
components of the nations water vision is development and application of indicators for monitoring and assessment of water quality. However,
proper implementation of an effective monitoring and assessment program may require several
years (long-term planning) for Thailand where
expertise and resources are limited. Time is of
the essence to accomplish the national vision by
2025. Unfortunately, a detailed prescription for
identifying suitable indicators of ecological health
and performing methods to measure the degree
of achievement of the vision was provided by
Boonsoong et al. (2008). So, the implementation
and development of biological tools which are
ideal to support the national water vision of Thai-

212

land have been provided in a scientifically defensible framework. A successful biological assessment
program for water resource protection as outlined
by Boonsoong et al. (2008) depends on several
elements:
1. clear definition of goals (i.e., the national vision and timeline);
2. program support and mandates to pursue the
goals;
3. cooperation of agencies and coordination for
staff collaboration;
4. staffing (e.g., well-trained biologists, database
managers, technicians); and
5. facilities (e.g., appropriately equipped facilities, offices, and centers).
The goal of a comprehensive biological assessment strategy for effective and comprehensive water management for all river basins within
Thailand can be done by integrating the longterm planning for basin development with the ecological knowledge from the scientific community
to develop a viable program. The delicate balance between socio-economic concerns and overall protection of the nations water resources is a
key consideration in the essence of this program
and how benchmarks are derived. This means
integrating institutional, policy, legal, and technical measures to provide a consistent framework
of basin planning and management to guide the
systematic development of a program to protect
and restore a basins water resources, as per the
National Water Vision.
Staffing and technical resources
Thailand is divided into 25 river basins based
on geographical characteristics. There are 16
Regional Environment Offices that support environmental monitoring over various parts of Thailand. A cost-effective way to develop a biological
assessment program is to coordinate efforts and
share data with adjacent regional environmental
offices. Several well-trained biologists, resources,
and facilities should be available to support the
bioassessment program in each of the 16 regional
offices. Having experienced staff is a necessary
element for conducting an effective ecological
assessment and monitoring program. Employing

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

or contracting knowledgeable scientists will help

support the technical development (e.g., ecological indicators, calibration of endpoints, biocriteria for assessment of condition), formulation
of the monitoring strategy (e.g., timing of monitoring, density of survey efforts, interpretation
guidelines), and program maintenance (e.g., training, field sampling, quality assurance, quality control). Scientists at Thai universities should also be
included in the planning and monitoring phase
of the program because they provide essential
resources to develop an effective bioassessment
program in Thailand. Universities are a valuable resource for supporting the development of
monitoring protocols and conducting training and
their students make excellent field technicians and
serve as the next generation of knowledgeable
scientists. Overall knowledge is fragmented due
to a highly local focus of research and a lack
of institutional collaborations (Parnrong 2002). A
combination of university collaborators, staff in
governmental environment offices, and dedicated
program managers is critical to the success of
water resource management (Savan et al. 2003).
Volunteer monitoring to supplement limited
resources
The use of a bioassessment program has been
a valuable tool for educating the public about
ecological values associated with biological integrity and the health of ecosystems (Lathrop
and Markowitz 1995). Entering the public process
with a bioassessment approach has resulted in
a high degree of acceptance among citizens and
watershed groups interested in the status of their
watersheds. Public participation in water quality management in Thailand is becoming more
progressive in the water quality monitoring activities. Non-government organizations (NGOs)
have been established in some areas for implementing some activities related to water issues.
Rapid bioassessment by volunteer monitors in
streams in the Loei River Basin was conducted
in December 2004 and 2005 (Boonsoong 2007).
Boonsoong found that most of the volunteers,
when trained, could identify insects and other
macroinvertebrates at the ordinal taxonomic
level and were capable of data interpretation.

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

213

Boonsoong (2007) proposed a volunteer monitoring network scheme to train volunteers and
provide a skilled workforce at a low budget to conduct long-term biomonitoring in the Loei River
Basin.
Trained volunteers who are not experienced biologists can practice reliable rapid bioassessment
methods when provided proper oversight and supervision. Results of these citizen monitoring activities can provide a cost-effective supplemental
resource to government agencies for the identification and characterization of impaired streams.
However, the success of an effort to establish
such a network is dependent upon the relationship
of volunteer monitoring groups with government
agencies, whereby the necessary support and a realistic budget can be jointly established to address
the scope of a long-term monitoring program and
to accomplish the common goal of water resource
protection.

(Barbour et al. 2008). The role of scientists is

to: (1) translate ecological theory and knowledge
into tools for application to decision-making; (2)
become communicators and facilitators of credible science for actions that protect and restore
water quality that result in ecosystem recovery;
and (3) provide sound science to form the basis of
making informed decisions regarding our aquatic
resources (Barbour 2008). The role of managers
is to: (1) engage scientists in a timely fashion
to provide scientific underpinnings for managers
decisions; (2) apply the scientific knowledge in
an objective manner to support agency goals for
protection and restoration of aquatic resources,
and (3) consider socio-economic costs and benefits
along with the ecological risk assessment provided
by the science, and involve stakeholders (those
with vested interest in the outcome) in discussions
leading to informed decision-making. Our recommendations are:

Water quality program support

 To address watershed management and water pollution, the Thai regulatory system for
water resources management and pollution
control should focus on biomonitoring tools
for water quality assessment. The lack of an
integrated approach combined with physical,
chemical and biological assessments has exacerbated the problem of characterizing the
pollution of Thailands waters. Thailand needs
to develop an integrated approach for the
management of surface water resources. A
standardized biological assessment program is
an important issue to implement in determining the health of streams in Thailand.
 Regional reference conditions should be determined throughout Thailand and can be
used to improve all types of water quality
indicators. Regionalization can then facilitate
the calibration of the multimetric approach
for bioassessment in Thailand. The biological
index score (Boonsoong et al. 2008) was specific for one regional catchment, but may need
refinement for assessing other regions. Once
calibrated for each region, the biological index
will provide a powerful tool for water quality
agencies.
 For a nationwide application of rapid bioassessment, the multimetric system biological

There are two major barriers to effective water

management in Thailand: (1) the lack of clear
regulatory policies and (2) the lack of coordination among organizations. With regard to the first
barrier, promulgation of stronger criteria and water quality standards based on bioassessment data
is more appropriate than use of existing, limited
policies, but is currently not in place. Secondly,
water resources are administered and managed
by eight ministries with different priorities, and
programs that sometimes overlap or are in conflict
(Sethaputra et al. 2001). A central authority is
needed to direct the cooperation of the ministries
in the common goal of water resource assessment
and protection. Once the program support is in
place for water quality management, implementation of a bioassessment program as prescribed by
Boonsoong et al. (2008) is possible.

Recommendations
Implementation requires a close interaction between the scientists and agency managers, as
strong scientific foundation is crucial to the
protection and restoration of aquatic resources

214

index has been tested and is an appropriate technique for Thailand. This approach is
simple to perform, cost effective, and easily
understandable for water resource managers.
Implementation of a bioassessment strategy will improve monitoring and assessment
programs.
 The concept of establishing volunteer
monitoring groups has merit and may serve
as a cost-effective choice for increasing
public awareness, improving environmental
education, and strengthening the need to
prioritize waters for protection or restoration.
A volunteer national standard method
on using benthic macroinvertebrates as
bioindicators in Thailand has been proposed
(Boonsoong 2007) and may serve as a
framework for broadscale implementation.
A process for evaluating the volunteer
monitoring program in other regions should
be established and tested with the local people
for proper application.
Acknowledgement We would especially like to thank
Prof. Dr. John C. Morse (Clemson University, USA) for
critically reading and editing the manuscript.

References
Bailey, R. C., Norris, R. H., & Reynoldson, T. B. (2004).
Bioassessment of freshwater ecosystem using the reference condition approach. Boston: Kluwer.
Barbour, M. T. (2008). The societal benefit of biological
assessment and monitoring in rivers. In O. Moog, D.
Hering, S. Sharma, I. Stubauer, & T. Korte (Eds.),
ASSESS-HKH: Proceedings of the scientific conference Rivers in the Hindu KushHimalayaEcology
& Environmental Assessment (pp. 57). Vienna:
BOKUUniversity of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences.
Barbour, M. T., & Gerritsen, J. (1996). Subsampling of
benthic samples: a defense of the fixed-count method.
Journal of the North American Benthological Society,
15, 386391. doi:10.2307/1467285.
Barbour, M. T., & Yoder, C. O. (2000). The multimetric
approach to bioassessment as used in the United State
of America. In J. F. Wright, D. W. Sutcliffe, & M. T.
Furse (Eds.), Assessing the biological quality of freshwaters: RIVPACS and other techniques (pp. 281292).
Cumbria: Freshwater Biological Association.
Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B. D., &
Stribling, J. B. (1999). Rapid bioassessment protocols
for use in streams and wadable rivers: Periphyton,

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

benthic macroinvertebrates and fish (2nd ed.). EPA
841-B-99-002. Washington D.C.: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
Barbour, M. T., Poff, N. L., Norris, R. H., & Allan, J. D.
(2008). Perspective: Communicating our science to influence policy. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 27(3), 562569. doi:10.1899/07-051.1.
Barbour, M. T., Swietlik, W. F., Jackson, S. K.,
Courtemanch, D. L., Davies, S. P., & Yoder, C. O.
(2000). Measuring the attainment of biological integrity in the USA: A critical element of ecological integrity. Hydrobiologia, 422/423, 453464.
doi:10.1023/A:1017095003609.
Boonsoong, B. (2007). Rapid bioassessment for Thai
streams with benthic macroinvertebrates. PhD thesis,
Khon Kaen University, Thailand.
Boonsoong, B., Sangpradub, N., & Barbour, M. T.
(2008). Development of rapid bioassessment approaches using benthic macroinvertebrates for Thai
streams. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.
doi:10.1007/s10661-008-0423-2.
Clarke, R. T., Wright, J. F., & Furse, M. T. (2003). RIVPACS models for predicting the expected macroinvertebrate fauna and assessing the ecological quality
of rivers. Ecological Modelling, 160, 219233.
doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00255-7.
Davies, S., & Jackson, S. (2006). The biological condition
gradient: A descriptive model for interpreting
change
in
aquatic
ecosystems.
Ecological
Applications, 16(4), 12511266. doi:10.1890/10510761(2006)016[1251:TBCGAD]2.0.CO;2.
Diamond, J. M., Barbour, M. T., & Stribling, J. B.
(1996). Characterizing and comparing bioassessment
approaches and their results: A perspective. Journal
of the North American Benthological Society, 15, 713
727. doi:10.2307/1467818.
Karr, J. R., & Chu, E. W. (1999). Restoring life to running waters: Better biological monitoring. Washington,
D.C.: Island.
Lathrop, J. E., & Markowitz, S. A. (1995). Monitoring water resource quality using volunteers. In W. S. Davis, &
T. P. Simon (Eds.), Biological assessment and criteria:
Tools for water resource planning and decision making
(pp. 303314). New York: Lewis.
Moog, O., & Chovanec, A. (2000). Assessing the ecological
integrity of rivers: Walking the line among ecological,
political and administrative interests. Hydrobiologia,
422/423, 99109. doi:10.1023/A:1017053829050.
Morse, J. C., Bae, Y. J., Munkhjargal, G., Sangpradub, N.,
Tanida, K., Vshivkova, T. S., et al. (2007). Freshwater
biomonitoring with macroinvertebrates in East Asia.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 5(1), 3342.
doi:10.1890/1540-9295(2007)5[33:FBWMIE]2.0.CO;2.
Mustow, S. E. (2002). Biological monitoring of rivers
in Thailand: Use and adaptation of the BMWP
score. Hydrobiologia, 479, 191229. doi:10.1023/A:
1021055926316.
Norris, R. H. (1995). Biological monitoring: The dilemma
of data analysis. Journal of the North American
Benthological Society, 14(3), 440450. doi:10.2307/
1467210.

Environ Monit Assess (2010) 165:205215

Norris, R. H., & Barbour, M. T. (2009). Bioassessment
of aquatic ecosystems. In G. E. Likens (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Inland waters (Vol. 3 pp. 2128). Oxford:
Elsevier.
Parnrong, S. (2002). A review of biological assessment of
freshwater ecosystems in Thailand. Report submitted
to Mekong River Commission.
Pollution Control Department (1997). Water quality criteria & standard in Thailand. Bangkok: Pollution Control Department, Ministry of Science Technology and
Environment.
Resh, V. H. (1995). Freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates
and rapid assessment procedures for water quality
monitoring in developing and newly industrialized
countries. In W. S. Davis, & T. P. Simon (Eds.), Biological assessment and criteria: Tools for water resource planning and decision making (pp. 167177).
New York: Lewis.
Resh, V. H. (2008). Which group is best? Attributes
of different biological assemblages used in freshwater biomonitoring programs. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 138, 131138. doi:10.1007/
s10661-007-9749-4.
Resh, V. H., & Jackson, J. K. (1993). Rapid assessment
approaches to biomonitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates. In D. M. Rosenberg, & V. H. Resh (Eds.),
Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates (pp. 195233). New York: Chapman and Hall.
Rosenberg, D. M., & Resh, V. H. (1993). Freshwater
biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates. New
York: Chapman and Hall.

215
Sangpradub, N., & Boonsoong, B. (2006). Identification
of freshwater invertebrates of the Mekong
river and tributaries. Vientiane: Mekong River
Commission.
Sangpradub, N., Inmuong, C., Hanjavanit, C., & Inmuong,
U. (1998). A correlation study between freshwater
benthic macroinvertebrate fauna and environmental
quality factors in Nam Pong Basin. Research report
submitted to Thailand Research Fund.
Savan, B., Morgan, A. J., & Gore, C. (2003). Volunteer environmental monitoring and the role of
universities: The case of Citizens Environmental
Watch. Environmental Management, 31, 561568.
doi:10.1007/s00267-002-2897-y.
Sethaputra, S., Thanopanuwat, S., Kumpa, L., &
Pattanee, S. (2001). Thailand water vision: A case
study. In L. H. Ti, & T. Facon (Eds.), From vision
to action: A synthesis of experiences in Southeast
Asia (pp. 7198). Bangkok: The FAOESCAP Pilot
Project on National Water Visions.
Stoddard, J. L., Larsen, D. P., Hawkins, C. P.,
Johnson, R. K., & Norris, R. H. (2006). Setting
expectations for the ecological condition of running
waters: The concept of reference condition. Ecological
Applications, 16(4), 12671276. doi:10.1890/10510761(2006)016[1267:SEFTEC]2.0.CO;2.
Thorne, R. J., & Williams, W. P. (1997). The response of benthic macroinvertebrates to pollution in developing countries: A multimetric system
of bioassessment. Freshwater Biology, 37, 671
686.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.