A COMPARISON BETWEEN EU AND BRAZILIAN WATER POLICIES: THE USE OF MACROINVERTEBRATES

Water management has traditionally looked at the physical-chemical measurements which are not enough to protect the ecosystems in a more detailed watershed management. The European Union (EU) and Brazil have been attempting to improve their water status by the implementation of the Water Frame Directive (WFD) and the Brazil's National Water Resources Plan (PNRH) respectively. Despite of many similarities between the policies, they mainly differ in the use of bioindicators. Macroinvertebrates are the most common biological indicator used to show disturbances in the water bodies. The aim of this paper is to explain how macroinvertebrates have been adopted to classify the ecological status of the water bodies by the Brazilian and EU water policies. In the WFD it was defined the AQEM biomonitoring program, which uses macroinvertebrates index. On the other hand, the PNRH does not require biomonitoring. The use of bioindicators is the main difference between both water management policies. It reflects the concept of the water as a resource in Brazil and as an ecosystem in the EU.


I. INTRODUCTION
Human activities impact most of the river basins and adjacent seas [!]. Worldwide water management has been improving in the recent past. Current biological characterization of the water bodies is an important parameter that is to be considered [2,3,4]. However, water management has traditionally looked at the physical-chemical measurements, which are enough to regulate effluent discharge and protect human health, but not to protect the ecosystems in a more detailed watershed management [5]. It means that the health of the aquatic ecosystems has been "virtually ignored in a management context" [6]. A water quality monitoring program is well structured when encompass physical, chemical and biological measurements [7]. The implementation of new water policies in Brazil and EU is a milestone to the development of these sites. Both sites have been undertaking frame works to tackle the water deterioration. Biological indicators are a requirement to whole water bodies from Europe through the Water Frame Directive (WFD). Locally some areas from Brazil are also adopting the same strategy. The use of macroinvertebrate communities in water management plans has been increasing [8]. Macroinvertebrates are the most common biological indicator used to show disturbances in the water bodies [5,9]. Their use can assist decision-makers in defining restoration and conservation strategies [ I OJ. They also help to monitor biodiversity and water quality in watersheds [IO]. The objective here is to spell out how macroinvertebrates have been adopted to classify the ecological status of the water bodies by the Brazilian and European Union water policies. Thus this paper will help us to understand how water management has used the benthic macroinvertebrates index, and what the legal differences are between the two sites.

MAIN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IN WATERSHEDS
The land use plays the most important role to the biochemical process in the watersheds and hence to its water features [II]. The growing level of the large-scale land-use enterprise infrastructure development, deforestation and agriculture have been the main factor steering environmental changes in most of the ecosystems [12], decreasing biodiversity (36]. Sediment load is the most critical by-product of the human activities which causes defilement of the natural environments. Sewage is forecasted to enhance with population growth due to the lack of treatment facilities. Chemical pollution from industries is also a huge impact to the water basins in the world [I]. Dams are the main factor affecting aquatic communities [I]. It threats the water basins due to changes in the water flow regime in the rivers which in turns influence the biodiversity in rivers [13]. Besides, it changes nutrient ratio to coastal zones [14]. Agriculture gives rise to huge environmental changes as well. It brings suspended solids due to erosion process [I]. Besides, agriculture nutrients pollute other aquatic habitats and groundwater, and its pesticides bioaccumulate in the food web [ 15]. Moreover agriculture is also the background of excessive water abstraction. Globally 70% of the water goes to irrigation [I, 16] and in countries where agriculture is the main activity it increases to 95% [ I 6]. It leads to the abstraction of approximately 50% of the whole available surface water [12]. It is clear that human enterprises are linked with downstream habitat modification [I] and changes in the biological community. Human activities cause environmental deterioration, such as changes, the bioaccumulation of toxins, the presence/absence or abundance of indicator species or groups, and changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning [I].

Ecological integrity is a key concept for the management and protection of the ecosystems. [ 17]. Because it is difficult to monitor the whole ecosystem different shortcuts can be used [ 18]. One of them is the concept of bioindicators. This concept indicates the condition of an ecosystem and forms the basis of biological monitoring of environmental changes [ 19].
Macroinvertebrates have been one of the most promising bioindicators to carry out environmental assessment using aquatic biota [5,9]. Aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates are used to assess the spatial and temporal changes in water quality [20]. According to Reice & Wohlenberg [2 I] the advantages for using them are: duration of their life cycles which provides for long-tenn exposure to toxic substances in relation to other aquatic organisms, e.g. zooplankton; they live in contact with the sediment which increase their exposure to pollutants making it easier to detect levels of toxins in their body; given that decomposition takes place mainly in the bottom, studying benthic fauna is an effective tool to assess the ecosystem functioning.

Legal bases for using Macroinvertebrates as indicators of water quality: EU Water Policy
In 2000, the European Union (EU) adopted a new water policy, the Water Framework Directive (WFD). It established a legal framework to guarantee sufficient quantities of good quality water across EU. The WFD focus on inland and coastal surface waters and groundwater [26), aiming good ecological and chemical status for surface waters, good chemical and quantitative status for ground waters, and good ecological status for the surface waters by 2015 [27), For surface waters, the objectives are to achieve 'good ecological status' and 'good chemical status', and for Heavily Modified Water Bodies/Artificial Water Bodies 'good ecological potential' and 'good surface water chemical status'. Further objectives are: "to make the water management on river basins, to combine emission limit values with environmental quality standards, to ensure that water prices provide adequate incentives for water users to use water resources efficiently, to involve citizens more closely, and to streamline legislation".

Legal bases for using macroinvertebratcs as indicators of water quality: brazilian Water Policy
Currently, the most important law about water resource management is the so called Brazilian Water Law, no. 9433/1997 [31), This law establishes that the water management must be done within the limits of the river basin and states that water plans are one of the instruments for bringing this law into reality. The public participation and the charging for the water usage were both included in this law. In January 2006, when it was approved the National Water

Resources Plan (PNRH), Brazil was the first country in Latin America, and one of the first in the world to do so (32], With this plan, Brazil met the UN deadline of creating an integrated national water management plan by the year 2005.
Despite of all improvements done so far, the Brazilian legislation still does not require biomonitoring for determining water quality (31,33], In the Brazilian Water Law (no, 9433/1997) the aquatic communities were totally ignored [3 I]. This same author states that the water resources are not faced as aquatic ecosystems in that law, Usually the evaluation is perfonned only taking into account physical and chemical variables (34,35], In the very recent National Water Resources Plan, it is highlighted the concept that the water quality cannot be dissociated from the biotic aspect However, the plan does not specify how to use bioindicators and does not obligate its usage. Locally, some states are already looking upon the ecological integrity to evaluate water quality, but is still incipient  (40], The AQEM biomonitoring program was created to fulfill the WFD by using macroinvertebrates as biological indicators. [30], The principal aim of the WFD is to achieve 'good status' for all surface waters, which means both 'good ecological status' and 'good chemical status', It can be hard, however, to harmonise the understanding of 'good ecological status' in all Member States, and to ensure that this common understanding is consistent with the definitions of the Directive, Macroinvertebrates will be of great importance in the intercalibration of 'good ecological status' among the EU member states (Sadin and Hering 2004), The Brazilian and the European water laws have established parallel objectives as demonstrated in this paper. However, the Brazilian water law does not consider the water as an aquatic ecosystem [31 ], but as a public resource (34], According to Karr and Chu [4] it is a failure not to see rivers as living systems and not to take biology seriously in management programs, Physical-chemical parameters are not enough to define an adequate protection to the aquatic ecosystem [2]. A water quality monitoring program is well structured when encompass physical, chemical and biological measurements [7]. The Brazilian policy does not require bioindicators (macroinvertebrates) for water assessment in spite of several researches about multimetric bioindicator index, e.g.

Buss (2001), Egler (2002), Silveira et al. (2006) and (37],
In conclusion, the use of macroinvertabrates has been adopted to classify the ecological status of the water bodies by the use of the AQEM biomonitoring program in EU. In the Brazilian policy macroinvertebrates have not been required. The fact that the Brazilian water policy does not define the water as an aquatic ecosystem results in a lack of biomonitoring programs. This is the main difference between both water management policies.