# The Biological Assessment and Rehabilitation of the World's Rivers: An Overview
## 2 Biological Assessment of Rivers
### Oceania  
In Australia, different jurisdictions and organizations are responsible for river health monitoring and have laws that mandate the protection of aquatic ecosystems. Thus, there are many programs operating at different spatial and temporal extents using a variety of indicators [306]. For example, the Index of Stream Condition in Victoria [307] operated between 1999 and 2010 provided 5-yearly reports on Victorian streams based on hydrology, physical form, riparian vegetation, water physical and chemical quality and macroinvertebrates. In addition, the Victorian Environmental Flows Monitoring and Assessment Program (DWELP, [308]) and Wetland Monitoring Assessment Program [309] report on environmental flows (e-flows) using measurements of fish, riparian vegetation, birds and frogs, also with contribution of citizens. In south-eastern Queensland, since 2000, the Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program provides an annual report on the health of waterways using water quality, fish, macroinvertebrates, and riparian vegetation [310]. In the Australian Capital Territory, the citizen led WaterWatch Catchment Health Indicator Program ([[http://www.act.waterwatch.org.au/chip.html](http://www.act.waterwatch.org.au/chip.html)]([http://www.act.waterwatch.org.au/chip.html](http://www.act.waterwatch.org.au/chip.html))) reports annually on river condition using a combination of macroinvertebrate, physical and chemical variables and riparian condition metrics. The Australian freshwater ecological assessments have focused mainly on rivers and streams where macroinvertebrate bioassessment is commonly used to provide one of several possible ecological indicators for the status and functioning of freshwater ecosystems. The Australian River Assessment System (AUSRIVAS) bioassessment framework [311; 312] provides a standardized method for sampling macroinvertebrates and collecting environmental data and an assessment method that enabled the National River Health Program [313]. That program resulted in just one national river health survey that included 6000 sites and modelled data. That biological assessment indicated that 70% of river reaches were equivalent to reference condition and 30% were significantly impaired [314]. This survey did not include ephemeral or seasonally intermittent streams and rivers, which is an area for further research and development [315]. Catchment disturbance, elevated sediment and nutrient loads, and habitat degradation all contributed to these results. Since that initial national assessment, no updated nationally coordinated assessment of river and stream condition has been conducted, and AUSRIVAS is now largely used for targeted site assessments and state or territory-based assessment purposes [306]. Nevertheless, every 5 years the Australian Government conducts reviews the state of the Australian environment. However, this reporting on river condition remains limited because state and regional assessments are not consistent temporally and the lack of spatial coverage of sites is a major shortcoming for reporting consistent trends at this extent [316]. Over-use of water has also contributed to poor ecological condition of Australian rivers. Major water reforms in Australia over the past 20 years led to specific rules to provide water for the environment (i.e., environmental flows) and specific environmental water licenses being held by public authorities. These water holders manage large portfolios of environmental water, including within Australia's Murray Darling Basin (MDB; 1.061 million km\({}^{2}\) from Queensland, through New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory, Victoria and South Australia), where the water is used to meet the environmental objectives of the basin-wide Environmental Watering Plan [317]. The use of the water is accompanied by major investment in ecological monitoring and evaluation funded at both State and Federal levels.