ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and above all, I feel great pleasure in expressing my deep sense of gratitude,
obligation and heartiest respect to Dr. Bui Xuan Dung for his kind support, meticulous
guidance and heart touching inspiration throughout this thesis work.
I gratefully acknowledge the blessings and valuable suggestions from teacher in the
laboratory of Faculty of Biology in University of Science, would especially like to thanks to
the help provided for by laboratory work at Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology
Institute of Chemistry.
I am thankful to Ms.Nhan, Mr. Tuc to provide the information of Phoenix Golf
Course.
Last but not least, I take this opportunity to express my thanks and gratitude to my
parents and my friends for their never ending affection and encouragement.


CONTENT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .......................................................................................................... 1
CONTENT ................................................................................................................................. 2
LIST OF TABLE ........................................................................................................................ 4
LIST OF PICTURE .................................................................................................................... 5
LIST OF FIGURE ...................................................................................................................... 6
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... 1
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 2
1.1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 2
1.2. Literature review.................................................................................................................. 4
II. OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................ 9
2.1. Goal ..................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2. Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 9
III. STUDY SITE AND METHODOLOGY ............................................................................ 10
3.1. Study site ........................................................................................................................... 10
3.2. Methodology...................................................................................................................... 16

3.2.1. Experiment design .......................................................................................................... 16
3.2.2. Laboratory sample processing ........................................................................................ 22
3.2.3. Data analysis ................................................................................................................... 23
IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................................................... 27


4.1. Impact of Phoenix Golf Course on invertebrate composition and diversity ..................... 27
4.2. Physical and chemical parameters ..................................................................................... 39
4.2.1. Evaluating water quality in Bui River based on Vietnam’s water quality standard ....... 39
4.2.2. Evaluating water quality in Bui River based on Water Quality Index (WQI) ............... 48
4.3. Suggestion for Golf Course management. ......................................................................... 50
V. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 52
VI. REFFERENCES................................................................................................................... 1


LIST OF TABLE
Table 3.1. Climate - Hydrology indicators at Lam Son commune Luong Son district, Hoa
Binh province ........................................................................................................................... 11
Table 3.2. Parts of the Phoenix golf course .............................................................................. 13
Table 3.2. Weighting factors of water quality parameters ....................................................... 23
Table 3.3. Water quality range ................................................................................................. 25
Table 3.4. The relationship between bio – index ASPT and population level. ........................ 26
Table 4.1. List of invertebrate present in sample location........................................................ 27
Table 4.2. List of macroinvertebrates were found in sample location that lay in BMWPVIET
scoring system. ......................................................................................................................... 34
Table 4.3. Biological index in sample location 1: .................................................................... 35
Table 4.4. Biological index in sample location 2: .................................................................... 36
Table 4.5. Biological index in sample location 3 ..................................................................... 37
Table 4.6. Results of WQI calculating by using the formula of WQI with missing parameters
.................................................................................................................................................. 48



LIST OF PICTURE
Picture 2.1. Pond net ................................................................................................................. 20
Picture 2.2 (a): collecting samples; (b) putting samples in metal dish; (c) conserving samples
in 70% alcohol; (d) laboratory analysis .................................................................................... 21
Picture 4.1. Shoreline buffer .................................................................................................... 51


LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 3.1. Location of study site in Lam Son commune ........................................................ 10
Figure 3.2. Map of Phoenix Golf Course (Source: Phoenix Golf Course) ............................... 12
Figure 3.3. Operations of the Phoenix Golf course that affect amount of chemicals and water
applications. .............................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 3.2. Map of sample locations in Bui River ................................................................... 16
Figure 3.3. Water samples location in study site ...................................................................... 18
Figure 3.4 Map of biological sample ........................................................................................ 22
Figure 4.1. The ratio of species composition in 3 sample locations of Bui River.................... 30
Figure 4.2. The Shannon Wiener index of diversity values at study site ................................. 31
Figure 4.3. The proportion of invertebrate feed groups corresponds to changes in the physical
factor in the longitudinal direction (Source: USDA 2001)....................................................... 32
Figure 4.4. The respond of the number of families and ASPT score ....................................... 38
Figure 4.5.pH fluctuation in four periods at three different locations ...................................... 39
Figure 4.6. The amount of TSS in four periods at three locations ........................................... 40
Figure 4.7. Values for BOD in four periods at three different locations .................................. 41
Figure 4.8. COD concentration in four periods at three different locations ............................ 42
Figure 4.9. DO level of Bui River in 4 periods at 3 locations .................................................. 43
Figure 4.10. Total nitrogen of Bui River in 4 periods at 3 locations ........................................ 44
Figure 4.11. Total phosphorus of Bui River in 4 periods at 3 locations ................................... 45
Figure 4.12. Total coliform of Bui River in 4 periods at 3 locations ....................................... 46

Figure 4.13. The impact of Phoenix Golf Course on water quality of Bui River from upstream
to downstream .......................................................................................................................... 47
Figure 4.14. WQI values in 4 periods at 3 locations ................................................................ 49


ABSTRACT
In the current time, more and more golf courses are beginning to take form in the
world. However, under many activities of golf courses which are using fertilizers and
pesticides for turfgrasses, water quality has declined significantly. This study was conducted
to examine water quality of the Bui River under the impact of the Phoenix Golf Course using
two main methods: macroinvertebrate community through BMWPVIET and ASPT scoring
systems, along with physical and chemical parameters characteristics (pH, pH, TSS, DO,
COD, BOD5, NO3-, PO4, total coliforms) at three locations: upstream, in the stream passing
through the golf course, and downstream. Measurements were taken in 4 different periods: on
a sunny day without using fertilizers and pesticides, one day after applying fertilizers and
pesticides, after applying fertilizers and pesticides on a rainy day, and using fertilizers and
pesticides on a sunny day. The results show that: (1) Operations of the Phoenix Golf course in
applying fertilizers and pesticides with 76 – 78 tons fertilizers per year, 41280 liter pesticides
per year; (2) pollution level decreases dramatically from upstream to downstream (from 6.4 to
4.2) based on ASPT method; (3) The concentrations of pollutants increased significantly from
upstream to downstream. Almost parameters exceeded B1 standard, only pH, total nitrogen
and total coliform range in B1 standard limit based on Vietnam water quality Standard while
WQI also depicted that water quality decreases from upstream to downstream. This finding
suggested some solutions to reduce the influence of golf course to water quality and aquatic
ecosystem of Bui River catchment including improved pesticide management and riparian
buffer zones.

1



I. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Introduction
The ecological value of streams and rivers globally is influenced by increasing human
land use (Allan, 2004). Currently, there are estimated to be more than 31,500 golf courses
worldwide (Tanner and Gange, 2005). In Vietnam, golf is one of the most luxury sports,
which is reserved for the upper class, and in the past - it was not popular. However, in recent
years, more golf courses are beginning to take form in the whole country. According to the
information of Ministry of Planning and Investment, there are 144 golf course projects in 39
provinces, with another 35 golf courses operating in Vietnam. The total area using for these
projects go up to 49.000 ha which makes golf become an appreciable portion of land use in
our country.
In the lower level, golf courses seem to be harmless sport, not only do they bring a lot
of profits but they also become a developing project for using land, keeping water, and being
one of the most important places to connect many parts of nature, landscape river, ocean,
mountain, and the local community. However, in the upper level, building golf courses has
negative impacts on the environment such as: releasing the natural vegetation cover, forest
fire, damaging natural resources, causing the changing in topography. Furthermore, a major
focus of discussion regarding known or suspected ecological impacts of golf courses has been
water quality, typically focusing on chemical toxicology (Wheeler & Nauright, 2006).
Golf courses depend on agrochemicals for pest control, turf management, and esthetic
purposes. To maintain the landscape of golf courses, which is created mainly by turf grass, the
staffs in there need to take care if this grass very carefully with great amount of pesticides. In
addition, worker in here have to use pesticides and fertilizers regularly to grow them.
Professor Charles Melton in California University, Davis, United State had a report about this

2


issue. This report show that most of pesticides and fertilizers using in golf courses consist of
some organic compound such as nitrogen and phosphorus. These organic compounds are

helpful to golf course but they have negative impact to environment around it.
Moreover, if a golf course is built near water and the around area which can have
negative impacts to the water quality and stream ecology of the stream which is passed
through the course ground. When it rains or golf course irrigates after fertilizing, the nutrients
and chemicals in fertilizers will be dissolves and drift downstream. Since water had nitrogen
in fertilizers, phytoplankton – a microorganism dependent on nitrogen will grow rapidly. The
more phytoplankton growth, the more their waste transport into environment and some of
their carcass will sink to river bottom and become food for another microorganism such as
bacteria. When these bacteria increase dramatically and then break out, the river will not have
enough oxygen for fish and other aquatic animal. Due to the lack of oxygen, this area will
become dead area. To clarify this issue and provide information to latter researches, I decide
to choose the research: Impact of golf courses on water quality of Bui River in headwater
catchment.

3


1.2. Literature review
Freshwater is one of the most important resources to the health and wellbeing of
human life. One worldwide problem is water pollution due to excreta and chemical waste.
Agriculture urban developments and golf courses commonly overuse pesticides and fertilizers
which can cause water quality to decline. Therefore, many scientists took interest in this issue.
Due mostly to the local permitting process, research about the impact of golf course to water
quality has increases significantly since the late 1980s (Cohen et al. 1999). In addition to
concerns about pesticides, attention has recently been directed toward the impacts of
fertilizers (Minnesota Statutes, 2004).
The regular use of pesticides and fertilizers on golf courses often leads to the
assumption that these chemicals are transported into surface water and ground water
following application (Hindahl et al. 2009). For example, in 1990, the leaching of pesticides
that was applied to four golf courses in Cape Cod was described by Cohen and others. They

detected eight pesticide and metabolites as well as two pesticide impurities in the ground
water. However, only chlordane and heptachlor were present in toxicologically significant
levels. Moreover, in this research, Cohen and others found more pesticides in water from
monitor wells associated with greens and tees than fairways (three grasses were used for golf
courses). They concluded that in the conditions of hydrologic at Cape Cod, the use of turf
pesticides applied in the golf course had minimal impact on ground water quality. They also
recommended that this type of study was repeated in other areas, especially in southern
climates where more nematicides are applied to turf. After that, the United States Golf
Association (USGA) invested $3.2 million in 1991 to start a research program studying
environmental relates issues pertaining to the golf industry, followed by twenty – one research
projects were funded across the United States to investigated: the fate of fertilizers and
pesticides when applied to golf courses in different geographic regions, the implications of

4


applying recycled water to golf courses and alternative pest management techniques that are
more environmentally friendly (Starrett, 1994).
In 1990, Guam Municipal Golf, INC. at Guam International Country Club (Guam
EPA, 1992) also had a program to test water quality in these golf courses. In this study, more
than 86000 individual analyses for NO3 and pesticides have been performed on water samples
in lakes and wells at the golf course and then the results showed that no pesticides were
detected Despite the potential negative impacts golf course development and maintenance can
have on landscapes, a number of studies have found golf courses to have a general positive
conservation value on the species studied, including amphibians (Boone, Semlitsch, &
Mosby, 2008; Colding, Lundberg, Lindberg, & Andersson, 2009), butterflies (Porter,
Pennington, Bulluck, & Blair, 2004) pond breeding macroinvertebrates (Porter, Pennington,
Bulluck, & Blair, 2004), birds (Merola – Zwartjed & Delong, 2005; Rodewald & Santiago,
2004), and mammals (Eisenberg, Noss, Waterman & Main, 2011).
In 1999, Cohen and others reviewed surface water and ground water quality

monitoring results from golf courses around the United States. The authors concluded that
widespread water quality impacts by golf courses were not occurring and none of the
individual studies reviewed observed significant toxicological effects despite health advisory
levels and maximum contaminant levels being occasionally. However, according to
Cockerham and Leinauer, these conclusions appeared to be based on risk assessment rather
than toxicity testing and the conclusion was not accurate due to the limited geographic and
climatic distribution of the golf courses in the study (Cockerham and Leinauer 2011).
In 1990, Klein asserted that the quantities of fertilizers applied to the turfgrasses of
golf courses is roughly the same as that used on cropfields (Klein 1990). However, to
maintain the landscape, the golf courses have to use fertilizers and pesticides regularly.
Therefore, up to 84% of the nitrogen fertilizers applied to turfgrass may leach to groundwater

5


with the average hovering between 5% and 10% (Petrovic, 1990). Nitrate may pose a threat to
the health of infants when the concentration in drinking water exceeds 10 mg/l as N. Of the
various studies of nitrogen leaching reviewed by Petrovic, 14% reported nitrate
concentrations of 10 mg/l N or greater in leachate. To object to these studies, at least two
papers were reviewed that defend the use of irrigation following chemical application for
decreasing the average losses of these chemicals (Kelling and Peterson, 1975; Mugass,
Agnew and Christians, 1991). Losses of fertilizer were 1.6 percent of that applied when a
simulated storm was applied immediately after fertilizer application. The losses were reduced
to 1.7 percent of the amount applied when application was followed by a recommended
watering before the simulated storm. However, some researchers found that, there are many
factors dictate the quantity of nitrogen which reach groundwater such as: irrigation practices,
grass species, type of nitrogen applied, timing of fertilizer application, and application rates
(Klein 1990). For instance, irrigation can increase the leaching of fertilizers and pesticides to
ground water. A typical 18 holes golf course may require 100,000 to 150000 gallons of
irrigation water per day (Hammond and McKinney 1990).

Moreover, studies in the United States have found that nitrate levels in creeks
increases while passing through golf course (Mallin and Wheeler, 2000) and that nutrient
concentrations in golf course ponds and coastal areas adjacent to golf courses were higher
than those in reference locations (Lewis et al, 2002). In 1999, a research was conducted in
Japan suggested that there were increased in conductivity and total nitrogen, total phosphorus,
potassium and sodium concentrations in a stream at the outflow of a golf course relative to the
inflow (Kunimatsu et al., 1999). One study also concluded that mean annual concentrations of
K, TN and NO3 were higher in all of the golf course streams than in the forested reference
streams in both hydrologic years (Winter and Dillon 2006).

6


Besides making negative impact on ground and surface water, when fertilizers or
excess nutrients enter aquatic ecosystem, it leads to a phenomenon known as eutrophication.
In 1988, Wong and others found that, with current fertilizer application rates, the nutrient
inputs from the golf course would undoubtedly cause adverse environmental impacts,
including eutrophication as well as surface and ground water pollution. With the same
opinion, in 2015, a study of Colorado University stated that, eutrophication can be stimulated
by runoff from golf courses. And the authors gave an example that the maintenance crew at a
golf course may apply fertilizers to the course on any given day, then it rains before the grass
can take up all the nutrients, these used nutrients flow into nearby lakes and streams with the
runoff, so the aquatic community receive a number of nutrient which makes the process of
eutrophication begins (Jones 2015).
In Vietnam, the first golf course is Dalat Palace Golf Course, which was designed
initially by a French Architect and was brought to life by Vietnam’s last Emperor Bao Dai
throughout the 1920’s. Now, there are 54 golf courses operating in the whole country, with
another 144 projects in development. Therefore, Vietnam has to suffer many influences from
golf courses. For instance, since Tam Dao Golf Course was established in 1994 in the
northern Vinh Phuc Province, local environment became heavily polluted, especially water

source which is the consequence of untreated discharge from golf course. Although this golf
course was fined 114 million for this problem in 2010, the situation still continues and causes
a lot of consequences to local people.
Despite the negative impacts of golf course to the environment, in Vietnam, the
studies in water quality impacts by golf courses are very rarely, impacts of Phoenix Golf
Course to water quality of Bui River is a surviving example. In 2009, Hua Thi Yen, Nguyen
Thuy Duong, Tran Van Hung had a study researched on the consequence of a golf course to
surface water at Bui River. This study concluded that, the concentrations of nitrate and

7


phosphorous upstream water where had not impact of Phoenix Golf Course were lower than
the water in downstream. In 2015, Dinh Thi Quynh Oanht also had a study about the impact
of Phoenix Golf Course in water quality of Bui River. The results showed the increase trend
of TSS, COD, BOD, total nitrogen and total phosphorous from upstream to downstream in
Bui River under the impact of Phoenix Golf Course. Nevertheless, there are very few
scientific survey and report on chemical effect in golf course in Lam Son Province which use
for reference and guidance. This study was conducted to solved these problem and provide
information for further research.

8


II. OBJECTIVES
2.1. Goal
This study aims to evaluate water quality of Bui River under the impact of Phoenix Golf
Course.
2.2. Objectives
The study has three main objectives:

(1) Evaluating the effect of Phoenix Golf Course to invertebrate composition and diversity of
Bui River.
(2) Using physical and chemical parameters to evaluate the effect of Phoenix Golf Course to
water quality of Bui River.
(3) From (1) and (2), providing some solutions to conserve and improve water quality of Bui
River in Lam Son.

9


III. STUDY SITE AND METHODOLOGY
3.1. Study site
The study was conducted in Lam Son commune which is located in the Northwest of Luong
Son district, Hoa Binh province, it is far from Ha Noi center to the North 46 km. Lam Son is
situated along the 6th Highway from Km44 + 500 to Km52 + 500 that connects Hanoi to
Northwest region. The dominant surficial geology consists of limestone alternating with
mountains with the absolute elevation is 252m above sea level and relative elevation is 126m.
The geographical coordinated of this area is: 20045’ – 210 01’ in the North and 105024’ –
105039’ in the East (Source: Lam Son’s report).

Figure 3.1. Location of study site in Lam Son commune
Lam Son, likes many commune in the Northwest of Vietnam, has humid subtropical climate
which has extensive rainfall with two main seasons. Rainy season begins from April to October
and dry season starts from November to March in the next year. The detail is as table below:

10


Table 3.1. Climate - Hydrology indicators at Lam Son commune Luong Son district,
Hoa Binh province

Month

Temperature

Precipitation

Moisture (%)

(0C)

(mm)

1

16

15

84

2

17.3

21

85

3


20.6

28

85

4

24.3

96

84

5

27

234

82

6

28.1

259

83


7

28.2

331

84

8

27.6

342

86

9

26.4

343

86

10

23.9

178


82

11

20.6

54

82

12

17.4

12

83

Mean

23.1

1913

84

In term of temperature regime, the mean temperature is 23.10C per year; the highest
temperature is 28.1 0C (June), the lowest is in January with 160C. In the concern of
precipitation regime, the mean precipitation is 1913 mm per year, the month has highest
rainfall is September with 343 mm, the lowest rainfall is in December with 12mm. There are


11


146 rainy days per year. Moreover, Lam Son commune has many streams, ponds, lakes,
which is the upstream of Bui River, which is the main water source for local people.

Figure 3.2. Map of Phoenix Golf Course (Source: Phoenix Golf Course)
Being designed by Mr. Ronald Fream of USA, Korean and Japanese international golf
course designer, the Phoenix Golf Course was established in 2005 following government
permission number 2417/GP with total area is 311.7 ha while 17 ha of golf club and hotel and
250 ha of turf grass systems. Due to the geographical position, which is lain in valley
surrounded by hills and mountains, this golf course has a beautiful lanscape. Not only was it
compared with Ha Long Bay on land, it also became “The biggest and the most beautiful Golf
resort in Southeast Asia” which was listed in Vietnam Gunness Book of World Records. In
311.7 ha of golf course, there are 25 ha of green area and more than 150 ha of fairway area,
and the area of facilities are 17 ha.

12


Table 3.2. Parts of the Phoenix golf course
Parts of the Phoenix Golf
course
1. Tees

Description
This is the starting point of each hole and has a small
device for setting the ball up above the ground. Average
1180 m2 per holes, normally mowed short and often,

fertilized as needed, over seeded and top-dressed to
replace divots and maintain smoothness

2. Greens

This is the most closely mown and smooth area on the
course where the holes are located. Grasses are achieved
generally by daily mowing, seasonal coring, light
frequent topdressing, regular fertilization, consistent
frequent irrigation, and insect and disease control as
needed to maintain near perfect turf

3. Fairway

They are the closely mown area between the tee and green,
normally annual insecticide sprays, and repeated fungicide
treatments during the growing season.

4. Roughs

Roughs are longer grass, thicker grass or naturally
growing adjacent to fairways, greens and perhaps tees,
normally maintained at a low level of intensity.
Fertilization is minimal, often being limited to overthrow
from fairway fertilizer applications

5. Practice greens

Practice green is separate from the golf course;
designated for practicing putting only


6. Driving range

This is an area, separate from the golf course, designated
for hitting practice balls

7. Water hazard

This is a pond, lake, river which is designed to add both
beauty and difficulty to a golf course. The area about 15
ha
(Source: Phoenix golf course 2009)

13


The table 4.1 provides the detail informations about parts of golf course. To maintain
Greens, Tees and Fairways areas, the manager of golf course have to use the highest quality
of turfgrass which is the special grass used for golf course. Moreover, there are a thousand
species of turfgrasses. In Phoenix Golf Course, they used hybrid grass: Tifeagle grass for
Greens and wintergreen Bermuda for fairway. However, under the tropical climate of
Vietnam, these grasses need to have a high watering demand and application of fertilizers,
pesticides, herbicides to grow:

Figure 3.3. Operations of the Phoenix Golf course that affect amount of chemicals and
water applications.
From the information of figure 6, we can see the that, water quality of Bui River can
be affected by at least three sources from Phoenix Golf Course. In one hand, they used
chemical treatment by spraying fertilizers and pesticides to grow and maintain turf grasses.


14


According to Mr.Tuc, who planned to spray fertilizers and pesticides in Phoenix Golf Course,
in this golf course, depend on location, they used the suitable fertilizers and pesticides. For
instance, for the grass of greens, they used Delta – Coated with 1 kg per 100m2 in 2 – 3
months. The area of Phoenix is 311.7 ha, in which the area they grow green grass is 10% of
total area (25 ha), so total of Delta – Coated used in green is 25 ha x 1 kg/100m2 = 2500 kg or
2.5 tons per application. Fairway grass is easier to take care so they used Delta – Top with
1kg /100m2 (1 month / application). The area of fairway is 150ha, which is about 1.5 tons per
application. Moreover, they also used NPK fertilizer for grass with 2 tons per application (2
times/month). Therefore, the amount of fertilizers in Phoenix Golf Course is 6 tons per
application. In one year, total of Delta – Coated are 10 – 15 tons (2.5 x 4 – 6 times/year) , total
of Delta – Top are 18 tons (12 months x 1.5tons/month), total of NPK are 48 tons (12 months
x 4 tons/month). Hence, total of fertilizers were used in Golf Course per year are 76 – 81 tons.
The component nutient chemicals of Delta – Coated are: N = 16%; P2O5 = 5%, K2O = 12 %;
MgO and others = 5%. Meanwhile, Delta – Top includes: N = 12%, P2O5 = 8%, MgO = 3%,
S = 12.8 %, K2O = 18%. Hence, the main chemical nutrients in 2 kinds of fertilizers and
pesticides are N and P, so we can conclude that, fertilizers that golf course applied for turf
grass are the source of N and P concentration in water of Bui River.
In addition, to keep the green color for grass, people in Phoenix Golf Course also used
some kind of pesticides. In Tees and Greens, they used Agrodream “D” with the ratio: 1/50
(1l pesticides dissolve with 50 l water) and they used 20l/ha/time (14 days/time). In fairways
location, they use Agrodream “M” to spray with the same ratio of Tees and Greens. So, total
amount of pesticides for 1 time are 1300l/time. Moreover, they also use Anvil 5SC to release
fungi in grasses with the concentration is 600l/2500 m2, with total area are 175 ha, Golf
Course used 420 l per application. Therefore, the amount of pesticides were used in golf
course in one time equal to 1720 liter and one year, they used 41280 liter.

15



Furthermore, to maintain the quality of turf grass, not only did golf couse have to use
fertilizers and pesticides, they also irrigated water regularly. Turf grass is one of the most
grass that require high amount of water, fertilizers and either pesticides. So Golf course
applied the irrigation system at leat twice time per week ith the amount is 15000 m 3 water per
time (Phoenix Golf Course report). However, this irrigation system can make the fertilizers
and pesticides leaching faster to the ground and surface water of Bui River.
3.2. Methodology
3.2.1. Experiment design
From the upstream to downstream of Bui River, I collected two kinds of samples at
three locations: upstream, in the section passing through the golf course, downstream:

Figure 3.2. Map of sample locations in Bui River

16


Sample location 1: upstream area belongs to Rong stream which is located in Ao Ha
hamlet with the elevation is 60m. This is a small and shallow stream with 3m width, 60 cm
depth. The discharge of stream is from 8.3m3/s to 10.56 m3/s. Due to shallow water, local
people passed through this stream in a small road to go the fields in the mountain and there is
not much aquatic animals. Before coming to Phoenix Golf Course, the stream was not
affected by human activities so water clarity is high, two banks are covered mainly by shrubs
and grass.
Sample location 2 the stream passing through Phoenix Golf Course, this location is
belonged to the stream that passed through the Phoenix Golf Course. It’s also a small stream
with 5 - 7m width, 90 cm depth. However, two banks are eroded and some parts are covered
by small grasses. There are some small fishes and aquatic animals in the stream.
Sample location 3 downstream area, this part is located in Rong Dai hamlet which is

near 6th Highway. The stream is quite large with 10 – 15m width (2 small streams with a
small island in the middle, the deepest part is 1.5 m, the shallow part is 40 – 50 cm. This
stream has many small pools in the right bank due to human activities (digging gold). The left
bank contains crop, bamboo, shrubs and grasses. This stream looks clean but dirty, seldom
can you find fishes and large aquatic animals. Moreover, there are a lot of algae and aquatic
plants (Eichhornia crassipes) present in the surface water.
a. Physical and chemical water samples


Sampling period: With the aim of evaluating the impact of Phoenix Golf

Course to water quality of Bui River, I determined 3 points at: upstream, in the golf course
and in downstream to take three samples of water in four periods:
Day 1: No apply fertilize and pesticide on golf course: 16h – 18h, 25 July 2016.
Day 2: After applying fertilizer and pesticide on golf course: 16h – 18h, 30 July, 2016

17


Day 3: After raining and applying fertilizer, pesticide on golf course: 16h – 18h, 15
August, 2016
Day 4: Sunny day and using fertilizer and pesticide on golf course: 16h – 18h, 31
August, 2016.

Figure 3.3. Water samples location in study site
 Number of water samples: The figure 3.3 shows the map of water samples in Bui
River, the blue line indicates Bui River, the red arrows display the location that I took water
samples as in upstream, in the golf course and in downstream. Total of water samples are 12.
 Taking samples water in the field: Water samples were collected following taking
water samples method which was based on standard of Vietnam TCVN 5996 – 1995: Water

quality – Sampling – Guidance on sampling on rivers and streams.

18


 Preparation: 12 plastic bottles (volume > 500ml), 1 black box, layout map of Phoenix
Golf Course, GPS device, pen and notebook, adhesive tape, and so on.
 Taking samples in the field: Firstly, the bottles need to be clean and rinse out by
water in the location that I take water samples to avoid impurities. After that, samples are
taken by dipping bottles into the surface water at a depth of 30 – 50 cm, the bottle’s mouth is
put toward the direction of water flow. Then the sampling bottles need to be cap immediately
under water surface to prevent oxygen from entering the samples. After hand – writing or pre
– print labels and sticks them on the water samples, I keep them in black box to prevent
sunlight which can affect to the organism activities and make wrong results. Afterwards, I
transported water samples to laboratory in order to analysis water quality indicators.
b. Samples of invertebrate animals
In the past, water quality was assessed using only physicochemical parameters, but
these variables only reflect punctual pollution. The use of biological indicators is more
adequate to detect long – term changes in water quality, since aquatic organisms are adapted
to specific environmental conditions. If these conditions change, some organisms can
disappear (intolerant) and be replaced by others (tolerant). Therefore, variations in the
composition and structure of aquatic organism assemblages in running waters can indicate
possible pollution (Alba – Tercedor, 1996).
Biomonitoring is the use of biological variables to survey the environment (Gerhardt,
2000). The first step in this type of monitoring is to find the ideal bioindicator whose
presence, abundance and behavior reflects the effect of a stressor on biota (Bonada et al.,
2006b).
Benthic macroinvertebrates are considered as good indicators of local scale conditions
(Metcalfe, 1989). These invertebrates live on the bottom of aquatic ecosystems at least part of
their life cycle and can be collected using pond net or ISO 7828 (EN 27828, 1994). They


19