“…The potential for turbidity to impact upon our field study was assessed by measuring a range of RWT solutions prepared using water from our field site, and no significant deviation from expected fluorescence was observed hence any possible effects of turbulence on RWT fluorescence measurements were ignored for the remainder of the study. A number of studies have also demonstrated that the use of RWT in quantitative studies may be compromised by photochemical decay of RWT over time (Smart and Laidlaw, 1977;Tai and Rathbun, 1988;Suijlen and Buyse, 1994;Upstill-Godard et al, 2001;Dierburg and C. H. Mines et al: Use of rhodamine WT as proxy for point source pollutants DeBusk, 2005) and loss of RWT due to adsorption (Smart and Laidlaw, 1977;Wilson et al, 1986;Sabatini and Austin, 1991;Shiau et al, 1993;Di Fazio and Vurro, 1994;Soerens et al, 1994;Kasnavia et al, 1999;Close et al, 2002;Keefe et al, 2004;Kung et al, 2000;Vasudevan et al, 2001;Lin et al, 2003;Pang et al, 2003;Richardson et al, 2004;Dierburg and DeBusk, 2005) but as the work described here focused on the use of RWT within a closed pipe surface water drainage network these potential losses were deemed insignificant and not re-examined. Given this range of potential compromising factors, the inconsistent nature of field results concerning RWT fate and transport (Tai and Rathbun, 1988;Jones and Jung, 1990;Suijlen and Buyse, 1994;Ptak and Schmid, 1996;Kung et al, 2000;Upstill-Godard et al, 2001;Close et al, 2002;Lin et al, 2003) is unsurprising.…”