RIVERS are the only source of fresh water in Malaysia. Well, almost. They supply 98 per cent of all fresh water there is. Yet we can't stop polluting our rivers.
According to recent media reports, 25 of the 1,800 rivers (including tributaries) in Malaysia are "dead". But classifying a river as "dead" isn't without controversy, says water quality and modelling specialist Dr Zaki Zainuddin. Besides, what is the point of so classifying the river?
Bury it for good? Or leave it for later revival? Perhaps to avoid such controversy, the Department of Environment (DoE) has opted to designate them under class I to V, the last in the tragic red zone of near death. If the Environmental Quality Report 2020 of the Environment and Water Ministry (the latest available report) is any indication, there are more than 25 rivers in the red across the country.
Alarmed, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are calling for the government to come down hard on water polluters. If the Sun daily is right, the NGOs want the Environmental Quality Act 1974 to enable compensation to be paid to people who are affected by water cuts.
Good idea, but it may be hard to determine who or what caused the pollution. Here is why.
To begin with, the EQA 1974 itself allows a certain level of "pollution", so to speak. This may be counter-intuitive, but it's true. Consider Standard A and Standard B of allowable ammonia levels in a river. According to Zaki, the first allows 10mg per litre and the second 20mg per litre, both of which fall under class V, the tragic category.
Perhaps the DoE is placing too much hope on the rivers to dilute the ammonia. We do not deny that rivers have abilities to cleanse themselves of impurities. But dilution is about volume, too.
Not all rivers have the right volume, though we are a rainfall-rich nation. Plus, ammonia isn't the only pollutant. We should not expect our rivers to work so hard at dilution.
What should work hard are our laws and those who are tasked with enforcement. There are occasions when neither receive our thumbs up. And for good reason, too.
Every time there is a disruption to water supply by some form of pollution — Selangor must take the dishonour lap here — households and businesses suffer. Sometimes, the frequency of supply disruptions is too many to keep count.
To not compensate them is morally wrong. And it must be made legally wrong, too. Difficulty in determining who or what causes pollution shouldn't be a cause for inaction. Justice demands that the polluters be punished.
The EQA 1974 isn't the only legislation that requires a study and change. Better still, a revamp. Other laws need a deep think, too. But having all the laws in the world is one thing.
Getting them enforced is another. Lack of manpower has been a constant lament of our enforcers for the longest time. The problem with laments is that they remain nothing more than moans of inaction.
There are at least a million people in the civil service. Surely some of them can be spared to be trained as enforcers. Supported with drone technology, these enforcers can cover the 1,800 rivers, or whatever of these that remain. Think rivers, think 98 per cent fresh water. Or, think of life support.