• what duties householders are prepared to take on;
• the availability of sufficient quantities of water if flush systems are envisaged; and
• financial and institutional capabilities of local government.
Therefore, appropriateness and sustainability of any sanitation system is only as good as the communities total involvement in the decision making of choosing an appropriate system, as much ofthe above is in the control of the members of the community.
Dehydration is an alternative system whereby the urine and faeces are separated and the dried faeces can be handled safely as a soil conditioner and the urine can be used as a fertilizer (Holden and Austin, 1999). The advantage is that the system can be built inside the house as there is no liquid in the pit, low maintenance and operational costs as the members of the household are required to regularly clean out the system and is only sustainable if the user is prepared to handle the dry faeces. According to Holden and Austin (1999), the CSIR and the Mvula Trust looked at the feasibility of urine diversion technology, which could provide an alternative to VIP. Of critical importance was to ensure cost effective solutions, overcoming social issues of handling dry faeces (use as night soil ), handling urine and education to men to sit during urination.
of rivers caused by detergents, cattle defecating near the water, the building of latrines in perco line soils found near the rivers encourage seepage of bacteria from sewage into river systems. This undermines the sustainability of the newly acquired land. Her methodology suggests educating rural people on water conservation, water harvesting and the protection of rivers against pollutants. Thus, the need arises to determine the quality of water for use, especially in the rural areas and the need to educate communities on water resource management.
According to the Mvula Trust (1999a), surface water resources are dwindling due to South Africa being underlain by hard rock formations, only small quantities of water is obtained from underground sources, and in some areas due to salinity of the ground water over large areas it makes the water undrinkable. However, many rural people are still dependant on traditional, unprotected surface water sources such as ponds, rivers, dams and lakes and groundwater sources which includes all water that occurs underground, that which must be brought to the surface for use via boreholes and springs. The water is used for peoples domestic purposes (drinking and preparing food, washing and personal hygiene, and gardening or watering plants, etc.) and agricultural needs (crop production, irrigation, animal requirements, etc.). Rainwater harvesting is also an important source of water in communities but this depends on the amount of rainfall and the type of roofing that households can afford.
In rural areas, especially those that are remote, the principal collection of water is from groundwater which is collected through boreholes and wells. Ground water sources are becoming increasingly important as a source of supply to rural communities and South Africa, as they are often the only source and cost effective alternative available to isolated communities. According to the University of Durban Westville's Microbiology Department, groundwater was historically considered to be a safe and reliable source of water protected from surface contamination by a
"living filter", an upper soil layer that removes pollutants (Water Research Commission, 1997b).
This allows water to percolate downwards through the soil reaching the groundwater table.
However, according to the Water Research Commission (1997b: 53), the University of Durban Westville's Microbiology Department recorded that "a number of well documented outbreaks of microbially related diseases traced to contaminated groundwater, as well as numerous reports of chemical contamination, have destroyed the widely-held misconception that groundwater is safe
from pollution". This challenges the commonly held contention that groundwater is pollution free.
In poor rural communities this problem can be linked to the poor sanitation systems used or poor sanitary practices, poor waste management and allowing animals in close proximity to potable water sources.
The Mvula Trust (1995) reveals that there are approximately 20.1 million people without adequate domestic sanitation facilities in the rural areas of South Africa with ninety five percent (95 %) of rural people using either bush, bucket or pit latrine systems. This figure has not changed substantially in the last six years. The negative human health and natural environmental impacts of this is high. As population size and density increases, soils become saturated with pollutants (often fecal in nature), resulting in percolation of pollutants, especially bacteria and viruses into the groundwater table which are used by the local community.
In rural redistribution projects, in most instances the poo ling of the R 16 000 land settlement grants becomes the only mechanism to acquire land through the land reform programme. This implies that many families settle on an acquired piece of land where existing policies do not make the existence of adequate sanitation facilities a pre-requisite for beneficiary settlement. Sanitation and the provision of piped water are viewed as services that the community must develop on its own by either utilizating the balance of the land acquisition grant (if there are any remaining monies after the purchase ofland) or by acquiring funds from other sources. For most communities the only source of funding becomes already financially strapped beneficiary households.
Development of piped water in rural areas is forging ahead very slowly and therefore rural people are still dependent on traditional systems for their daily water requirements. The provision of water services in land redistribution projects most often entails the construction of boreholes or standpipes. With increasing urbanization, mining, irrigation, human waste discharges and poor sanitation facilities; the quality of water in these natural water sources needs seriously to be looked at. The quality of water is determined by the purity of the water bodies or the pollution content of the water bodies.
Due to the importance placed on water resources in South Africa, there is a high priority placed on water quality control. The term Water Quality, according to a joint report by the Water
•
Research Commission, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry and the Department of Health (1999: 5): "is used to describe the microbiological, physical and chemical properties of water that determine its fitness for use."
These properties are influenced by human activities, stemming from human domestic use, industrial and mining use, agricultural use and the disposal thereof to the receiving water bodies.
This also includes problems that are related to inherent geological characteristics ofthe source area, such as mineral salts that leaches or dissolves into a water course .
It must be stressed that a clean or clear looking water does not necessarily mean that it is acceptable to drink, as it could contain dissolved substances and! or pathogenic disease causing microorganisms which are detrimental to health. When a lay person asks about the quality of water, they probably would like to know if the water is suitable to use at home for domestic purposes and or for recreational use.
The principal categories of pollutants that can enter an aquatic system are through chemical, suspended matter and biological means. The quality ofwater is therefore determined scientifically by the following properties:
• Physical Quality
•
This refers to the measurements such as conductivity, pH and turbidity, that effects the aesthetic quality (taste, odour and overall appearance) of water. This is affected by suspended matter and dissolved matter like metals, oils, detergents, which reduces the oxygen transfer in the water and waste that encourages eutrophication (nutrient enrichment of water that encourages excessive microscopic growth of algae). This therefore transforms the physical quality, which effects aquatic life and human health negatively.
Microbiological Quality
This refers to the pathogenic constituent of the water that is affected by viruses bacteria
, ,
protozoa stemming from poor waste management both human and animal. These organisms are responsible for the transmission of infectious diseases such as cholera, viral
hepatitis and dysentery. A common mechanism used is co liform testing in water, especially E.coli (used as an indicator organism), which determines if the water is faecally contaminated. If there is presence of E. coli there is a strong possibility that there is a risk of infectious diseases carrying bacteria or viruses being present which is detrimental to health. Drinking or potable water should contain no coliforms.
• Chemical Quality
This refers to the concentration of dissolved organic and inorganic compounds (metals, acids, salts) which are in high concentrations. Most of these compounds originate from industries, mines, agricultural (with use of herbicides, pesticides), that inhibit and destroy bioactivity in water by removing oxygen, which makes water impalatable and if consumed can cause illness and or death if not treated.
The impacts of these pollutants pose major threats on rural water supplies if they are not adequately controlled and! or, if there is no pre-treatment and disinfection of the polluted water prior to use. Thus, the treatment of water is needed prior to use, and in poor rural areas water treatment is almost non-existant and therefore rural communities are susceptible to disease and death. Therefore the determination of water is needed prior to use.
The classification of water is therefore important according to the Water Research Commission, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry and the Department of Health (1999), as one can establish how suitable the water is for domestic uses (drinking, food preparation, bathing and washing clothes) to allow for communication of water quality information to the communities and to aid in decision making regarding management for domestic supply. The classification of water is therefore important when one considers that according to van Veelan (undated), situations arise when poor quality water sources are accepted whilst good quality sources are rejected especially in rural areas. This is due to murky, discoloured and odorous water which may not necessarily be unhygienic being rejected whilst clear odourless water which may be harmful is accepted.
When water is classified, one can then determine whether the water can be used for domestic use or not, in relation to drinking, food preparation, bathing, laundry, etc. (Water Research
Commission, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry and the Department of Health, 1999).
Thus, in a joint report, the Water Research Commission, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry and the Department of Health (1999) have classified water in terms of colour and class criteria, where:
Blue Class 0 Ideal Water Quality
Green Class 1 Good water Quality
Yellow = Class 2 Marginal Water Quality
Red Class 3 = Poor Water Quality
Purple = Class 4 = Unacceptable Water Quality
These water quality assessments are analysed through strategic expensive laboratory means according to the properties of water quality discussed previously, in relation to microbiological, chemical and physical properties. In South Africa where water is in short supply, the ability to assess water quality accurately for its determined use is critical in protecting the health and well being of the people, with special reference to those in the rural areas that use water from unprotected systems. By using the above colour coded classification system the information can be used by communities to determine the quality of water and therefore its appropriate usage.
However, time and money is of importance and this system requires expensive sampling procedures and transportation of the samples to the laboratories. There is therefore a need to determine early warning systems in the field to determine water quality which does not stop the normal sampling process being undertaken.
According to Genthe (1998), another means of determining the quality of water is through the use of a field kit for monitoring microbial water quality (the H2S Strip Test). This test method indicates the presence of total and faecal coliforms. Detecting its presence, the strip turns Black and therefore provides an effective visual mechanism for illustrating contaminated water. This allows to the evaluation of the microbial quality of water for small community water supplies and is used as an early warning system. This system has been supported by the Water Research Commission in 1998 and has been found to be 86 % accurate (Genthe, 1998). Its benefits include on field rather than expensive laboratory testing, no need for transportation of samples and awaiting a few days for results, anyone can carry out the test and it is a rapid method resulting in
the reduction of time loss during analysis. However this must not be used as a alternate system for analysis rather it should be used as a early warning system supported by laboratory analysis.