top of page

By:

Dr. P. K. Singh and Dr. Kishore Paknikar

22 November 2024 at 10:39:13 am

From Cleaner Rivers to Healthier Rivers

A river can look clean and still be unhealthy. Water may meet prescribed standards while native fish disappear, seasonal flows change, floodplains shrink and groundwater connections weaken. New pollutants may go undetected. A river is more than water flowing between two banks; cleaning it is necessary, but does not by itself restore its health. As India looks towards Viksit Bharat@2047, the focus must shift from water quality to river health. Programmes such as Namami Gange are already moving...

From Cleaner Rivers to Healthier Rivers

A river can look clean and still be unhealthy. Water may meet prescribed standards while native fish disappear, seasonal flows change, floodplains shrink and groundwater connections weaken. New pollutants may go undetected. A river is more than water flowing between two banks; cleaning it is necessary, but does not by itself restore its health. As India looks towards Viksit Bharat@2047, the focus must shift from water quality to river health. Programmes such as Namami Gange are already moving beyond pollution control towards biodiversity conservation, ecological flows and biological monitoring. The next measure of restoration should be whether a river is functioning as a living ecosystem. Beyond Clean Water The Central Pollution Control Board’s 2025 assessment, based on monitoring during 2022 and 2023, identified 296 polluted stretches across 271 rivers, compared with 351 polluted stretches identified in 2018. These figures describe pollution, and not river health. Suppose a river meets prescribed standards while its natural flow declines, native fish disappear or its floodplain is built over. Would we call it healthy? No physician would declare a person healthy after measuring blood glucose alone. Rivers, too, need a broader assessment that includes flow, aquatic life, sediments, groundwater and floodplains. European and Australian programs recognize this approach. Scientists at IIT (BHU) have developed and tested a River Health Index for the Ganga at Varanasi, bringing together measures of river condition across locations and seasons. Subsequent research has examined pharmaceutical pollutants and biological responses involving algae, small aquatic animals and fish. Aquatic organisms experience river conditions continuously. A water sample tells us what was present when it was collected; changes in aquatic life can reveal what has been happening over time. Emerging threats include medicine residues, personal care chemicals, microplastics and antimicrobial resistance. Studies of Indian rivers have detected antibiotic-resistant bacteria and genes associated with antibiotic resistance in water and sediments. Sewage, hospital waste, agricultural runoff and industrial discharges can introduce these threats into rivers, linking the health of people, animals and the environment. This is where the One Health approach becomes relevant. High flows, low flows and seasonal floods move sediments, create habitats, connect floodplains and support aquatic life. In many rivers, groundwater helps maintain flow during dry periods. In monsoon-dominated India, when and how water flows matter as much as its quantity. We often try to restore rivers by working on the rivers themselves. Yet many problems begin far from their banks. Deforestation and farming change runoff and erosion. Urban growth reduces the amount of rainwater entering the ground. Excessive groundwater pumping can reduce river flows. Dams alter water and sediment movement, while sand mining and construction damage riverbeds and floodplains. A river cannot ultimately be healthier than the basin that sustains it. Restoration must include tributaries, wetlands, groundwater, vegetated riverbanks and natural drainage routes, not merely treatment plants and riverfronts. The Sahibi illustrates this challenge. Rising in Rajasthan and passing through Haryana before entering Delhi, it has undergone major changes in its flow and surrounding landscape. Its links with Najafgarh Jheel and the Najafgarh Drain show how urban growth, sewage, altered flows and drainage works become intertwined. Treating water in its channel alone cannot restore the wider river system. India’s rivers also differ greatly. A Himalayan river fed by snow, glaciers and monsoon rain cannot be assessed exactly like a seasonal river in Rajasthan or a dam-regulated peninsular river. We need common principles, but different measures and restoration goals for different rivers. Climate change makes this task harder. Unpredictable rainfall, longer dry periods and extreme floods can alter flows, water quality and habitats. Restoration plans must account for these changes, while monitoring should tell us whether improvements last. Viksit Bharat@2047 offers an opportunity to establish a national River Health@2047 framework. It should examine water and sediment quality; natural flow patterns; aquatic life; the condition of riverbeds and floodplains; and the relationship between rivers and the people who depend on them. River Health Index These aspects tell us what to measure. But measurement alone cannot restore a river. Rivers need sufficient water through their natural seasonal cycles, supported by groundwater where appropriate. Pollution must be reduced and wastewater treated. Floodplains, wetlands and natural drainage routes must be protected. Aquatic habitats, biodiversity and connections within river systems must be restored. Farming, groundwater use, urban growth and industry must be managed without steadily damaging rivers. Governments, communities, universities, civil society and businesses must work together, with clear responsibilities for monitoring, protecting and restoring them.
A River Health Index can bring measurements together and identify where a river is under stress, why and what might help. Success must be measured by checking whether natural flows have returned and if aquatic life has recovered. Scientific findings must guide decisions about water use, land use and floodplain protection. Otherwise, even sophisticated measurements will achieve little. Importantly, restoration cannot remain the responsibility of scientists and government agencies alone. Technology cannot replace the knowledge of people who live beside rivers. Their observations of changing flows, disappearing fish and shrinking wetlands can help scientists judge whether restoration is working. This is the spirit behind Bharat Discourses on Rivers@2047: Connecting Science with the Society which begins on October 3 at IIT (BHU). The event raises vital questions. What should be different about Indian rivers by 2047? How will we know their health has improved? What is holding us back, and what must we do differently? Most importantly, what one or two actions should begin by 2027 to achieve our goals? Healthy rivers sustain biodiversity and livelihoods, recharge groundwater, carry sediments and accommodate floods. They are not an environmental luxury to consider after development; they are essential to development itself. We must leave the next generation not merely cleaner stretches of water, but living, resilient rivers. The question for 2047 is not simply, “Is our river cleaner?” It is, “Is our river healthier, and is its health continuing to improve?” (Dr. Singh is a Professor of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi; Dr. Paknikar is the ANRF Prime Minister Professor, COEP Technological University, Pune. Views personal.)

Gun Violence in America

Writer: Vishwas Pethe
Vishwas Pethe
Dec 27, 2024
3 min read

Updated: Jan 2, 2025

Gun Violence in America

On December 16, 2024, tragedy struck Abundant Life Christian School in Madison, Wisconsin, where a 15-year-old student, Natalie Rupnow, fatally shot a fellow student and a teacher before taking her own life. Six others were injured, with two in critical condition. This devastating event is a grim reminder of the United States' ongoing struggle with gun violence, particularly in schools.


A Long History of Gun Ownership in America

The issue of gun violence in the United States cannot be discussed without acknowledging its deep-rooted history of gun ownership. The right to bear arms is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, adopted in 1791, which states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”


Initially, this amendment was intended to empower citizens to form militias for self-defense during a time when standing armies were distrusted. Over the centuries, however, the interpretation of the Second Amendment has evolved. Today, it is often cited as a justification for individual gun ownership, a concept reinforced by landmark court cases such as District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), which affirmed an individual's right to own firearms for self-defense.


Gun culture is deeply ingrained in American society, with nearly 400 million firearms in civilian hands—more guns than people. This level of accessibility, coupled with a powerful gun lobby led by organizations like the National Rifle Association (NRA), has made significant legislative reform difficult.


Gun Violence in Numbers

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), firearms cause approximately 40,000 deaths annually in the United States—equivalent to 109 deaths per day. This figure includes homicides, suicides, and accidental shootings. Among children and teenagers, firearms are now the leading cause of death, surpassing motor vehicle accidents.


School shootings are a particularly horrifying aspect of gun violence in America. Since 1990, there have been over 800 incidents in K-12 schools, resulting in more than 500 deaths and over 1,000 injuries. High-profile tragedies such as the Columbine High School massacre (1999), the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting (2012), and the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School attack (2018) have shocked the nation and the world, yet meaningful reforms remain elusive.


A Global Comparison

The United States stands out among developed nations for its high rate of gun violence. In countries like Australia, Canada, and much of Europe, strict gun control measures have significantly reduced firearm-related deaths. For example: By contrast, the firearm-related death rate in the United States is 12.2 per 100,000 people, significantly higher than other developed nations. The prevalence of guns and the lack of uniform gun control laws contribute to this disparity.


Challenges in Addressing Gun Violence

Efforts to reduce gun violence in the U.S. have faced significant obstacles. One of the most notable is the prohibition of federal funding for gun violence research. In 1996, Congress passed the Dickey Amendment, effectively barring the CDC from studying gun violence as a public health issue. Although the funding ban was partially lifted in 2019, its legacy has left the country with a limited understanding of the causes and solutions to gun violence.


Advocates have long called for measures such as:

• Universal Background Checks: Closing loopholes in gun sales to ensure that all firearm purchases are subject to background checks.

• Safe Storage Laws: Requiring gun owners to store firearms securely to prevent unauthorized access.

• Bans on Certain Firearms: Prohibiting the sale of assault-style weapons, which are often used in mass shootings.


The Debate Over Gun Rights and Reform

The debate over gun control in the United States often pits the rights of gun owners against the need for public safety. Opponents of stricter gun laws argue that restrictions infringe on constitutional rights and fail to address the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues. Proponents, however, point to the success of gun control measures in other countries and the overwhelming public support for policies like background checks.


A Way Forward

Despite the challenges, there is growing momentum for change. Grassroots organizations, survivors of gun violence, and some lawmakers are advocating for comprehensive reforms. The Madison school shooting serves as a stark reminder of the urgency of these efforts. As the nation grapples with its gun violence epidemic, it must look to both its history and the experiences of other countries to find a path toward a safer future.


(The author is a resident of US. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page