**Table 2.**

### *An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

and a report from the Stats SA 2016 Community Survey, indicates its home to some 187,630 people, which have increased. The Municipality is made up of various communities confronted with a society that faces sundry economic, social, environmental, and governmental challenges. Approximately 80% of the populace live in the rural areas concentrated in the east of the area; the two main service centres of Emanzana and Carolina provide a home for 15% of the people while the remaining population are found in the forestry and farming areas of the Municipality [96]. Nthunya and co-workers [64] investigated the source of toxic metals in drinking water in this Chief Albert Luthuli Local Municipality in Mpumalanga, South Africa. Their work was so detailed and captured five different points over four seasons of the year, winter, spring (August 2014), summer (November 2014), autumn (February 2015). The sampling points included a drinking water treatment plant in Eerstehoek bout 5 km from Lochiel, a 50 m deep open well used largely by the community and the students of a nearby school designated as well 1; an open shallow well located in the upper part of Lochiel and used by the residents designated as well 2; Tanks 1 and 2 located in the Lochiel Primary school premises and the community respectively. The latter of the two tanks is being used by the larger part of the community and finally a borehole in Masakhane primary school supplying water to the school tank and taps. Using ICP-OES spectrometer suited with iTEVA software for measurements of all the analytes at maximum wavelength, they investigated the presence of nine heavy metal pollutants in the drinking water which are namely: cadmium, chromium, copper, cobalt, iron, manganese, nickel, lead and zinc (**Figure 3**).

**Figure 3** represents the physical properties of the various water samples and the concentration of toxic metals in ppm. Their results indicate that the concentration of toxic metals varied across the seasons and sources. The lead concentration was found to be above WHO limit for drinking water in well 1 & 2, Tanks 1 & 2, surprisingly in both raw and treated water in February 2015, and bore hole for all seasons considered. In autumn, the level of Manganese rose above the WHO limit in the untreated water. Cobalt for most of the periods of the year considered remained above WHO limits for safe and potable water. The rest of the metals were largely within the WHO drinking water limit. The borehole is ground water mainly used by a greater percentage of African populace as already established in the earlier part of the review [97]. **Table 2** indicates that the borehole water taken in July designated as BHMPRSAJ has a lead and cobalt concentration that is greater than the WHO limit by a factor greater than 8 and 1 respectively as at 2014/2015. They argued that the source of these toxic metal accumulation in this locality is both natural and anthropogenic, which include weathering of mineral rich rocks and indiscriminate disposal of metal rich wastes at the landfills. In conclusion, they underscored that long-term exposure to the toxic heavy metal can be fatal and hence, the need to further purify and monitor the quality of drinking water regularly.

Another detailed work was done on the assessment of heavy metals in drinking water, at Datuku in the Talensi-Nabdam District in the Upper East region of Ghana by Cobbina and co-workers [94]. They aimed to evaluate the impact of small scale gold mining on the drinking water quality in that community. Samples were collected from six sources namely: Accra abandoned pit (AAP), Obuasi abandoned pit (OAP), mainstream (MS), upper stream (US), Accra borehole (AB) and down stream (DS). Using the Shimadzu model AA 6300, they evaluated the trace concentration of Zn, As, Cd, Fe, Mn and Hg in these five places. Their results show that Cd, Fe, Hg and Mn level was higher than the standard for safe water by WHO, while As and Zn were within the limit safety for all the sources (**Table 2**). The level of Cd concentration on the mainstream source (MS) was 5666.7 times higher than the WHO standard for safe water. The level of Fe contamination was taken with

### **Figure 3.**

*(a) The physical properties of the various water sources under consideration (b) the number of toxic metals present from the various water sources in winter, spring (August 2014), summer (November 2014), autumn (February 2015). TP TW: Treated Plant Treated Water and TP RW: Treated Plant Raw Water [64].*

reference to US-EPA and was also found to be higher than the accepted limit by a factor greater than 2 for all the sources of the water. They opined that cadmium pollution could be as a result of seepage from the parent rock, use of cadmium containing products such as batteries, plastics and mining tools.

Orata and Birgen [98] studied the uptake of heavy metals by different fishes and their tissues in a lagoon waste water (LWW). They proposed that their study would provide a useful tool for envisaging human exposure to PTEs through consuming fish under different contamination scenarios. The lagoon wastewater body had

### *An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

heavy metals concentration of the most lethal class of lead, cadmium, and chromium in an amount that is 102, 183.3 and 22 times respectively higher than the WHO accepted standard of safe water (**Table 3**) and other environmental agencies (**Table 4**). They hence concluded that various species of fishes studied in this scenario were unsafe for consumption sequel to the uptake of heavy metals in various parts of their bodies. Another similar and detailed work was done to inspect the physicochemical properties and heavy metal content of water sources in Ife North Local Government Area of Osun State, Nigeria by Oluyemi and co-workers [99, 100]. While they concluded that the physical parameters of the water collected from pipe borne water (PBW), borehole (BH), stream, river and hand-dug well (HDW) were within limits for potable and household water, the AAS results of heavy metal concentration of Pb, Cd, Cu, Cr, Fe, Mn and Zn is a far cry from safe limits for drinking water (**Table 2**). Pd and Cd levels were 279 and 476.6 times in pipe borne water and 455 and 463.3 times in borehole (BH) above the WHO standard for safe domestic and drinking water. These two sources of water have been validated as the most common sources of water for Africans in rural settings. They opined that such high concentration of these PTEs cannot be disconnected from mining activities, leaching of metals from wastes site to the ground water plus rural and urban water run-off, and possible wearing of lead from metal pipes into the water during the distribution.

In this study, the following elements Cd, As, and Ni, concentrations in all the sampling points were below the detection limits except for Cr (0.1 mg/L) in point C (Agriculture/Mining) and Pb (0.02 mg/L) in point D (Resort/Commercial).


*Key: DWAF\* = Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, South Africa. EPA\* = US- Environmental Protection Agency(2011). WHO\* = World Health Organization (2011), N/A\* = Not reported or Not available and BDL\* = Below detection limits, ECE: European Commission Environment (1998), FTP-CDW: Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking Water, Health Canada (2010), PCRWR: Pakistan Council of Research in Water (2008), ADWG: Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (2011), NOM-127: Norma Official Mexicana NOM-127- SSA1–1994 (1994).*

### **Table 3.**

*Standards and guidelines for heavy metals in drinking water (mg/L), recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and world health organizations (WHO) for drinking water that is based on data of toxicity and scientific findings.*


### **Table 4.**

*Guidelines for metals in seawater and sediment by EEC: European Commission environment; ANZECC: Austrialian and new Zeland environmental conservation council; CEPA: Cannadian Environmental Protection Agency; PSAG: Proposed South African guidelines.*


**Table 5.** *Average PTEs concentrations (mg/L).*

The spatial distribution of Mn, Cu, Fe, Al and Zn along the different land uses in the Crocodile River is presented in **Table 5** and **Figure 4**. The concentration of Mn is quite variable along the different land uses and the highest value of 0.22 mg/L was recorded in point B (Agriculture) while the least value (0.13 mg/L) in point A (Urban). The concentration of Cu also varied spatially along the river with the highest value in point C (Agriculture/Mining) while point A (Urban) and D (Resort/ Commercial) had the lowest values of 0.02 mg/L respectively (**Table 2**; **Figure 4**). Fe had the highest concentration in point C, while point A had the lowest concentration value. The concentrations of Al along the different land uses were slightly different from each sampling and point A and C had the lowest concentrations of 0.02 mg/L respectively. The average concentration of Zn in the river indicates that point A, B and C all had the same concentration value of 0.05 mg/L, respectively but with a slight drop in the concentration value of point A (0.04 mg/L) (**Table 2**; **Figure 4**).

Three water quality guidelines permissible threshold values were used to gauge the level of PTEs concentrations in the river (**Table 5**). The results indicate that most of the elements were within the DWAF (Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, South Africa, 1997, and 1997b), stipulated guideline for aquatic environments except for Al, Mn and Fe exhibiting high concentration values above the permissible threshold limit of DWAF of <0.005, 0.18 and 0.1 mg/L respectively (**Table 3**). Similarly, the value of Mn in the Crocodile River exceeded the recommended threshold guideline for EPA of 0.05 mg/L. The concentration of Al in the river exceeded the DWAF guideline in all the sampling points, while Mn concentration exceeded the recommended threshold value by EPA, for all the sampling points, and also that of DWAF at point B (Agriculture) and D (Resort & Commercial). In contrast, the values of Fe exceeded the permissible limit of DWAF *An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

**Figure 4.** *Summary of the average concentrations (mg/L) of PTEs in the Crocodile River.*

at point C (Agriculture/Mining). Cd, As and Ni concentrations in the river were below the detection limit or were not present in the water.

Although the following elements As, Ni, Cd, Pb and Cr analyzed exhibited low concentrations values; however, it cannot be concluded that the river is not contaminated. For instance, Pb concentration in point D (0.02 mg/L) exceeded all the water quality guidelines (DWAF, WHO and EPA) as seen in **Table 3** and a plausible explanation could be attributed to point-source contamination. This is an indication that the river might eventually be polluted in the future if proper mitigation measure is not put in place due to the diverse anthropogenic activities within the vicinity of the river [36]. These changes might also be due to the spatial–temporal input from agricultural areas, surface runoff from different mining areas, untreated wastes disposal from resort accommodation, catchment sensitivity, and settlement dumpsites close to the river [62].

### **3.2 Seasonal variation of physicochemical parameters and PTEs in the Crocodile River**

### *3.2.1 Physicochemical parameters in the Crocodile River*

Studies by Okonkwo and Mothiba [101] and Somerset and co-workers [102] have reported changes in physicochemical and heavy metal concentrations in South African rivers due to changes in the seasons. The results of the physicochemical parameters between the different seasons are shown in **Table 6**. The analysis of the water temperature at the different sampling points was slightly different but was distinctively different between the wet (summer) and the dry season (winter) (**Table 6**). At the time of the water collection, the wet season had a maximum temperature of 28.6°C ± 0.35 while the dry season (winter) had a minimum



**Table 6.**

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

temperature of 19.8°C ± 1. The EC values from across each of the sampling points ranged from 509 μs/cm to 533 μs/cm in the wet season while during the dry season the readings ranged from 544.3 μs/cm to 568 μs/cm.

The pH concentration in the river varied slightly between each sampling points with a maximum value of 8.5 for the wet season and 7.7 for the dry season (**Table 6**). According to du Preez and co-workers [91], an increase in pH concentrations might have a negative impact on water quality and its suitability in watering crops and animals. Although the pH values were generally lower, its value, however, indicates that the water is slightly alkaline in most of the sampling points for drinking water which is deleterious for the animals and human in the catchment. Evidence from the field visit also suggests that the water from the Crocodile River is abstracted and irrigated for agricultural purpose. Bouaroudj and co-workers [103] report that the continuous irrigation of crops with saline waters may lead to a gradual or rapid increase in soil salinity. The concentration of TDS (mg/L) in the river from the different sampling point varied from a 321.5 ± 0.7 to 381.5 ± 71.4 for the wet season while for the dry season it varied from 391.0 ± 88.74 to 412.0 ± 97.97 (**Table 6**). A study by du Preez and co-workers [91], attributed an increase in EC and pH in the Crocodile to anthropogenic activities likely from runoff caused by agricultural activity while Wongsasuluk and co-workers [104] attributed an increase in EC due to seasonal variation, thus confirming the role of seasonal variations in physicochemical parameters.

### *3.2.2 Seasonal variations in PTE concentrations in surface water*

The assessment of PTEs in the Crocodile River suggests there is a significant variation (*p* > 0.05) of each element between seasons (**Figures 5** and **6**). The average concentration of Cu in the dry season ranged from 0.01 to 0.018 mg/L while those for the wet season ranged from 0.03–0.04 mg/L signifying an elevated concentration during the wet season. Although the value of Cu between the two seasons was within the safe permissible limit stipulated by DWAF (< 0.2 mg/L), WHO (< 0.2 mg/L) and EPA (US) (0.3 mg/L). However, a study by Ahmad and Goni [105] states that Cu concentration at 0.01 to 0.02 mg/L might be toxic because of the presence of salts (chlorides and litigates). Analysis of Al in the river for the

**Figure 5.** *Average PTEs concentration (mg/L) in surface water.*

**Figure 6.** *Average PTEs concentration in the Crocodile River.*

dry seasons ranged from 0.02–0.04 mg/L whereas during the wet season it was not detected in the water samples. A plausible reason why Al was found in the water during the dry season might be due to the discharge of waste effluent from nearby private resort accommodation, agricultural surface runoff and commercial waste dumping directly into the river. Marara and Palamuleni [89] reported an increase in toxic element in the Klip river, South Africa to high evaporation rates and low flow rates of water during the season which is similar to the findings of this research.

The average concentration of Mn in the river ranged from 0.03–0.18 mg/L (dry season) while for the wet season it ranged from 0.22–0.34 mg/L. The findings of this study is in line with those reported by Li and Zhang [106], whereby an increase concentration of Mn during the wet seasons in the Upper Han River in China. Fe concentration for the dry season ranged from 0.03–0.05 mg/L while in the wet season, it ranged from 0.03–0.15 mg/L recorded only at points C and D respectively, whereas point A and B were below the detection limit and or might not be available in the water. The observed high concentration of Fe during the dry season compared to the wet season might be attributed to significant anthropogenic disturbance dominated primarily by physical weathering in the river as source areas [89].

### *3.2.3 Correlation matrix of PTEs in the water samples*

The results of the Pearson's correlation coefficients (*r*) (*p* > 0.05) between the PTEs and the physicochemical parameters are shown in **Table 7**. The results of the physicochemical parameters of the water showed a highly significant positive correlation with each of the parameters with temperature and EC (*r* = 0.96), temperature and pH (*r* = 0.99), temperature and, TDS, (*r* = 0.98) and pH and EC, (*r* = 0.99), TDS and EC (*r* = 1) as indicated in **Table 7**.10. Also, the pH was significantly positively correlated with all the PTEs, thus indicating that the pH influences the concentration of PTEs in the Crocodile River. Similarly, the temperature correlation with the PTEs showed positive to significantly strong positive with Zn, Mn and Cu (*r* = 0.63, *r* = 0.64 and *r* = 0.76) respectively. The correlation between the PTEs showed a significant positive correlation between Mn and Zn (*r* = 0.70), Mn and Al (*r* = 0.71) while Fe and Cu, Fe and Zn showed strong positive correlation **Table 7**.

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*


### **Table 7.**

*Pearson correlation coefficient matrix of the physiochemical parameters and PTEs in the river.*

### **3.3 Land use and land cover change detection in the catchment**

The Crocodile River catchment witnessed a considerable change in land use and land cover during the two decades. The results from the observed changes of the land use and land cover in the study area during the selected periods (1999– 2009-2018) are illustrated in **Tables 8**–**10** and **Figure 7**. **Table 8** shows the results of the accuracy assessment for the study area. Thematic map of the study area shows the overall accuracy classification of 77% with an overall kappa statistic of 0.7579 in 1999. Cropland and grassland user accuracy yielded 73% and 70% respectively. Bare land was correctly classified at 75% user accuracy, and built-up land yielded a classified user accuracy of 78% as per the actual representation on the ground. Water bodies were correctly classified at 88%, thus making it the highest user's accuracy. Classification of 2009 had an overall accuracy of 84% ( *K*ˆ = 0.8341), slightly better than the 1999 image. Water bodies had the highest user's accuracy, at 100%. Bare land had a user's accuracy of 73%, built-up area had user's accuracy of 85%, while cropland and grassland had user's accuracy of 75% and 88% respectively. On the other hand, the 2018 image produced an overall kappa statistic of 0.7832 with an overall accuracy of 79%. The built-up class had a user's accuracy of 80%, while the cropland area had 73%. The bare land class, as well as the grassland, were both classified with a user's accuracy of 75%, while the water bodies' class produced a user's accuracy of 93%, which was the highest out of all the five classes.

### *3.3.1 Change detection in the study area*

**Tables 8**, **9** and **Figure 7** shows all the major land use classes in the area. It was noted that between 1999 to 2009, cropland increased by 25 462 ha and with a land cover change of 21.8% but decreased from 2009 to 2018 by −7 884 ha and with a − 5.5% changes in land cover. However, from 1999 to 2018, cropland witness 15.05% general change land cover and 1.44% change rate. The observed change can be attributed to a number of natural factors such as climate changes, and anthropogenic factors such as loss in soil fertility, changes in land use pattern/management, bush encroachment amongst others. It is also possible that climate change has played a leading role to the loss of cropland from 2009 to 2018. Grassland decreased by −2 159 ha between 1999 to 2009 with a land cover change of −1.9% but increased


### **Table 8.**

*Accuracy of LULC obtained from satellite data for the selected periods.*

from 2009 to 2018 by 28 771 ha having a land cover change of 25.8%. Also, from 1999 to 2018 grassland witness an overall increase of 23.42% change in land cover with an annual change rate of 2.76%. This could be attributed to increased conservation in protected areas for game hunting as the number of privately owned resort accommodation increased for ecotourism [29].

Similarly, between 1999 and 2009 and from 2009 to 2018, bare land decreased from −22 163 ha to −20 775 ha respectively, with an annual negligible land cover

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*


### **Table 9.**

*Trend changes in study area land cover categories.*


### **Table 10.**

*Annual rate of change in land cover categories for study area.*

### **Figure 7.**

*Land use and land cover map of the upper crocodile river catchment from 1999 to 2018.*

change of 1.9% and − 22% respectively and with an overall land cover change of **−**36.81% and annual change rate of **−**3.88 spanning from 1999 to 2018. The decrease in bare land suggests that other land uses such as grassland are slowly occupying the bare land. Similarly, Built-up also decrease from 1999 to 2009 by −1 978 ha and between 2009 to 2018 by −685 ha witnessing a change of **−**2.29% in land cover change and **−** 0.28% annual change rate from 1999 to 2018. Similar explanation as for bare land hold true with the exception that built-up areas are highly influence by man reconfiguring the environment.

Water bodies increased from +838 ha from 1999 to 2009 and with a slight increment of 0.7% and from 2009 to 2018, it further increased by 573 ha with an overall land cover change of 1.18% and annual change rate of 0.18 spanning from 1999 to 2018. This increase could be attributed to the construction of artificial dams used for irrigation water of crops in the area. The area is known for large scale intensive cultivation of both perishable crops (vegetables) fruits and grains (corn and wheat). Also, river environments are pristine and fragile, thus the restriction of human on these environments critical for sustainability [29]. The reconfiguration of the environments and the land use and land cover change may have had a negative effect on the river most probably influenced by the increased numbers and concentration of privately own accommodation along the river. A similar study by Namugize and co-workers [107], also attributed the deterioration of the uMngeni river catchment in South Africa to the multifaceted relationships between land use and land cover change and water quality parameters to be site specific.

Therefore, these findings help to understand the state of the environment in the upper Crocodile River catchment and aid in decision making on the implication on such findings on water resources which are considered be one of the most critical environmental problems in South Africa. The intensification of agricultural practices along the Crocodile River has had a negative impact on the receiving water through pollution as a result of the use of chemical fertilizers for cultivation profitable and more productive crop varieties (e.g. Fruits, grains and vegetables). The toxicity of water owing to the use of pesticides and other forms of chemical fertilizers draining into water bodies has resulted in the extinction of many marine organisms including serious effect on human health of those depending on the river as source for fish and domestic use [37, 84]. Furthermore, the decline in cropland from 2009 to 2018 may have a serious implication to food security and self-sufficiency for the province. This is further compounded by the increase in population growth urbanization, tourism, and other development activities are the principal drivers of LULC change in the Crocodile River catchment.

### **3.4 Prospect and implications for future studies**

PTEs, even in trace amount in some cases, could pose a great risk to humans, exert harmful effects on the environment and other ecological receptors, as mentioned earlier. With this increased anthropogenic activity, considering the land use and landcover change, spanning from 1999 to 2018, with the concomitant rise in PTEs observed in the study area, as one of the African water bodies, the need for continuous environmental monitoring of the safety of the river water body has emerged, of great importance. Standard techniques for detection of the PTEs such as inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) [108], Uv–Vis spectrometry [109], atomic absorption/emission spectroscopy [110], laserinduced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) [111] and even the inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy (ICP-MS) employed in this study, are not generally suitable for in situ, fast, easy and low cost operations [112]. Gross setbacks like tedious sample preparation and pre-concentration, professionalism needed in personnel operation, and high cost of procuring and maintaining equipment have surrounded the use of such techniques. Such growing mandatory demand for real-time on-site tracking of water quality for human health and the environmental monitoring requires a competitively sensitive and reliable technique which is affordable and exerts less pressure on the environment.

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

### **Figure 8.** *Typical electrochemical set-up [114].*

Hence, it is proposed that electrochemical monitoring technique could be a promising portable, low cost alternative with high selectivity and low detection limit [112]. Consequently, electrochemical sensors could be simply assembled into a compact system that is cheaper, simple to operate and possible for the desirable on-the-field application. These techniques leverage on the electro-catalytic oxidation of pre-concentrated deposited analyte on the surface of a prepared electrode. They have been engaged in extensive scope of applications such as environmental safety monitoring, control of food quality, medical diagnostics, and chemical threat detection. Some of the electrochemical methods most commonly in use nowadays include voltammetry, amperometry, impedemetry, potentiometry and conductometry [113]. Therefore, the safety assessment of African water bodies could profit immensely from the synergic integration of remote sensing and electrochemical technique in a way that is comparably affordable and efficient. **Figure 8** [114] illustrates a typical electrochemical setup.

### **4. Conclusion**

The physicochemical parameters and PTEs contamination in the Crocodile River were analyzed to highlight the effect of the PTEs have on the river health. The results of this study revealed that the Crocodile River is contaminated with the following PTEs, (Al, Mn and Fe) as their contamination level were above the stipulated permissible guideline of DWAF of 0.005, 0.18 and 0.1 mg/L respectively. Non-point sources of metals in the river could possibly be attributed to anthropogenic activities such as agriculture, mining, resorts, and privately owned accommodation, commercial activities and the increasing population along the Crocodile River. A measure to curb metal pollution in the Crocodile River would be to avoid tannery discharge effluent into the river and farmland without prior treatment. Apart from the treatment of wastewater, effluent discharged into the Crocodile River. The different classes of land use and land cover revealed the following change patterns; bare land and built-up declined from 1999 to 2018, with a net change of −42 938 ha and − 2 663 ha respectively. Whereas, land cover category for grassland, cropland and water bodies exhibited an increase of 26 612, 17 578 and 1 411 ha respectively. The LULC changes observed in the upper Crocodile River can be attributed to anthropogenic activities having a range of negative impact on the river and the environment. This result, therefore, serves as an informed guideline for policymakers in understanding the effects of land use and land cover change in designing an eco-friendly land use policy in the Crocodile River. Electrochemical strategy using appropriate sensors has been proposed a congruent technique for periodic monitoring of water quality needed, to inform the local population of the human health risk associated with the use of water derived from the river.

### **Acknowledgements**

The authors thank the North-West University (Mafikeng Campus), Department of Geography and Environmental Sciences, and Material Science Innovation and Modeling (MaSIM) Research Focus Area for their financial support and research facilities.

### **Conflict of interest**

All authors declared no conflicts of interest.

### **Author details**

Nde Samuel Che1 \*, Sammy Bett1 , Enyioma Chimaijem Okpara2,3, Peter Oluwadamilare Olagbaju4 , Omolola Esther Fayemi2,3 and Manny Mathuthu5

1 Department of Geography and Environmental Sciences, North-West University, Mafikeng Campus, Mmabatho, South Africa

2 Department of Chemistry, North-West University, Mmabatho, South Africa

3 Material Science Innovation and Modelling (MaSIM) Research Focus Area, North-West University, Mmabatho, South Africa

4 Department of Physics, North-West University, Mmabatho, South Africa

5 Centre for Applied Radiation Science and Technology, North-West University, Mmabatho, South Africa

\*Address all correspondence to: ndesamuelche@gmail.com

© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

### **References**

[1] Rahmanian N, Ali SHB, Homayoonfard M, Ali N, Rehan M, Sadef Y, et al. Analysis of physicochemical parameters to evaluate the drinking water quality in the State of Perak, Malaysia. Journal of Chemistry. 2015;2015.

[2] Ngwenya B, Thakadu O, Phaladze N, Bolaane B. Access to water and sanitation facilities in primary schools: A neglected educational crisis in Ngamiland district in Botswana. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C. 2018;105:231-238.

[3] Moss T. The governance of land use in river basins: prospects for overcoming problems of institutional interplay with the EU Water Framework Directive. Land use policy. 2004;21(1):85-94.

[4] Peters NE, Meybeck M. Water quality degradation effects on freshwater availability: impacts of human activities. Water International. 2000;25(2):185-193.

[5] Luo Z, Zuo Q, Shao Q. A new framework for assessing river ecosystem health with consideration of human service demand. Science of the Total Environment. 2018;640:442-453.

[6] Shiferaw H, Bewket W, Alamirew T, Zeleke G, Teketay D, Bekele K, et al. Implications of land use/land cover dynamics and Prosopis invasion on ecosystem service values in Afar Region, Ethiopia. Science of the total environment. 2019;675:354-366.

[7] Zhang Y, Huang G, Lu H, He L. Planning of water resources management and pollution control for Heshui River watershed, China: a full credibility-constrained programming approach. Science of The Total Environment. 2015;524:280-289.

[8] Tekken V, Costa L, Kropp JP. Increasing pressure, declining water and climate change in northeastern Morocco. Journal of Coastal Conservation. 2013;17(3):379-388.

[9] Cosgrove WJ, Loucks DP. Water management: Current and future challenges and research directions. Water Resources Research. 2015;51(6):4823-4839.

[10] Brack W, Dulio V, Ågerstrand M, Allan I, Altenburger R, Brinkmann M, et al. Towards the review of the European Union Water Framework management of chemical contamination in European surface water resources. Science of the Total Environment. 2017;576:720-737.

[11] Corcoran E. Sick water?: the central role of wastewater management in sustainable development: a rapid response assessment: UNEP/Earthprint; 2010.

[12] Rehman F, Rehman F. Water importance and its contamination through domestic sewage: Short review. Greener J Phys Sci. 2014;4(3):045-048.

[13] Dube T, Shoko C, Sibanda M, Baloyi MM, Molekoa M, Nkuna D, et al. Spatial modelling of groundwater quality across a land use and land cover gradient in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C. 2020;115:102820.

[14] Anderko L, Chalupka S. Climate Change and Health. The American journal of nursing. 2014;114(8):67-69.

[15] Abbasi S, Vinithan S. Water quality in and around an industrialized suburb of Pondicherry. Indian Journal of Environmental Health. 1999;41(4):253-263.

[16] El-Sheekh MM. Impact of water quality on ecosystems of the Nile River. The Nile River: Springer; 2016. p. 357-385.

[17] Hellmuth ME, Moorhead A, Thomas MC, Williams J. Climate risk management in Africa: Learning from practice. 2007.

[18] Bloch R. The Future of Water in African Cities: Why Waste Water? Integrating Urban Planning and Water Management in Sub-Saharan Africa, Background Report. 2012.

[19] Shrestha S, Bhatta B, Shrestha M, Shrestha PK. Integrated assessment of the climate and landuse change impact on hydrology and water quality in the Songkhram River Basin, Thailand. Science of The Total Environment. 2018;643:1610-1622.

[20] Giri S, Qiu Z. Understanding the relationship of land uses and water quality in Twenty First Century: A review. Journal of environmental management. 2016;173:41-48.

[21] Mintz E, Bartram J, Lochery P, Wegelin M. Not just a drop in the bucket: expanding access to point-of-use water treatment systems. American journal of public health. 2001;91(10):1565-1570.

[22] Zeinu KM, Hou H, Liu B, Yuan X, Huang L, Zhu X, et al. A novel hollow sphere bismuth oxide doped mesoporous carbon nanocomposite material derived from sustainable biomass for picomolar electrochemical detection of lead and cadmium. Journal of Materials Chemistry A. 2016;4(36):13967-13979.

[23] Yeboah-Assiamah E. Involvement of private actors in the provision of urban sanitation services; potential challenges and precautions. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal. 2015.

[24] Dos Santos S, Adams E, Neville G, Wada Y, De Sherbinin A, Bernhardt EM, et al. Urban growth and water access in sub-Saharan Africa: Progress,

challenges, and emerging research directions. Science of the Total Environment. 2017;607:497-508.

[25] Organization WH. Health in 2015: from MDGs, millennium development goals to SDGs, sustainable development goals. 2015.

[26] Hopewell MR, Graham JP. Trends in access to water supply and sanitation in 31 major sub-Saharan African cities: an analysis of DHS data from 2000 to 2012. BMC public health. 2014;14(1):208.

[27] Hickling S. Status of sanitation and hygiene in Africa. Sanitation and Hygiene in Africa: Where do We Stand? 2013;36:11.

[28] Ding J, Jiang Y, Liu Q, Hou Z, Liao J, Fu L, et al. Influences of the land use pattern on water quality in loworder streams of the Dongjiang River basin, China: A multi-scale analysis. Science of The Total Environment. 2016;551-552:205-16.

[29] Peter A, Mujuru M, Dube T. An assessment of land cover changes in a protected nature reserve and possible implications on water resources, South Africa. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C. 2018;107:86-91.

[30] Gyamfi C, Ndambuki JM, Salim RW. Hydrological responses to land use/cover changes in the Olifants Basin, South Africa. Water. 2016;8(12):588.

[31] Wijesiri B, Deilami K, Goonetilleke A. Evaluating the relationship between temporal changes in land use and resulting water quality. Environmental Pollution. 2018;234:480-486.

[32] Tong ST, Chen W. Modeling the relationship between land use and surface water quality. Journal of environmental management. 2002;66(4):377-393.

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

[33] Yang J, Ma S, Zhou J, Song Y, Li F. Heavy metal contamination in soils and vegetables and health risk assessment of inhabitants in Daye, China. Journal of International Medical Research. 2018;46(8):3374-3387.

[34] Camara M, Jamil NR, Abdullah AFB. Impact of land uses on water quality in Malaysia: a review. Ecological Processes. 2019;8(1):10.

[35] Hua AK. Land use land cover changes in detection of water quality: A study based on remote sensing and multivariate statistics. Journal of environmental and public health. 2017;2017.

[36] Pujol L, Evrard D, Groenen-Serrano K, Freyssinier M, Ruffien-Cizsak A, Gros P. Electrochemical sensors and devices for heavy metals assay in water: the French groups' contribution. Frontiers in chemistry. 2014;2:19.

[37] Nde SC, Mathuthu M. Assessment of Potentially Toxic Elements as Non-Point Sources of Contamination in the Upper Crocodile Catchment Area, North-West Province, South Africa. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2018; 15(4):576.

[38] Antoniadis V, Shaheen SM, Levizou E, Shahid M, Niazi NK, Vithanage M, et al. A critical prospective analysis of the potential toxicity of trace element regulation limits in soils worldwide: Are they protective concerning health risk assessment?-A review. Environment international. 2019;127:819-847.

[39] Olaniran AO, Balgobind A, Pillay B. Bioavailability of heavy metals in soil: impact on microbial biodegradation of organic compounds and possible improvement strategies. International journal of molecular sciences. 2013;14(5):10197-10228.

[40] Cipullo S, Prpich G, Campo P, Coulon F. Assessing bioavailability of complex chemical mixtures in contaminated soils: Progress made and research needs. Science of the Total Environment. 2018;615:708-723.

[41] Oyekunle ASAJA, Suliat O. Speciation Study of the Heavy Metals in Commercially. Environ Monit Assess. 2011;169:597-606.

[42] Devi SS, Sethu M, Priya PG. Effect of Artemia franciscana on the Removal of Nickel by Bioaccumulation. Biocontrol science. 2014;19(2):79-84.

[43] Tortora F, Innocenzi V, Prisciandaro M, Vegliò F, Di Celso GM. Heavy metal removal from liquid wastes by using micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution. 2016;227(7):240.

[44] Borba C, Guirardello R, Silva E, Veit M, Tavares C. Removal of nickel (II) ions from aqueous solution by biosorption in a fixed bed column: experimental and theoretical breakthrough curves. Biochemical Engineering Journal. 2006;30(2): 184-191.

[45] Ihedioha J, Okoye C. Levels of some trace metals (Zn, Cr, and Ni) in the muscle and internal organs of cattle in Nigeria. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal. 2013;19(4):989-998.

[46] Oyaro N, Ogendi J, Murago EN, Gitonga E. The contents of Pb, Cu, Zn and Cd in meat in nairobi, Kenya. 2007.

[47] Al Moharbi SS, Devi MG, Sangeetha B, Jahan S. Studies on the removal of copper ions from industrial effluent by Azadirachta indica powder. Applied Water Science. 2020;10(1):23.

[48] Zhang X, Yang L, Li Y, Li H, Wang W, Ye B. Impacts of lead/zinc mining and smelting on the

environment and human health in China. Environmental monitoring and assessment. 2012;184(4):2261-2273.

[49] Naseem R, Tahir S. Removal of Pb (II) from aqueous/acidic solutions by using bentonite as an adsorbent. Water Research. 2001;35(16):3982-3986.

[50] Fu F, Wang Q. Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: a review. Journal of environmental management. 2011;92(3):407-418.

[51] Chedrese PJ, Piasek M, Henson MC. Cadmium as an endocrine disruptor in the reproductive system. Immunology, Endocrine & Metabolic Agents in Medicinal Chemistry (Formerly Current Medicinal Chemistry-Immunology, Endocrine and Metabolic Agents). 2006;6(1):27-35.

[52] de Angelis C, Galdiero M, Pivonello C, Salzano C, Gianfrilli D, Piscitelli P, et al. The environment and male reproduction: The effect of cadmium exposure on reproductive function and its implication in fertility. Reproductive Toxicology. 2017;73:105-127.

[53] Żukowska J, Biziuk M. Methodological evaluation of method for dietary heavy metal intake. Journal of food science. 2008;73(2):R21-RR9.

[54] Gao X, Schulze DG. Chemical and mineralogical characterization of arsenic, lead, chromium, and cadmium in a metal-contaminated Histosol. Geoderma. 2010;156(3-4):278-286.

[55] Royer MD, Smith LA. Contaminants and remedial options at selected metals contaminated sites-a technical resource document. Citeseer; 1995.

[56] Sparks DL. Environmental soil chemistry: Elsevier; 2003.

[57] Yabe J, Ishizuka M, Umemura T. Current levels of heavy metal pollution in Africa. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science. 2010;72(10):1257-1263.

[58] Mohod CV, Dhote JJIJoIRiS, Engineering, Technology. Review of heavy metals in drinking water and their effect on human health. 2013;2(7):2992-2996.

[59] Olade M. Heavy Metal Pollution and the Need for Monitoring: Illustratedfor Developing Countries in West Africa. 1987.

[60] Jackson VA, Paulse A, Odendaal JP, Khan WJW, Air,, Pollution S. Identification of point sources of metal pollution in the Berg River, Western Cape, South Africa. 2013;224(3):1477.

[61] Okoro HK, Fatoki OS, Adekola FA, Ximba BJ, Snyman RG. A review of sequential extraction procedures for heavy metals speciation in soil and sediments. 2012.

[62] Edokpayi JN, Odiyo JO, Olasoji SOJIJNSR. Assessment of heavy metal contamination of Dzindi river, in Limpopo Province, South Africa. 2014;2(10):185-194.

[63] Lalah J, Ochieng E, Wandiga S. Sources of heavy metal input into Winam Gulf, Kenya. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 2008;81(3):277-284.

[64] Nthunya LN, Masheane ML, Malinga SP, Nxumalo EN, Mamba BB, Mhlanga SD. Determination of toxic metals in drinking water sources in the Chief Albert Luthuli Local Municipality in Mpumalanga, South Africa. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C. 2017;100:94-100.

[65] Reza R, Singh GJIJoES, Technology. Heavy metal contamination and its indexing approach for river water. 2010;7(4):785-792.

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

[66] Caruso B, Cox T, Runkel RL, Velleux M, Bencala KE, Nordstrom DK, et al. Metals fate and transport modelling in streams and watersheds: state of the science and USEPA workshop review. 2008.

[67] Mohanty J, Misra S, Nayak B. Sequential leaching of trace elements in coal: A case study from Talcher coalfield, Orissa. JOURNAL-GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF INDIA. 2001;58(5):441-448.

[68] Cravotta III CA. Dissolved metals and associated constituents in abandoned coal-mine discharges, Pennsylvania, USA. Part 1: Constituent quantities and correlations. Applied Geochemistry. 2008;23(2):166-202.

[69] SHAHTAHERI S, Abdollahi M, Golbabaei F, RAHIMI FA, Ghamari F. Monitoring of mandelic acid as a biomarker of environmental and occupational exposures to styrene. 2008.

[70] Rim-Rukeh A, Ikhifa OG, Okokoyo A. Effects of agricultural activities on the water quality of Orogodo River, Agbor Nigeria. Journal of applied sciences research. 2006;2(5):256-259.

[71] Khadse G, Patni P, Kelkar P, Devotta S. Qualitative evaluation of Kanhan river and its tributaries flowing over central Indian plateau. Environmental monitoring and assessment. 2008;147(1-3):83-92.

[72] Juang D, Lee C, Hsueh S. Chlorinated volatile organic compounds found near the water surface of heavily polluted rivers. International Journal of Environmental Science & Technology. 2009;6(4):545-556.

[73] Venugopal T, Giridharan L, Jayaprakash M. Characterization and risk assessment studies of bed sediments of River Adyar-An application of speciation study. 2009.

[74] Sekabira K, Origa HO, Basamba T, Mutumba G, Kakudidi E. Assessment of heavy metal pollution in the urban stream sediments and its tributaries. International journal of environmental science & technology. 2010;7(3):435-446.

[75] Masindi V, Muedi KL. Environmental contamination by heavy metals. Heavy metals. 2018;10:115-132.

[76] Ali H, Khan E, Ilahi I. Environmental chemistry and ecotoxicology of hazardous heavy metals: environmental persistence, toxicity, and bioaccumulation. Journal of chemistry. 2019;2019.

[77] Kinge CW, Mbewe M. Bacterial contamination levels in river catchments of the North West Province, South Africa: Public health implications. African Journal of Microbiology Research. 2012;6(7):1370-1375.

[78] Rimayi C, Odusanya D, Weiss JM, de Boer J, Chimuka L. Contaminants of emerging concern in the Hartbeespoort Dam catchment and the uMngeni River estuary 2016 pollution incident, South Africa. Science of the Total Environment. 2018;627:1008-1017.

[79] Mbiza NX. Investigation of the effectiveness of techniques deployed in controlling cyanobacterial growth in Rietvlei Dam, Roodeplaat Dam and Hartbeespoort Dam in Crocodile (West) and Marico Water Management Area 2014.

[80] Benabdelkader A, Taleb A, Probst J-L, Belaidi N, Probst A. Anthropogenic contribution and influencing factors on metal features in fluvial sediments from a semi-arid Mediterranean river basin (Tafna River, Algeria): A multiindices approach. Science of The Total Environment. 2018;626:899-914.

[81] Pavlović P, Marković M, Kostić O, Sakan S, Đorđević D, Perović V, et al.

Evaluation of potentially toxic element contamination in the riparian zone of the River Sava. Catena. 2019;174:399-412.

[82] Vareda JP, Valente AJ, Durães L. Assessment of heavy metal pollution from anthropogenic activities and remediation strategies: A review. Journal of environmental management. 2019;246:101-118.

[83] Chetty S, Pillay L. Assessing the influence of human activities on river health: a case for two South African rivers with differing pollutant sources. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2019;191(3):168.

[84] Alam A, Bhat MS, Maheen M. Using Landsat satellite data for assessing the land use and land cover change in Kashmir valley. GeoJournal. 2019:1-15.

[85] Hussain M, Chen D, Cheng A, Wei H, Stanley D. Change detection from remotely sensed images: From pixel-based to object-based approaches. ISPRS Journal of photogrammetry and remote sensing. 2013;80:91-106.

[86] Dewan AM, Yamaguchi Y. Using remote sensing and GIS to detect and monitor land use and land cover change in Dhaka Metropolitan of Bangladesh during 1960-2005. Environmental monitoring and assessment. 2009;150(1-4):237.

[87] Witharana C, Civco DL. Optimizing multi-resolution segmentation scale using empirical methods: exploring the sensitivity of the supervised discrepancy measure Euclidean distance 2 (ED2). ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 2014;87:108-121.

[88] Benz UC, Hofmann P, Willhauck G, Lingenfelder I, Heynen M. Multi-resolution, object-oriented fuzzy analysis of remote sensing data for GIS-ready information. ISPRS Journal

of photogrammetry and remote sensing. 2004;58(3-4):239-258.

[89] Marara T, Palamuleni L. A spatiotemporal analysis of water quality characteristics in the Klip river catchment, South Africa. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2020;192(9):1-28.

[90] Paerl HW. Mitigating toxic planktonic cyanobacterial blooms in aquatic ecosystems facing increasing anthropogenic and climatic pressures. Toxins. 2018;10(2):76.

[91] du Preez GC, Wepener V, Fourie H, Daneel MS. Irrigation water quality and the threat it poses to crop production: evaluating the status of the Crocodile (West) and Marico catchments, South Africa. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2018;190(3):127.

[92] Ogoyi DO, Mwita C, Nguu EK, Shiundu PM. Determination of heavy metal content in water, sediment and microalgae from Lake Victoria, East Africa. 2011.

[93] Schwartz JDM. The functional role of fish diversity in Lake Victoria, East Africa: Boston University; 2002.

[94] Cobbina S, Myilla M, Michael KJIJSTR. Small scale gold mining and heavy metal pollution: Assessment of drinking water sources in Datuku in the Talensi-Nabdam District. 2013;2(1).

[95] Witte F, Goldschmidt T, Wanink J, van Oijen M, Goudswaard K, Witte-Maas E, et al. The destruction of an endemic species flock: quantitative data on the decline of the haplochromine cichlids of Lake Victoria. Environmental biology of fishes. 1992;34(1):1-28.

[96] Mambo M, Jonathan OO, Nana AM, editors. HRP biosensor based on carbonized maize tassel-MWNTs

*An Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Changes and Its Impact on the Surface Water… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95753*

modified electrode for the detection of divalent trace metal ions. SENSORS, 2013 IEEE; 2013: IEEE.

[97] Lapworth D, Nkhuwa D, Okotto-Okotto J, Pedley S, Stuart M, Tijani M, et al. Urban groundwater quality in sub-Saharan Africa: current status and implications for water security and public health. Hydrogeology Journal. 2017;25(4):1093-1116.

[98] Orata F, Birgen F. Fish tissue bioconcentration and interspecies uptake of heavy metals from waste water lagoons. Journal of Pollution Effects & Control. 2016;4(2):157.

[99] Oluyemi E, Adekunle A, Adenuga A, Makinde W. Physicochemical properties and heavy metal content of water sources in Ife North Local Government Area of Osun State, Nigeria. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2010;4(10):691-697.

[100] Edokpayi JN, Odiyo JO, Popoola OE, Msagati TA. Assessment of trace metals contamination of surface water and sediment: a case study of Mvudi River, South Africa. Sustainability. 2016;8(2):135.

[101] Okonkwo JO, Mothiba M. Physicochemical characteristics and pollution levels of heavy metals in the rivers in Thohoyandou, South Africa. Journal of Hydrology. 2005;308(1-4):122-127.

[102] Somerset V, Van der Horst C, Silwana B, Walters C, Iwuoha E. Biomonitoring and Evaluation of Metal Concentrations in Sediment and Crab Samples from the North-West Province of South Africa. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution. 2015;226(3):43.

[103] Bouaroudj S, Menad A, Bounamous A, Ali-Khodja H, Gherib A, Weigel DE, et al. Assessment of water quality at the largest dam in Algeria

(Beni Haroun Dam) and effects of irrigation on soil characteristics of agricultural lands. Chemosphere. 2019;219:76-88.

[104] Wongsasuluk P, Chotpantarat S, Siriwong W, Robson M. Heavy metal contamination and human health risk assessment in drinking water from shallow groundwater wells in an agricultural area in Ubon Ratchathani province, Thailand. Environmental geochemistry and health. 2014;36(1):169-182.

[105] Ahmad JU, Goni MA. Heavy metal contamination in water, soil, and vegetables of the industrial areas in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2010;166(1):347-357.

[106] Li S, Zhang Q. Risk assessment and seasonal variations of dissolved trace elements and heavy metals in the Upper Han River, China. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2010;181(1-3):1051-1058.

[107] Namugize JN, Jewitt G, Graham M. Effects of land use and land cover changes on water quality in the uMngeni river catchment, South Africa. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C. 2018;105:247-264.

[108] Schunk PFT, Kalil IC, Pimentel-Schmitt EF, Lenz D, de Andrade TU, Ribeiro JS, et al. ICP-OES and micronucleus test to evaluate heavy metal contamination in commercially available Brazilian herbal teas. Biological trace element research. 2016;172(1):258-265.

[109] Mehder A, Habibullah Y, Gondal M, Baig U. Qualitative and quantitative spectro-chemical analysis of dates using UV-pulsed laser induced breakdown spectroscopy and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Talanta. 2016;155:124-132.

[110] Yu J, Yang S, Sun D, Lu Q, Zheng J, Zhang X, et al. Simultaneously determination of multi metal elements in water samples by liquid cathode glow discharge-atomic emission spectrometry. Microchemical Journal. 2016;128:325-330.

[111] dos Santos Augusto A, Batista ÉF, Pereira-Filho ER. Direct chemical inspection of eye shadow and lipstick solid samples using laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) and chemometrics: proposition of classification models. Analytical Methods. 2016;8(29):5851-5860.

[112] Hou H, Zeinu KM, Gao S, Liu B, Yang J, Hu J. Recent advances and perspective on design and synthesis of electrode materials for electrochemical sensing of heavy metals. Energy & Environmental Materials. 2018;1(3):113-131.

[113] Ahammad A, Lee J-J, Rahman M. Electrochemical sensors based on carbon nanotubes. sensors. 2009;9(4):2289-2319.

[114] Huang A, Li H, Xu D. An on-chip electrochemical sensor by integrating ITO three-electrode with low-volume cell for on-line determination of trace Hg (II). Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry. 2019;848:113189.

### **Chapter 3**
