As mentioned in the Discussion section, our tests of the water quality proved our hypothesis correct, where there are no visible forms of pollution within the our testing sites of the Sungei Ulu Pandan River. For test location A and B are graded as "good", while test location C is categorised as "medium". This lives up to its name of being a clean and unpolluted waterway (Ministry of the Environment, 2000). The relevant agencies such as the Ministry of the Environment have been taking measures to prevent the contamination of our waterways, such as making industries treat their trade effluent to desired standards before discharging them into a watercourse (Ministry of the Environment, 2000). Such practices allow us to enjoy the practical usage of water catchment areas for our clean and potable water. Accordingly, we find treating the water of Sungei Ulu Pandan River a feasible idea.
However, as mentioned in the Discussion section, our testing may not be accurate. This is due to several reasons, such as small sample size and a slight procedural error. Being able to collect and test water from this site at least three times would allow us to get a better picture of the water quality, hence enabling us to make more informed decisions. Even though we use a reliable and chemical method, we should be more meticulous in our procedures of testing. This ensures that we minimise the chances of error and unwanted speculation. We also tested from only a mere part of the Sungei Ulu Pandan River, meaning that our results are not conclusive of the entire stretch of catchment area.
Therefore, our results may only serve as a guideline or a small frame of a picture. Chemical methods of testing such as using specialised sensors and probes should give a reliable readings. Hence, our results may be only reliable for the collection sites we have tested from.