You are on page 1of 159

NORTH WEST IRRIGATION SECTOR PROJECT

ADB Loan No. 2035 - CAM (SF)


AFD Grant No. CHK 3003.01

RIVER BASIN AND WATER USE STUDIES, PACKAGE 2

Boribo and Dauntri Sub-basins

Final Report

Volume 3: Dauntri Sub-basin

5 December 2006

Prepared for
MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES AND METEOROLOGY
by
PRD Water & Environment in association with DHI Water & Environment

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2

Revisions
Version 1: New section 4.4: Water availability
Summary expanded
Table 8.3 changed

Version 1a: Section 4.4 expanded


A large part of Section 6.3 (water quality) shifted to new Appendix 5

Version 2: Section 3.5: Reference added to Appendix 3


Sections 4.3 and 4.4, new Table 4.14: Discussion of a further extension of the
Damnak Ampil Canal all the way to St. Dauntri (to serve the Prek Chik candidate
sub-project), with exemplification of achievable benefits
New Section 4.5 (allocation of manageable flows), with explanation of manageable
flows, and estimates of water availability downstream of candidate sub-projects
Section 8.4: Livestock analysis revised

Acknowledgement
The Package 2 Team expresses its sincere thanks to the staff members from the Provincial
Departments, the district officers, and the many individual persons who have kindly taken time out to
share their knowledge for the purpose of the present study. MOWRAM, the PMO, the PIUs and the
TA Consultant have provided valuable guidance and shared data and knowledge, including results
from monitoring programmes and previous related studies. MRC has kindly made data and GIS layers
available for the purpose of the study.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2

Summary
The Northwest Irrigation Sector Project (NWISP) is being implemented by MOWRAM, with
assistance from Asian Development Bank (ADB) and Agence Française de Développement (AFD). It
has the overall objective of supporting the effort of the Royal Government of Cambodia to reduce
poverty in rural areas of northwest Cambodia through enhanced agricultural production. The
immediate objectives are to improve the use of water resources and to take advantage of the potential
for irrigated agriculture.

One activity of the NWISP is a series of river basin and water use studies, which have the over-all
objective 'to provide a framework leading eventually to institutional means for installing a
scientifically informed approach for management of water quantity and quality in the target river
basins'.

The river basin and water use studies will provide a part of the basis for subsequent master planning,
and for design and feasibility studies of irrigation schemes to be conducted later on under the NWISP.

Package 2 of these studies covers the Dauntri Sub-basin in Battambang and Pursat Provinces, and the
Boribo Sub-basin in Pursat and Kg Chhnang Provinces (and with a small corner in Kg Speu Province).

The present 'Final Report, volume 3' describes the water balance and water uses in Dauntri Sub-basin.

The work has been based on data and information available from the Commune Database,
MOWRAM, MRC and others, as well as comprehensive field surveys conducted under the present
study. The analyses have been supported by numerical river basin modeling of water balance and
water quality.

A summary of the average water balance and the present water utilization is shown in the following
table.

Dauntri Sub-basin (St. Kambot, St. Svay Donkeo and St. Dauntri)
Area: 3,542 km2 (21 percent of which is more than 100 m above mean sea level)
Cultivated area (rice and other crops) (2005): 1,623 km2, of which
wet season irrigated: 17 km2 (actual), 447km2 (potential)
dry season irrigated (2 crops per year): 5 km2 (actual), 3 km2 (potential)
Population (2004): 233.509

Annual water balance, present conditions, 4 out of 5 years


Rainfall Evapo-ration Storage and Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
losses availability uses uses uses
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
119,9 81,0 0,1 38,8 0,1 6,5 0,4 31,8
l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2
33,3 22,5 - 10,8 - 1,8 0,1 8,8

'-' means 'less than 0.05'

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2

Dauntri Sub-basin has 2 schemes that have been identified as candidate sub-projects under the
NWISP. The estimated manageable water availability is summarized below.

Water availability at candidate sub-projects


Krouch Sauch Anlong Svay Anlong Svay and Roneam Prek Chik
Prayol (to share)
Low estimate High estimate Low estimate High estimate Low estimate High estimate
(a) (a) (a) (a) (a), (b) (a), (b) (c)
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
J 1,5 2,7 2,4 4,0 2,4 4,0 0,3
F 0,9 1,7 1,3 2,3 1,3 2,3 -0,1
M 0,9 1,7 1,3 2,3 1,3 2,3 -0,3
A 0,9 1,7 1,3 2,3 1,3 2,3 -0,3
M 1,5 2,7 2,2 3,8 2,2 3,8 -0,3
J 2,1 3,6 3,3 5,4 3,3 5,3 0,9
J 4,9 7,1 9,6 12,6 9,9 12,9 8,2
A 8,2 10,5 17,0 20,0 18,2 21,2 21,3
S 10,2 12,5 21,4 24,4 23,1 26,1 29,1
O 8,2 10,4 16,9 19,9 18.0 21,0 21,1
N 4,1 6,4 7,9 10,9 8,1 11,1 5,2
D 2,2 3,7 3,7 5,7 3,7 5,7 1,5

The water availability is the estimated availability in 4 out of 5 years under present conditions
The estimate includes present withdrawals for irrigation; and present and future withdrawals for domestic and livestock
The estimate excludes any future expansion of irrigation withdrawals
(a) The water availability at Krouch Sauch, Anlong Svay and Roneam Prayol is influenced by the operation of the Damnak
Ampil Canal. The low and high estimates are based on assumptions about the future operation. Please refer to text for
details
(b) The water availability at Roneam Prayol is influenced by the implementation of the Anlong Svay scheme
(c) Negative values means that water is inadequate for the assumed future domestic and livestock demand
No allocation has been made for in-stream demands

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 i

Contents
Acronyms and abbreviations..................................................................................................................vii
Study tasks ........................................................................................................................................... viii
Terminology............................................................................................................................................ix
Names .....................................................................................................................................................ix
Location map............................................................................................................................................x
1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................1
2 Geography ...........................................................................................................................2
2.1 Data ........................................................................................................................2
2.2 Population, administrative boundaries ...................................................................2
2.3 Elevations, land use, soils ......................................................................................4
2.4 Irrigation.................................................................................................................6
3 Hydrology..........................................................................................................................10
3.1 Data ......................................................................................................................10
3.2 River network and catchment delineation ............................................................10
3.3 Rainfall and evaporation ......................................................................................14
3.4 Streamflow ...........................................................................................................15
3.5 Regulation ............................................................................................................17
4 Water uses and water balance............................................................................................22
4.1 Water uses ............................................................................................................22
4.2 Water balance.......................................................................................................23
4.3 Candidate sub-projects .........................................................................................39
4.4 Water availability .................................................................................................41
4.5 Allocation of manageable flows...........................................................................45
5 Morphology, floods and drought .......................................................................................51
5.1 Data ......................................................................................................................51
5.2 Morphology..........................................................................................................51
5.3 Floods and drought...............................................................................................52
6 Aquatic environment .........................................................................................................55
6.1 Data ......................................................................................................................55
6.2 Pollution loads......................................................................................................55
6.3 Water quality........................................................................................................63
6.4 Implications of irrigation development ................................................................65
7 Fisheries.............................................................................................................................69
7.1 Dauntri River........................................................................................................69
7.2 Svay Don Keo River ............................................................................................69
7.3 St. Kambot............................................................................................................69
8 Socio-economics................................................................................................................71
8.1 Data ......................................................................................................................71

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 ii

8.2 Socio-economic context .......................................................................................71


8.3 Water utilization...................................................................................................77
8.4 Economic analysis................................................................................................85
8.5 Water user groups ................................................................................................91
References..............................................................................................................................................92

Appendix 1: Thematic maps ..................................................................................................................93


Appendix 2: Data files ...........................................................................................................................98
Appendix 3: Water management structures .........................................................................................100
St. Dauntri (St. Moung) ...................................................................................................100
St. Svay Donkeo ..............................................................................................................101
St. Kambot (Preahmlu) ....................................................................................................102
Appendix 4: Water balance tables........................................................................................................103
Appendix 5: Water quality simulations................................................................................................133
A5.1 General ...............................................................................................................133
A5.2 Present conditions ..............................................................................................135
A5.3 Implications of irrigation development ..............................................................139

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 iii

Figures
2.1: Communes in Dauntri Sub-basin
2.2: Land elevations in Dauntri Sub-basin
2.3: Land elevation distribution in Dauntri Sub-basin
2.4: Land use in Dauntri Sub-basin
2.5: Irrigation schemes in Dauntri Sub-basin

3.1: River network, Dauntri Sub-basin (detailed and simplified)


3.2: Comparison between sub-basin boundaries
3.3: Ou Souphi Offtake
3.4: Monthly average flow, St. Dauntri
3.5: Structures along the Damnak-Ampil Canal
3.6: The Damnak Ampil Canal and regulator under construction (6 July 06)
3.7: The Damnak-Ampil Canal from Pursat River to Prek Chik
3.8: Photos from the Damnak-Ampil Canal

4.1: MIKE Basin model of the Dauntri Sub-basin


4.2: Schematic representation of sub-catchments
4.3: Rainfall-runoff simulation for the Dauntri catchment
4.4: Simulated and observed discharge in Stung Sangker at Battambang
4.5: Schematisation of the Damnak-Ampil irrigation canal
4.6: Water availability, present conditions, April, m3/s
4.7: Specific water availabilty, present conditions, April (l/s/km2)
4.8: Water availability, present conditions, September (m3/s)
4.9: Specific water availabilty, present conditions, September (l/s/km2)
4.10: Specific water availabilty, present conditions, annual (l/s/km2)
4.11: Ratio between groundwater flow and total runoff
4.12: Schematization of St. Kambot
4.13: Schematization of St. Svay Donkeo
4.14: Schematization of St. Dauntri

5.1: Erosion and accretion

6.1: Amount of annual BOD load by sub-catchment


6.2: Location of the sub-catchments
6.3: Amount of annual Total Nitrogen load by sub-catchment
6.4: Amount of annual Total Phosphorous load by sub-catchment
6.5: Time series results for the outlet of St. Dauntri, present conditions
6.6: Simulated discharge for reference scenario and the candidate sub-projects

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 iv

6.7: Changes in water discharge from the present situation after irrigation development
6.8: Time series results for the outlet of St. Dauntri after irrigation deveopment

8.1: Household income structure


8.2: Main sources of drinking water in Pursat and Battambang Provinces
8.3: Irrigated cropping areas in Dauntri Sub-basin
8.4: Present and future composition of major extractive water demands
8.5: Value added by water to livelihoods in Dauntri Sub-basin

A5.1: Average concentration of BOD for 2000 and 2001


A5.2: Maximum concentration of BOD for 2000 and 2001
A5.3: Average concentrations of NH4 for 2000 and 2001
A5.4: Maximum concentrations of NH4 for 2000 and 2001
A5.5: Average concentrations of NO3 for 2000 and 2001
A5.6: Maximum concentrations of NO3 for 2000 and 2001
A5.7: Average concentrations of Total-phosphorus for 2000 and 2001
A5.8: Maximum concentrations of Total-phosphorus for 2000 and 2001
A5.3 Implications of irrigation development
A5.9: Average concentration of BOD for the candidate sub-projects
A5.10: Maximum concentration of BOD for the candidate sub-projects
A5.11: Difference in BOD concentrations between the candidate sub-projects and the present
situation
A5.12: Average concentrations of NH4 for the candidate sub-projects
A5.13: Maximum concentrations of NH4 for the candidate sub-projects
A5.14: Difference in NH4 concentrations between the candidate sub-projects and the present situation
A5.15: Average concentrations of NO3 for the candidate sub-projects
A5.16: Maximum concentrations of NO3 for the candidate sub-projects
A5.17: Difference in NO3 concentrations between the candidate sub-projects and the present situation
A5.18: Average concentrations of total-phosphorus for the candidate sub-projects
A5.19: Maximum concentrations of total-phosphorus for the candidate sub-projects
A5.20: Difference in total-phosphorus concentrations between the candidate sub-projects and the
present situation

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 v

Tables
2.1: Administrative units with area and population, Dauntri Sub-basin
2.2: Land use
2.3: Forest cover
2.4: Irrigation schemes in Dauntri Sub-basin

3.1: Distribution of annual rainfall


3.2: Pan evaporation
3.3: Assumed flow from Pursat River into the Damnak-Ampil Canal

4.1: Estimate of future domestic demand, Dauntri Sub-basin


4.2: Summary water balance, base situation, 4 out of 5 years
4.3: Summary water balance with the Damnak Ampil Canal
4.4: Monthy simulated ratio between groundwater flow and total runoff
4.5: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects
4.6: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects, and climate
change
4.7: Estimated water availability at Krouch Saeuch
4.8: Estimated water availability at Anlong Svay
4.9: Estimated water availability at Roneam Prayol
4.10: Estimated water availability at Prek Chik
4.11: Manageable flows downstream of candidate sub-projects
4.12: Rainfall deficit
4.13: Irrigable areas
4.14: Irrigable area at Prek Chik assuming a supply from the Damnak Ampil Canal

5.1: Cultivation areas affected by floods and drought


5.2: Occurrence of floods and drought

6.1: Distribution of areas for rice cultivation and estimated fertiliser application
6.2: Overall generated load of BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus
6.3: Estimated BOD load reaching the river in each subcatchment
6.4: Estimated nitrogen load reaching the river in each subcatchment
6.5: Estimated phosphorus load reaching the river in each subcatchment

8.1: Sources of cash income in each sub-basin


8.2: Summary socio-economic indicators
8.3: Cultivated areas in Dauntri Sub-basin
8.4: Irrigated crop areas

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 vi

8.5: Future demands for irrigation in Dauntri Sub-basin


8.6: Present livestock water demands in Dauntri Sub-basin (2005)
8.7: Projected livestock water demands to 2030
8.8: Projected domestic consumption demands
8.9: Crop budget summary for Dauntri Sub-basin
8.10: Livestock value in Dauntri Sub-basin
8.11: Average tariff and unit production costs
8.12: Net benefits of domestic water supply
8.13: Value of the potential fish yield in Dauntri Sub-basin
8.14: Water User Groups in Dauntri Sub-basin

A2.1: Time series data


A2.2: Data tables

A4.1: Summary water balance, base situation


A4.2: Summary water balance, base situation with Damnak Ampil Canal
A4.3: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects
A4.4: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate
change
A4.5: Water balance, base situation
A4.6: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal
A4.7: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects
A4.8: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 vii

Acronyms and abbreviations


ADB : Asian Development Bank
AFD : Agence Française de Développement
CNMC : Cambodia National Mekong Committee
DoE : (Provincial) Department of Environment
EIA : environmental impact assessment
FWUC : farmer's water user community
GW : groundwater
IWRM : integrated water resources management
MAFF : Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
MCM : million cubic metres
MoE : Ministry of Environment
MOWRAM : Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology
MRC : Mekong River Commission
NWISP : North West Sector Irrigation Project
PDAFF : Provincial Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
PDWRAM : Provincial Department of Water Resources and Meteorology
PIU : Project Implementation Unit (of the NWISP)
PMO : Project Management Office (of the NWISP)
PRA : participatory rural appraisal
RGC : Royal Government of Cambodia
ToR : terms of reference
WQ : water quality
WUC, WUG : water user community, water user group
WUP-FIN : Finnish component of MRC's Water Utilization Programme
WUP-JICA : Japanese component of MRC's Water Utilization Programme

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 viii

Study tasks
No. Item Reference
Inception phase – Collection of information
1 Collection of general data and information (cross-cutting)
2 Collection of hydro-meteorological and hydraulic data and information Vol1 Sect 4.1
3 Field surveys, inspection of monitoring stations, flood damage assessment (cross-cutting)
4 Consultation meetings at province, commune and village level (cross-cutting)
5 Basic thematic maps Vol2&3 App 1
6 Approach to hydrological analysis Vol1 Sect 5.3, Vol1 App 2
7 Technical workshop with MOWRAM/PDWRAM (reported separately)
Hydrological studies and modelling
8 Review of river monitoring network Vol1 Sect 9.1
9 Hydrological analysis Vol2&3 Ch 4
10 Morphological analysis Vol1 6.2, Vol2&3 Sect 5.2
11 Flood characteristics Vol1 Sect 6.3, Vol2&3 Sect 5.3
12 Fish, fish habitats and fish migration Vol1 Sect 7.2, Vol2&3 Ch 7
13 Support to selecting candidate NWISP subprojects Vol1 Sect 9.2, Vol2&3 Sect 4.3
Analysis of water uses
14 Remote sensing analysis and field survey (cross-cutting)
15 Forestry and land use survey Vol1 Sect 2.3, Vol2&3 Sect 2.3
16 Field surveys of water uses Vol1 Sect 5.2, Vol2&3 Sect 4.1
17 Inventory of water users committees
18 Quantification of consumptive and non-consumptive water uses Vol1 Sect 5.2, Vol2&3 Sect 4.1
19 Economic analysis of water utilization Vol1 Ch 8, Vol2&3 Ch 8
20 Economic analysis of long-term development opportunities Vol1 Sect 8.4
Water balance
21 Water balance for the sub-basins Vol2&3 Sect 4.2, Vol2&3 App 4
22 Assessment of trends in water availability and demand (same)
23 Assessment of impacts of each subproject on downstream water uses Vol2&3 Sect 4.3, Vol2&3 App 4
24 NWISP candidate sub-projects Vol2&3 Sect 4.4
Environmental aspects
25 Existing WQ data and classification Vol1 Sect 7.3
26 Point and non-point sources Vol1 Sect 7.4, Vol2&3 Sect 6.2
27 Aquatic environment in representative reaches Vol2&3 Sect 6.3
28 Environmental flows in representative reaches, and assessment of enforcement Section 9.6
29 Evaluation of fish passages Vol2&3 Ch 7
Reports – progress meetings - workshops
30 Inception report (reported separately)
31 Sub-basin reports (reported separately)
32 Surface water and groundwater maps Vol2&3 Sect 4.2 (no GW maps)
33 Response to data shortcomings (cross-cutting)
34 Project completion report (reported separately)
35 Project completion workshops (reported separately)
36 Weekly progress statements (reported separately)
37 Liaison with RGC and provincial agencies and community representatives (cross-cutting)
38 Knowledge-sharing with designated counterpart staff (cross-cutting)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 ix

Terminology
Following a discussion at the Inception Workshop in Pursat on 11 July 2006, and with a view to the
terminology applied in the Terms of Reference, the following suggestions are made:

Terms used in the present study:


Catchment: The general term for an area from where the surface flow proceeds towards a specific
location (like a cross-section of a river or canal, or a lake or reservoir). A catchment is
delineated by a catchment boundary. It can be a river basin or a part of a river basin. Same as
drainage area

Catchment boundary: The boundary of a catchment (or a river basin or a sub-catchment). The surface
flow of rain falling on each side of the boundary will proceed towards different locations. A
review of catchment boundaries is a part of the present study

River basin: The catchment of a whole river (with its tributaries). In the present study, this term is used
both for the Mekong Basin and the Tonle Sap Basin. (In some other studies, the Tonle Sap
Basin is referred to as a sub-basin of the Mekong Basin)

Study area (Package 2): The Dauntri/Svay Don Keo and the Boribo/Thlea Maam Sub-basins

Sub-area: An area that is a part of another area

Sub-basin: The catchment of a tributary, and hereby a part of river basin. The present study deals with
the Dauntri/Svay Don Keo Sub-basin and the Boribo/Thlea Maam Sub-basin

Sub-catchment: A catchment that is explicitly a part of a larger catchment. In the present study, an
irrigation scheme will receive water from a sub-catchment, and sub-catchments are used as
units for the river basin modelling of water balance and water quality

Terms not used in the present study:


Drainage area or drainage basin: Same as a catchment (or a sub-catchment)

Watershed: (1) in English, same as a catchment boundary; (2) In American English, same as a
catchment. Watershed management can cover different aspects of water-related management
within a watershed, depending on the circumstances

Names
Most rivers change their names along their course, often within short distances.
Different spellings are used for many rivers, streams and locations, for example Pursat/Pouthisat,
Dauntri/Dauntry /Daun Try, etc.
St. Dauntri is also named St. Muong, and St. Kambot is also named St. Preahmlu.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 x

Location map
300 000 350 000 400 000 450 000 500 000
1 500 000

1 450 000

1 400 000

1 350 000

1 500 000

1 450 000

1 400 000

1 350 000

300 000 350 000 400 000 450 000 500 000

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 1

1 Introduction
The Northwest Irrigation Sector Project (NWISP) is being implemented by
MOWRAM, with assistance from Asian Development Bank (ADB) and Agence
Française de Développement (AFD). It has the overall objective of supporting the
effort of the Royal Government of Cambodia to reduce poverty in rural areas of
northwest Cambodia through enhanced agricultural production. The immediate
objectives are to improve the use of water resources and to take advantage of the
potential for irrigated agriculture. It is intended to establish ten to twelve
rehabilitated and sustainably operational small to medium-scale irrigation systems
and other water control infrastructure.

The NWISP is managed by a Project Management Office (PMO) within


MOWRAM, assisted by a TA Consultant (BCEOM/ACIL/SAWAC). The
assistance by the TA Consultant includes guidance and supervision of the studies
outlined in the present report.

One activity under the NWSIP is the 'River Basin and Water Use Studies, Package
2', covering Dauntri Sub-basin in Battambang and Pursat Provinces, and Boribo
Sub-basin in Pursat and Kg Chhnang Province. This work is being carried out by
PRD Water & Environment in association with DHI Water & Environment.

The scope of the river basin and water use studies is specified in the Terms of
Reference prepared by MOWRAM. The overall objective is 'to provide a
framework leading eventually to institutional means for installing a scientifically
informed approach for management of water quantity and quality in the target
river sub-basins'.

The aim is not a master plan nor a set of feasibility studies for selected sub-
projects. Rather, the work will serve as a part of the basis for subsequent master
planning and preparations for individual projects.

The Final Report comes in 3 volumes:


1 Methodology and general findings
2 Boribo Sub-basin
3 Dauntri Sub-basin

Data tables and thematic maps are submitted separately. Basic documentation has
been indexed and compiled on a CD.

A report about Dauntri Sub-basin was discussed at a workshop in Battambang on


27 October 2006. The present revised report is based on guidance received at the
workshop as well as from the TA Consultant.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 2

2 Geography

2.1 Data
This section relates to ToR, Task 1: Collection of general data and information

The physical geopgraphic description has been based on


• Land cover maps 1992/93, 1996/97 and 2002
• Satellite images (RADARSAT-1) 1998, 2000, 2002 and 2005 (showing
topographical features and land use)
• Aerial photos (available for a part of the area only)
• Administrative boundaries: Country, province, district, commune and village
(villages as point coverage)
• Topographical maps 1:50,000 and 1:100,000
• Digital Elevation Model with 50 m resolution
• Soil coverage digitized from 1,000,000 scale map

Various demographic information origins from the 2004 Commune Database. The
commune is the basic unit for a substantial part of the geographic, agricultural and
socio-economic data.

2.2 Population, administrative boundaries


This section relates to ToR, Task 1: Collection of general data and information

Related data (submitted electronically)


Area-population.xls Area and population (2002-04) within the study area; buffaloes,
cows, horses, goats, pigs, and poultry; families using fertilizer; by
province, district and commune

In Dauntri-Svay Don Keo Sub-basin, the population density was 56 persons/km2 in


2004and the population growth was 1.5 percent/year from 2002 to 2004.

The Tonle Sap Basin in general witnesses the highest population growth within the
Lower Mekong Basin, with 4.8 % per year as compared with Cambodia's average
rate of 2.2/2.5 % per year (CNMC October 04, p. 30). The difference is partly
related to migration.

There are no major urban settlements (such as provincial towns) in the study area.
This influences the future population growth, which is expected to be much higher
in urban areas than in rural areas.

District and commune boundaries, areas and population are shown in the following
figure and table.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 3

Figure 2.1: Communes in Dauntri Sub-basin

Table 2.1: Administrative units with area and population, Dauntri Sub-basin
Province District Commune Area (km2) Area within sub- Population within
basin (km2) sub-basin (2004)
Battambang Moung Ruessei Moung 50.9 38.9 12,672
Kear 96.2 96.2 15,941
Prey Svay 143.6 143.6 13,114
Ruessei Krang 163.1 163.1 14,251
Chrey 491.7 280.3 6,478
Ta Loas 135.9 73.9 4,288
Kakaoh 85.6 36.2 4,904
Robas Mongkol 128.8 104.3 9,228
Prek Chik 139.2 139.2 12,544
Prey Tralach 273.6 273.6 20,663
Koas Krala Doun Ba 199.2 39.8 620
Chhnal Moan 624.5 218.6 992
Pursat Bakan Boeng Bat Kandaol 194.9 25.3 1,276
Boeng Khnar 56.6 56.6 12,188
Khnar Totueng 53.7 53.7 7,734
Me Tuek 265.0 262.3 14,429
Ou Ta Paong 292.0 292.0 15,674
Rumlech 52.9 52.9 8,154
Snam Preah 228.9 13.7 984
Svay Doun Kaev 29.9 29.9 5,978
Ta Lou 305.0 305.0 15,354
Trapeang Chong 83.0 69.5 16,119
Phnum Kravanh Bak Chenhchien 40.7 14.7 2,543
Phteah Rung 156.1 143.6 14,396
Samraong 546.6 36.0 634
Sampov Meas Lolok Sa 42.7 7.7 1,700
Veal Veaeng Krapeu Pir 705.6 535.5 532
Pramaoy 865.9 35.7 118
Total 3,541.9 233,509

Data: Commune Database 2004 and GIS analysis

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 4

2.3 Elevations, land use, soils


This section relates to ToR, Task 1: Collection of general data and information

Related data (submitted electronically)


Landuse.xls Land use within each sub-basin (2005), and forest cover within each
sub-basin (1993, 1997, 2002, 2005), and rate of change
Geology.xls Geological classification of each sub-basin
Protectedareas.xls Protected areas in each sub-basin

The land elevation in the sub-basin is illustrated below. The highest elevation in
Dauntri-Svay Don Keo Sub-basin is around 1,273 m (according to the 50 x 50 m
resolution DEM).

Figure 2.2: Land elevations in Dauntri Sub-basin

Figure 2.3: Land elevation distribution in Dauntri Sub-basin

> 500 m (2.3 pct)


200-500 m (8.4 pct)

100-200 m (10.0 pct)

50-100 m (4.4 pct)


0-20 m (55.4 pct)

20-50 m (19.5 pct)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 5

Land use and soils


The present land use (2005) is shown in the following figure, which provides an
important characterization of the sub-basin: The major part is forest - evergreen,
semi-evergreen or deciduous (shedding the leaves annually). There is some rainfed
paddy area, and only small parts of other land use. Additional information is given
in Tables 2.2 and 2.3.

Figure 2.4: Land use in Dauntri Sub-basin

Data: Interpretation from Landsat ETM (2005)

Table 2.2: Land use (2005)


Land use Area (km2)
Evergreen forest 386
Semi-evergreen forest 182
Deciduous forest 543
Other forest 552
Grassland 181
Dry season rice 6
Rain fed rice 1,538
Other crop 85
Village 60
Water 10
Total 3,542

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 6

Table 2.3: Forest cover (1993-2005)


Forest cover Rate of change
1993 1997 2002 2005 1993-97 1993-2002 1993-2005
km2 km2 km2 km2 percent percent percent
Evergreen forest 224 224 395 386 0,0 4,8 4,6
Semi-evergreen forest 298 298 186 181 0,0 -3,2 -3,3
Deciduous forest 427 427 549 543 0,0 3,5 3,3
Other forest 996 973 516 552 -0,6 -13,5 -12,5
Non-forest 1.598 1.621 1.895 1.879 0,6 8,4 7,9
Total 3.542 3.542 3.542 3.542 0,0 0,0 0,0

'0,0' means 'less than 0,005'

2.4 Irrigation
This section relates to ToR, Task 1: Collection of general data and information

Related data (submitted electronically)


Irrigation.xls Wet and dry season irrigated areas (actual and potential)

Many of the schemes were registered and evaluated under the so-called Halcrow
study in 1994, conducted for the Mekong Committee (today's MRC). Some of
them, including most candidate sub-projects, were re-visited and evaluated under
NWISP in 2003. These studies are still relevant. When using them, however, it is
noted that in some cases, both the scheme and the commune(s) have changed their
names. The UTM coordinates provide the best identification.

Irrigation schemes are shown in the following table and figure. Additional
information (including coordinates and water source) are included in the
corresponding electronic file.

An overview of water management structures is given in Appendix 3.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 7

Figure 2.5: Irrigation schemes in Dauntri Sub-basin

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 8

Table 2.4: Irrigation schemes in Dauntri Sub-basin


District Name Commune Existing Potential Status
Wet (ha) Dry (ha) Wet (ha) Dry (ha)
Moung R. Po Canal, Ream Kun Chrey, Ta Lass 400 0 2.500 0 2
Moung R. Don Try Chrey, Ta Lass 70 20 1.550 0 1
Moung R. Ta Nak Kear 8 0 65 0 2
Moung R. Our Beng Kear 20 0 20 0 2
Moung R. Our Veng Kear 0 0 50 0 1
Moung R. Ream Koun Kear, Chrey, Prey Svay 190 0 4.700 0 2
Moung R. Kbal Mus Moung 0 0 300 0 1
Moung R. Prek Ta Am Moung 400 0 1.000 0 3
Moung R. Anglong Koub Muong Reusei 0 450 1.350 0 2
Moung R. Basac Reservoir Prek Chik 0 0 3.500 0 1
Moung R. Or Rum Chek Prek Chik 0 0 0 30 1
Moung R. Tracheak Chett Prek Chik, Prek Talach 0 0 1.900 0 1
Moung R. Srer Sdao Prek Chik, Robas 0 0 500 0 1
Mongko
Moung R. Prek Chik Prek Chik, Ruessei 490 0 18.470 0 CS, 2
Kran
Moung R. Chhouk Prey Svay 0 0 240 0 1
Moung R. Tum Leng Prey Svay 0 0 100 0 1
Moung R. Rum Chek Prey Svay 0 0 90 0 1
Moung R. Chay Vay Prey Svay 0 0 90 0 1
Moung R. Taserk Prey Tralach 0 0 900 0 1
Moung R. Prey Tralach Prey Tralach 0 0 2.700 0 1
Moung R. Cheang Chaot Prey Tralach 0 0 40 0 1
Moung R. Pov Eang Prey Tralach 0 0 100 0 1
Moung R. Mokh Rea Prey Tralach 0 0 100 0 1
Moung R. Prey Klot Prey Tralach 0 0 100 0 1
Moung R. Tramkong Reusei Krang 0 0 740 0 1
Moung R. Nikom Le Reusei Krang 0 0 330 0 1
Moung R. Dai Ta Chan, Kampang Reusei Krang 50 0 300 0 2
Moung R. Dam Nak Angkrong Rubos Mungkoul 40 0 550 0 2
Moung R. Beung Ktum Rubos Mungkoul 0 0 25 0 1
Moung R. Sdei Ta Lass 0 0 400 0 1
Moung R. Brour Lay Sdao Ta Lass 50 0 95 0 2
Bakan Kroch Seuch Boeng Bat Kandaol Unknown Unknown 132 0 CS
Bakan Vaot Chre Boeng Khnar Unknown 400 1
Bakan Boeng Khnar Boeng Khnar Unknown Unknown 0 0
Bakan Koah Khsach Me Toek 0 0 100 30 3
Bakan Vaot Leab Me Toek 0 0 335 170 3
Bakan Boeng Kanthor Me Toek 0 0 382 73 3
Bakan Roneam Prayol O Ta Paong Unknown Unknown 300 0 CS
Bakan Anlong Svay Rom Leach Unknown Unknown 220 0 CS
Total (ha) 1.718++ 470++ 44.674 303

++: Figure may be higher, but data coverage is incomplete

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 9

Speech by the PM visiting the Damnak Ampil irrigation system on 5 October 2006

Today I have a great pleasure to be with you all to inspect an irrigation system at Damnak Ampil that
is very important for the irrigation of three districts of Sampeo Meas, Ba Kaan and Phnom Kravanh of
Pursat, covering a total area of about 27467 hectares of rainy season rice and another 1500
hectares of dry season rice. ... I first came to this place 21 years ago and again in June, 2005. I
remember seeing a bad road condition and dilapidated irrigation system in those days ... As time has
come, ... the system has now been almost completed.
... Rice cultivation this year in this area as well as throughout the country seems to be better in
general. HE Chhay Saret reported just now that the area of cultivation this year is 7488 hectares or
93.90% of the total cultivation land. This is great news. As far as the irrigation system is concerned,
we are happy because of the fact that the system serves not only as water channel but also road
access. Take for instance we used to have a ferry boat to cross the river here and now we have a
bridge. Since the area is quite granted with natural availability, perhaps there would be room for
development that might attract tourists to this area in the near future. This proves that we have put
our country on a correct path of development ...
According to HE Chan Sarun, Minister for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, last year we have
collected about six million tons of paddy rice or two million tons more than local consumption
demand. This amounts to 1.3 million tons of milled rice in conversion. This was the result of rice
cultivation on 1.8 million hectares of land. But this year we have increased the area of cultivation to
2.13 million hectares or about 30,000 hectares more than last year. The state of the rice is in good
prospect. Therefore it is worth mentioning with confidence that the rice harvest this year would also
be increasing.
I would take this opportunity to share with you that agriculture in the last few years has played a very
important role in the country's economic development. Land for cultivation has increased from 70,000
hectares to 900,000 hectares. We should try to enlarge land for cultivation in area with irrigation
coverage and also deal with areas where irrigation is still a problem so that the total area of
agricultural production will play an increasingly important economic role.
Irrigation is important for agriculture and we have to do everything we can to get the irrigation in
place.
I have come frequently to this place and once I said to the people from Satre commune about the
possibility of swapping their long-term rice cultivation to that of short-term rice cultivation. According
to statistics I wish to share with you that the area of cultivation under short-term rice species has
increased, though we maintain to grow long-term rice in high-level of water fields. Area where level of
water accessibility is low, the Royal Government has advised our people to opt for short-term rice
cultivation. What remains to be our focus has been to guarantee food security level in the country
and we have made a great achievement in this endeavor because we were able to have a surplus
even in the worst year of 2000, 2002 or even in 2004.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 10

3 Hydrology

3.1 Data
This section relates to ToR, Task 2: Collection of hydro-meteorological and hydraulic data and
information

Related data (submitted electronically)


R@9stations-allyears.xls Daily, monthly and annual rainfall at Battambang (8 years), Kg
Chhnang (55 years), Pursat (60 years), Krakor (36 years), Kravanh
(10 years), Svay Donkeo (6 years), Talo (6 years), Bamnak (15
years) and Boeung Khnar (7 years)
R@Pursat-12-05 Daily and monthly rainfall data from Pursat 1912-2005 (53 years),
with summary statistics
R@16stations-01-04.xls Monthly rainfall data from 16 stations from 2001-2004 (4 years), with
summary statistics
R@3stations-7years.xls Monthly rainfall data from Battambang, Pursat and Kg Chhnang,
from 1939, 1996, and 2001-05 (7 years)
E@2stations-96-04.xls Daily and monthly evaporation at Pochentong 2000-04 and Siem
Reap 1996-2000
WL@KgChhnang-95-04.xls Daily water level at Kg Chhnang 1995-2004 (10 years)
WL@PrekKdam-95-04.xls Daily water level at Prek Kdam 1995-2004 (10 years)
Q@PrekKdam-64-73.xls Daily and monthly flow at Prek Kdam 1964-73 (10 years)
WL-Q@Boribo-98-05.xls Daily water level and calulated flow at Boribo (St. 590101) Jun 98 -
Dec 05 (7.5 years)
WL-Q@Maung-01-02.xls Daily water level and calulated flow at Maung Russey (St. Dauntri)
(St. 5501101) Jun 01 - Dec 02 (1.5 years)
Q@4stations.xls Flow records from St. Boribo (91 months), St. Dauntri (19 months),
and St. Pursat (72 and 58 months)

3.2 River network and catchment delineation


This section relates to ToR, Task 9: Hydrological analysis

The river network has been established on the basis of satellite (RADARSAT-1)
images; aerial photos (where available); and topographical maps 1:50,000 and
1:100,000. In addition, several reconnaissance visits have been made to locations
where there was doubt about the network.

In addition to the detailed network, which forms the basis for the catchment
delineation, a simplified network (of main rivers and streams) has been derived as a
basis for the hydrological analysis.

Results are shown below.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 11

Figure 3.1: River network, Dauntri Sub-basin (detailed and simplified)

St Svay
Don Keo

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 12

In connection with the present study, the catchment boundary has been revised as
follows:
1. Southern part of the Stung Dauntri Basin: The revision is based on the DTM
model and check with contour lines. From the contour lines, the water at the
revised area is drained to Stung Pursat Basin and not to Stung Dauntri Basin.
2. Eastern part of the Stung Dauntri Basin: The revision is based on the DTM
model and check with the satellite images, aerial photographs, river network
and field check. Some part of the basin boundary followed along the roads
and some other parts follows the levee of the rivers. The water at the revised
area is drained to Stung Pursat Basin and not to Stung Dauntri Basin.
3. Western part of the Stung Dauntri Basin: The revision is based on the DTM
model and check with the satellite images, aerial photographs, river network
and field check. Some part of the basin boundary follows the levee of the
rivers. The water at the revised area is drained to Stung Sangke Basin through
O Say river.
4. North-western part of the Stung Dauntri Basin: The revision is based on the
DTM model and check with the satellite images and aerial photographs. The
revised basin boundary follows the levee of the rivers. The water at the
revised area is drained to Stung Dauntri Basin.

The picture below illustrates the revised area. The red color boundary is the new
boundary and the black color is the old one (taken from MRC). The difference
between the areas is as follows:

Old Sub-basin boundary (MRC): 3,695.97 km2

New Sub-basin boundary (present study): 3,541.91 km2

Figure 3.2: Comparison between sub-basin boundaries

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 13

The sub-basin receives water from the adjacent Pursat Sub-basin via the Damnak
Ampil Canal (please refer to section 4.6, regulation), and also via a natural offtake
located downstream of this canal. During high stages, this offtake diverts water
from St. Pursat across the catchment boundary and into Ou Souphi (in the Dauntri
Sub-basin), and further to Ou Bakan and St. Kambot. This offtake is shown in the
figure below.

Figure 3.3: Ou Souphi Offtake

National Road 5

Sub-basin boundary
Ou Souphi

Railway
Damnak
Ampil Canal
St. Pursat

1 km

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 14

3.3 Rainfall and evaporation


This section relates to ToR, Task 9: Hydrological analysis

Related data (submitted electronically)


R@9stations-allyears.xls Daily, monthly and annual rainfall at Battambang (8 years), Kg
Chhnang (55 years), Pursat (60 years), Krakor (36 years), Kravanh
(10 years), Svay Donkeo (6 years), Talo (6 years), Bamnak (15
years) and Boeung Khnar (7 years)
R@Pursat-12-05 Daily and monthly rainfall data from Pursat 1912-2005 (53 years),
with summary statistics
R@16stations-01-04.xls Monthly rainfall data from 16 stations from 2001-2004 (4 years), with
summary statistics
R@3stations-7years.xls Monthly rainfall data from Battambang, Pursat and Kg Chhnang,
from 1939, 1996, and 2001-05 (7 years)
E@2stations-96-04.xls Daily and monthly evaporation at Pochentong 2000-04 and Siem
Reap 1996-2000

Rainfall
The long-term record from Pursat has been chosen as the basis for the water
balance analysis presented in this study. The rainfall in Dauntri Sub-basin can be
estimated as the rainfall in Pursat minus 6 percent.

Hereby, the analysis builds on (i) 53 years of 'good' data (which is fully
acceptable); (ii) a relatively safe estimate of the 4-out-of-5 years rainfall; (iii)
another relatively safe estimate of the variation along the Great Lake; and (iv) a
less safe assumption that the rainfall is homogenous within the sub-basin.

The resulting estimate of rainfall in the study area is shown below.

Table 3.1: Distribution of annual rainfall, Dauntri Sub-basin (mm)


1986 4 of 5 yrs Average 1995
Year 819 1.055 1.241 1.956
Jan 0 3 3 0
Feb 0 4 5 23
Mar 5 33 39 33
Apr 18 62 73 67
May 77 120 141 224
Jun 119 105 124 161
Jul 88 111 131 268
Aug 188 145 170 210
Sep 142 189 222 398
Oct 101 181 212 369
Nov 44 88 104 173
Dec 36 14 17 30

Data: Estimated as Pursat minus 6 percent

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 15

Evaporation
Evaporation data are sparse. The following figure and related table are based on 9
station-years of 'accepted' data from two different stations - Battambang and
Pochentong, which are located on each side of the study area. There was no overlap
between the 'accepted' records, but the difference between the stations remained
within 5 percent on an over-all average basis. The average variation from one year
to another on a monthly basis was +/- 24 percent.

Table 3.2: Pan evaporation (mm)


J F M A M J J A S O N D Year
Lowest 112 110 114 137 120 115 116 83 97 105 83 93 1,543
Average 130 135 167 163 154 143 151 139 128 124 125 133 1,691
Highest 156 184 217 203 200 167 167 171 155 147 150 183 2,000

Data: Battambang (1996-2000) and Pochentong (2001-04) (9 years)

The actual evaporation will be less than the pan evaluation values, depending on
the so-called pan coefficient and also on the vegetation cover (that varies very
much over the year in the study area). In view of the uncertainties, a conservative
estimate of 0.7 times the pan evaporation has been applied.

3.4 Streamflow
This section relates to ToR, Task 9: Hydrological analysis

Related data (submitted electronically)


WL-Q@Boribo-98-05.xls Daily water level and calulated flow at Boribo (St. 590101) Jun 98 -
Dec 05 (7.5 years)
WL-Q@Maung-01-02.xls Daily water level and calulated flow at Maung Russey (St. Dauntri)
(St. 5501101) Jun 01 - Dec 02 (1.5 years)

Rating curves from St. Pursat and St. Dauntri have been considered.

St. Pursat
There is no indication that Bac Rating curve Stung Pursat at Bak Trakoun
Trakoun station is subject to Q=f(H), data from 1998,1999, 2001

back water effects. Further 6.00

Carbonnel and Guiscafre 5.00


suggest that the rating curve is
Gauge height [m]

4.00
of the type Q=f(H), where H is
3.00
the water level at Bac Trakoun.
The correlation coefficient is 2.00

very good, 0.99. The formula 1.00

reads (JICA 2004): 0.00

Q = 25 .5 ⋅ (H BakTrakoun − 0.0856 )
0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00
2
Q [m3/s]

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 16

St. Dauntri
The rating curve at Maung is Rating curve Stung Dauntri at Maung, Q=f(H)
suggested to be of the type
3.
Q=f(H) (Carbonnel and
Guiscafre). It means that there 2.5

are no back water effects at the

Gauge height [m]


2.

station. Despite very few data


1.5
from year 2001, a rating curve
has been established (JICA 1.

2004). The rating curve has the 0.5


formula:
( )2
0.

Q = 12.4 ⋅ H Maung − 1.2439 0 5 10


Q [m3/s]
15 20

At the gauging location, the flow in St. Dauntri appears to be highly variable, with
a peak of 323 m3/s (on 27 Oct 02), as compared with an average flow of 7,87 m3/s
and a median flow of 2,36 m3/s. The corresponding specific yield is 6,5 l/s/km2 or
169 mm/year (average) and 1,9 l/s/km2 (median). The variation of the monthly
average flow is shown in the Figure below.

Figure 3.4: Monthly average flow, St. Dauntri

50

40

30

20

10

0
J F M A M J J A S O N D

Data: Maung (St. 5501101), catchment area 1214 km2, June 01-Dec 02

Rainfall versus discharge


The runoff in a catchment is clearly a result of the amount of rainfall. However, in
terms of establishment of a relation between the rainfall and runoff, the outcome
may be more of less successful. The reasons are several: The selected rainfall
station(s) may not be representing the entire catchment, the infiltration rate may be
unevenly distributed throughout the catchment, and there may be flow regulation
and storage occurring, just to mention a few.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 17

The relation between the rainfall and runoff is likely to be better on bi-weekly or
monthly time scale rather on a daily scale. One source of uncertainty in the present
study is that the discharges are mostly rated and that the number of rainfall stations
are few and of different quality.

3.5 Regulation
This section relates to ToR, Task 9: Hydrological analysis

The Damnak Ampil Canal


The Damnak Ampil Canal was built under Khmer Rouge between Maung and St.
Pursat. Part of it has been restored, and a diversion weir is in an advanced stage of
completion across St. Pursat to feed the canal (where the flow went in the opposite
direction in the past). The structure will also provide water to irrigation systems on
the right bank of St. Pursat. The project is a government project implemented by
MOWRAM.

So far, 7.7 km of the canal has been restored from Damnak Ampil and towards
Svay Don Keo. Later on, it will be restored further all the way to Svay Don Keo.
The width of the canal is app. 10 m, and the slope is 0.0002 m/m.

Water is distributed by a network of new and old 2nd order gates and canals.

Figure 3.5: Structures along the Damnak-Ampil Canal

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 18

Figure 3.6: The Damnak Ampil Canal and regulator under construction (6 July 06)

No data for the canal or its diversion structure on the Pursat river was available to
the consultant. However, upon physical inspection of the canal and intake site, as
well as with the available flow data from the Pursat river, it was possible to provide
an estimate of the flow in the irrigation canal. The subsequent diversion of the
canal flow into the catchment has been assumed.

The extent of the Damnak-Ampil canal (in its full extent during KR times) is seen
in the figure below. The length the canal that has been restored as per 2006 is also
indicated. It is seen that the canal is going to influence the water availability in the
upstream catchments in the Kreuch Sauch and Anlong Svay areas.

The photos show the conditions of the canal during the field visit in June 2006.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 19

Along the restored reach, 3 pairs (one on each side of embankment) of secondary
gates were observed. The purpose of these gates is to convey flows into the paddy
field areas on both sides of the canal. A typical layout of one of these gates is seen
in the bottom-left photo. At some reaches flooding outside the laft embankment
could be observed. The water level in this areas was significantly higher than in the
canal.

As mentioned, no data of flow capacity were available to the consultant. Hence the
canal capacity was estimated using Manning’s formula and the observed cross
section geometry.

The canal is approximately 10 m wide. The water depth at the time of visit was
app. 1.75 m. Information from the provincial department in Pursat reveals that the
slope of the canal is 0.0002. Assuming a roughness coefficient of n=0.02, the canal
flow capacity can be computed as follows :

Q = 1/n * A * R2/3 * S1/2

where n: is Manning’s roughness coefficient


A: is cross section area
R: is hydraulic radius (~D*W/(2D+W), where D is depth and W is width )
S: is canal slope (m/m)

Using the Manning’s formula with the above assumptions gives a flow of app. 15
m3/s.

Figure 3.7: The Damnak-Ampil Canal from Pursat River to Prek Chik

Dark dots are candidate sub-projects

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 20

Obviously the canal can not carry this flow at all times, as it will be dependent on
the flows in the Pursat river. An attempt to derive a monthly variation of the
irrigation canal flow has been made. First, the discharge rating curve for Pursat
river at Pursat as derived by the WUP-JICA study was used to produce a daily
rated discharge for three years, 2001-2003. Then the daily discharge on monthly
basis was derived for each of these years, and finally the average daily discharge
on monthly basis was derived, see the table below. A sound judgement of a
possible water intake into the canal for each month was hereafter applied.

Figure 3.8: Photos from the Damnak-Ampil Canal

Damnak-Ampil canal near Pursat River Gates on Damnak-Ampil Canal

Section of the restored canal Flooding outside of the embankment

Gates towards paddy fields Un-excavated part of the canal

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 21

Table 3.3: Assumed flow from Pursat River into the Damnak-Ampil Canal

Average daily flows, based on Average of Assumed abstracted


rated discharge [m3/s] years 01-03 flow from Pursat river
Month Year [m3/s] [m3/s]
2001 2002 2003
January 20.8 9.5 8.7 13.0 8
February 9.6 6.2 16.0 10.6 5
March 51.7 3.8 11.3 22.2 5
April 13.2 8.2 16.5 12.6 5
May 17.2 13.9 23.0 18.0 8
June 37.6 13.0 12.9 21.2 10
July 64.7 17.4 104.4 62.2 15
August 75.6 54.4 86.6 72.2 15
September 88.2 79.0 104.6 90.6 15
October 279.1 99.4 424.9 267.8 15
November 60.1 65.9 35.3 53.8 15
December 16.4 23.3 18.3 19.3 10

The geographical position of the pairs of secondary gates along the Damnak-Ampil
canal were recorded during the field trip in June 2006.

Please refer to Appendix 3 for an overview of regulation in each of the catchments


of the sub-basin. Details are provided in the thematic 'Sub-basin map', submitted
separately.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 22

4 Water uses and water balance

4.1 Water uses


This section relates to ToR, Task 18: Quantification of consumptive and non-consumptive water uses

Related data (submitted electronically)


Area-population.xls Area and population (2002-04) within the study area; buffaloes,
cows, horses, goats, pigs, and poultry; families using fertilizer; by
province, district and commune
Agriculture-2006.xls PRD survey Jul-Aug 2006: Cultivation practices; cropping cycles;
labour input; livestock; use of fertilizers and pesticides; farmgate
prices; obstacles to cultivation
Domesticdemand.xls Present and projected domestic water demand in each sub-basin

Domestic water uses


An attempt has been made to illustrate the possible development of domestic
demand. The following assumptions have been made:
• The actual long-term population growth within the sub-basin, including the
effect of migration, will be between nil and 2 percent per year
• The unit demand will increase by between 1 and 2 l/p/d per year

If so, as seen in the table below, the future domestic demand will be somewhere
between 3 and 6 times the present demand.

This is still a small part of the available water in the area, but the increase must be
kept in mind in connection with the predicted increased demand for other purposes,
particularly irrigation.

For long-term planning, a 'strategic priority allocation' could be considered,


perhaps of 60-80 l/p/d. This is believed to be a realistic level, although it cannot be
safely predicted when it will be reached.

Table 4.1: Estimate of future domestic demand, Dauntri Sub-basin


Year Population Unit demand Total demand
High Low High Low High Low
estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate
2 pct/yr nil l/p/d l/p/d Mm3/year Mm3/year
2004 233.509 233.509 23 23 2,0 2,0
2009 257.813 233.509 33 28 3,1 2,4
2014 284.646 233.509 43 33 4,5 2,8
2019 314.272 233.509 53 38 6,1 3,2
2024 346.982 233.509 63 43 8,0 3,7
2029 383.096 233.509 73 48 10,2 4,1
2034 422.969 233.509 83 53 12,8 4,5

Data: The present unit demand of 23 l/d is from TSBMO (Mar 03); the present pupolation is from the
Commune Database; other values are estimates

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 23

Agricultural water uses


Agricultural water uses are by far the largest in terms of volume, and play an
important role in terms of social and economic value, including livelihoods.

Today, the agricultural water uses are limited both by the raw water availability
and by infrastructural constraints. In the course of time, however, as the
infrastructural constraints are gradually removed, the raw water availability will
become the sole limiting factor.

Distribution of water uses


Spatial and monthly distributions of present and future domestic demand, livestock
demand and irrigation demand are inlcluded in Appendix 2.

4.2 Water balance


This section relates to ToR, Task 21: water balance for the sub-basins

Related data (submitted electronically)


D-W-balance-4of5yrs.xls Dauntri Sub-basin, calculated water balance, present conditions,
with water uses and availability, in 4 out of 5 years, whole sub-basin
and details
D-W-balance-scenarios.xls Dauntri Sub-basin, calculated water balance, alternative scenarios:
Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects, and impact of climate
change

MIKE Basin set-up


Water balances have been calculated using the MIKE Basin modeling system.
Please refer to Appendix 3 for a general description. The set-up for the present
study is shown in the following figure.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 24

Figure 4.1: MIKE Basin model of the Dauntri Sub-basin

The MIKE Basin model is divided into 21 sub-catchments with associated river
network as well as water uses. The sub-catchments follow largely internal
catchments divides, and are thus derived on basis of physical boundaries. In some
cases the topographical information was insufficient for a sub-catchment
delineation, instead the average distance to tributaries has been used.

During the field visits it was observed that the Damnak Ampil irrigation canal was
restored for a distance of about 7 km from Pursat river and into the catchment. The
water intake structure on the Pursat river was almost completed, and it is
anticipated that this canal will be in operation in year sometime in 2007. The
Damnak Ampil Canal is going to have a major impact on the available water in the
catchment. Although not confirmed, this canal is likely to be extended further to
the Svay Don Keo river. Since the is almost in operation, its presence and function
as a water supply source appears in all simulations except the first, which is
considered a base condition.

The figure below shows in schematic form the connection between the
subcatchments and their areas.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 25

Figure 4.2: Schematic representation of sub-catchments

C21 C26 C25


413 155 216

C20 C24 C23


45 6 196

C19 C18 C17 C8


122 28 504 156

C22 C12 C14 C15 C16 C2


186 74 27 24 191 367

C7 C6 C10 C1
331 104 95 184

C4
121

Sub-catchments are given by a number (eg. C21) and an area in km2 (eg. 413).
Grey: St. Kambot; yellow: Flow directly to the Great Lake; green: St. Svay Donkeo; red: St. Dauntri.
The Damnak Ampil irrigation canal and its entry points in the catchments are shown with red arrows

The calibration is made in two steps: First the NAM model is calibrated for the
Stung Sangker (the results from WUP-JICA is used). Then the calibrated
parameters were applied for the Dauntri catchment, and a comparison made
between the observed (only few measurements) and the simulated discharge, as it
was not possible to establish a rated discharge due to lack of water level data.

Rainfall-runoff model calibration


In the Dauntri – Svay Don Keo catchment there is only one station in which
discharges have been observed in recent times, namely at Prek Chik. This station is
located somewhat upstream in the catchment, and catches mainly flows from the
hilly areas. Further the station represents only approximately 20% of th entire
Dauntri – Svay Don Keo catchment. However, since this is the onle station within
the catchment which has flow measurements, this information should be used to
support the calibration of the model. The discharge measurements are few,
altogether 11 measurements measured in year 2001. This is hardly enough to base a
model calibration upon. An attempt to match the observed discharge with the NAM
model has been made, as illustrated in the figure below.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 26

In order to get in the order of the observed discharge, a very low runoff coefficient
had to be used (= 0.05). This value is questionable in itself, and it is not physically
justifiable to bring this value further down. It is seen from the figure that the model
predicts a discharge which is twice the recorded one. The explanation for this
ambiguity is likely to be found in the data basis, both the rainfall, and possibly the
observed discharge as well.

There are no rainfall stations in the mountain areas which could possibly improve
the model prediction. Also there are no further of water levels at Prek Chik made
available to the consultant to derive a rated discharge which could improve the data
basis for model calibration. Therefore, instead of attempting a further improvement
of the calibration on the sparse data basis described above, it was decided to apply
the calibrated NAM model parameters from the Stung Sangker catchment, which
were derived through the WUP-JICA study. This catchment is neighbouring to the
north of the Dauntri catchment. It was concluded in the WUP-JICA study that the
NAM parameters from the Stung Sangker calibration could be transferred to the
Stung Dauntri catchment. For illustration of the NAM calibration of the Stung
Sangker, please refer to Figure 5.6. The NAM parameters from the Stung Sangker
calibration are listed in Appendix 3.

The calibrated NAM parameters from Stung Sangker have been applied for the
entire Dauntri – Svay Don Keo catchment in the MIKE Basin model together with
the various water uses.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 27

Figure 4.3: Rainfall-runoff simulation for the Dauntri catchment


140.0

120.0
Simulated
Observed

100.0
Discharge [m3/s]

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0
01-01-98 01-01-99 01-01-00 01-01-01 01-01-02

Figure 4.4: Simulated and observed discharge in Stung Sangker at Battambang

600.0

500.0 Observed
Simulated

400.0
Discharge [m3/s]

300.0

200.0

100.0

0.0
01-01-98 01-01-99 01-01-00 01-01-01 01-01-02

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 28

Water uses
The water uses that have been accounted for in the model are domestic, irrigation
and livestock water uses. The data from the commune data base have been used to
derive the above uses.

The principle in the MIKE Basin model is that the water uses in a given sub-
catchment draws water from a particular node, in this case the catchment nodes.
Hence all the water uses in a sub-catchment takes water from the same sub-
catcment node, which is always located in the downstream end of the sub-
catchment. Since the sub-catcments are based on physical boundaries and the water
uses are based on commune data, it has been necessary to calculate the fractional
contribution of each commune to each of the sub-catchments. The commune data
(eg. number of persons) are then assumed to be evenly distributed in the
communes.

Domestic water uses: It is assumed that each person presently consumes 23 l/d in
the catchment. On basis of the results from the Boribo – Thlea Maam catchment
modelling, which showed that future increase in domestic water use has only minor
effect on the water balance, it was decided not to make a scenario simulation with
inceased domestic water use.

Irrigation water use: Data for rainfed irrigation area, wet season irrigation area, dry
recession irrigation area and dry season irrigation area are available in the
commune data base. These data have been used for the estimation of the irrigation
areas in each of the sub-catchments. The present state of the irrigation systems
suggest that there are no return flows from the paddy fields. Hence the rain fed
irrigation areas can simply be taken out of the calculations, as the water use in there
areas does not affect and is not affected by the river flows.

In the present MIKE Basin model, the wet season irrigation, the dry recession
irrigation and the dry season irrigation areas have been included. It is assumed that
the wet season irrigation takes place between July and November, the dry recession
irrigation between December and February, and the dry season irrigation between
March and June. It is assumed for all categories that the water demand for
irrigation is 2 l/s/ha, and that the paddy fields are evenly distributed in the
communes. It is further assumed that there are no return flows from the paddy
fields.

Livestock water use: In the MIKE Basin model it is assumed that the major water
consuming livestock are cows, buffalos, pigs and poultry.

The Damnak Ampil Canal


The Damnak-Ampil irrigation canal is likely to convey flows from the Pursat into
the Dauntri - Svay-Don Keo catchment some time in year 2007. It is therefore
considered important to include the function of this canal into the model analysis.

A short description of the canal is provided in Section 4.6.

The schematisation of the Damnak-Ampil irrigation canal is made by defining a


river branch which at the upstream end starts outside the Dauntri catchment, i.e. in

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 29

the Pursat river. The river branch is then extended into the Dauntri catchment for
app. 7.5 km. The location of the 3 pairs of gates is used to determine which sub-
catchments will receive water from the canal. There is no distinction between gates
located on the left or right side of the canal. Hence, altogether three abstraction
points have ben defined along the river branch representing the Damnak-Ampil
Canal.

The flow abstracted from the Pursat river is assumed as indicated in Table 3.3
(Section 3.5). However, it is based on an assessment of both the capacity of the
channel (using Manning’s formula) and the water availability in the Pursat river.
The latter is derived using the extended flow record at Pursat. An underlying
assumption is that the the amount of water available at Pursat is likewise available
at the Damnak Ampil water intake.

The time-series of assumed abstracted flow from the Pursat river is fed into the
canal at its upstream (sutheastern) end.

A total of three abstraction points along he Ampil canal has been assumed. This
has been done in order to provide each of the three subcatchments which the canal
traverses with irrigation water. This corresponds approximately to the observations
made in the field, where sets of gates were observed along the channel. Since the
flow in the Ampil canal is assumed, it is subject to uncertainty. Therefore the flow
at the three abstractions points has been assumed to be equal.

The schematisation is shown in the figure below.

The water diverted from the irrigation canal is used for irrigation of paddy fields in
a reasonable vicinity of the canal. It is assumed that 30% of the abstracted flow is
returned to the local river systems. This additional water in the rivers will be
available for water use, for example for the proposed candidate sub-projects. If
return flows were neglected, the effect of the canal would be neutral in the
simulations.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 30

Figure 4.5: Schematisation of the Damnak-Ampil irrigation canal

Location of
abstraction
points for
irrigation

Water balance, present conditions


The MIKE Basin model has been used to compute a water balance for the sub-
basin on a monthly and annual basis, considering the rainfall, evaporation, inflow,
outflow, storage/losses and water uses.

The following table shows the summary of the water balance for the Dauntri –
Svay Don Keo catchment under the existing conditions. The conditions imply that
all existing water uses have been included. However, the Damnak – Ampil canal is
not included in this simulation.

It is seen from the table that the water uses in general constitute a small fraction of
the available water, at least on a yearly basis and during the wet season. In the dry
season – January to May, the water uses are of the same magnitude as the available
water. In March to May there are no outflows from the catchment. Both presently
(in some years) and in the future there is therefore competition for water in the
driest months of the year, as not all demands can be met. Proper planning of the
water allocation is therefore inevitable, if the situation is to be improved.

Conversely, as seen in table, in the period of June to November, that is in the wet
season, as well as a part of the recession period (December), there is plenty of
available water for irrigation water use or other uses. Presently most water in this
period flows into the Tonle Sap Lake, were it naturally serves other purposes.

The numbers in the table are based on precipitation data that represent a ‘4 out of 5
years’ situation, or 80 % reliability. This means that in 1 out of 5 years the water
availability may be less.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 31

Table 4.2: Summary water balance, base situation, 4 out of 5 years


Rainfall Evapo- Storage Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
ration and losses availability uses uses uses
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
January 3,9 19,6 -19,2 3,6 0,1 1,5 0,4 1,7
February 4,9 7,1 -4,4 2,2 0,1 1,5 0,4 0,3
March 45,2 45,2 -3,4 3,4 0,1 2,9 0,4 0,0
April 84,6 84,6 -3,4 3,4 0,1 2,9 0,4 0,0
May 163,2 135,7 24,2 3,4 0,1 2,9 0,4 0,0
June 143,6 126,9 10,3 6,4 0,1 2,9 0,4 3,0
July 151,4 111,1 -7,7 48,0 0,1 12,5 0,4 35,1
August 197,7 98,3 -12,3 111,6 0,1 12,5 0,4 98,7
September 256,7 77,7 29,4 149,6 0,1 12,5 0,4 136,7
October 246,8 85,6 50,6 110,6 0,1 12,5 0,4 97,7
November 121,0 102,3 -15,3 34,0 0,1 12,5 0,4 21,0
December 19,7 78,3 -67,5 8,8 0,1 1,5 0,4 6,9
Year 119,9 81,0 0,1 38,8 0,1 6,5 0,4 31,8
l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2 l/s/km2
January 1,1 5,4 -5,3 1,0 0,0 0,4 0,1 0,5
February 1,4 2,0 -1,2 0,6 0,0 0,4 0,1 0,1
March 12,6 12,6 -0,9 0,9 0,0 0,8 0,1 0,0
April 23,5 23,5 -0,9 0,9 0,0 0,8 0,1 0,0
May 45,3 37,7 6,7 0,9 0,0 0,8 0,1 0,0
June 39,9 35,2 2,9 1,8 0,0 0,8 0,1 0,8
July 42,0 30,8 -2,1 13,3 0,0 3,5 0,1 9,7
August 54,9 27,3 -3,4 31,0 0,0 3,5 0,1 27,4
September 71,2 21,6 8,2 41,5 0,0 3,5 0,1 37,9
October 68,5 23,7 14,1 30,7 0,0 3,5 0,1 27,1
November 33,6 28,4 -4,2 9,4 0,0 3,5 0,1 5,8
December 5,5 21,7 -18,7 2,4 0,0 0,4 0,1 1,9
Year 33,3 22,5 0,0 10,8 0,0 1,8 0,1 8,8
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
January 3 15 -14 3 0 1 0 1
February 3 5 -3 1 0 1 0 0
March 34 34 -2 2 0 2 0 0
April 61 61 -2 2 0 2 0 0
May 121 101 18 2 0 2 0 0
June 103 91 7 5 0 2 0 2
July 113 83 -6 36 0 9 0 26
August 147 73 -9 83 0 9 0 73
September 185 56 21 108 0 9 0 98
October 184 64 38 82 0 9 0 73
November 87 74 -11 24 0 9 0 15
December 15 58 -50 7 0 1 0 5
Year 1055 713 -14 356 1 58 3 294

The detailed water balance assessment for each individual sub-catchment is


presented in Appendix 4.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 32

Figure 4.6: Water availability, present conditions, April, m3/s

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 33

Figure 4.7: Specific water availabilty, present conditions, April (l/s/km2)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 34

Figure 4.8: Water availability, present conditions, September (m3/s)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 35

Figure 4.9: Specific water availabilty, present conditions, September (l/s/km2)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 36

Figure 4.10: Specific water availabilty, present conditions, annual (l/s/km2)

Water balance, future conditions


Apart from the implications of irrigation development (which is described in a
separate section below), water balances have been calculated for three development
scenarios:
• Implementation of the Damnak Ampil Canal;
• Implementation of the Damnak Ampil Canal and the canidate sub-projects;
and

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 37

• Implementation of the Damnak Ampil Canal and the canidate sub-projects in


connection with climate change - illustrated by tentative (and quite uncertain)
assumptions as described in Section 4.8.

Base situation with Damnak-Ampil Canal included: In this scenario, the Damnak-
Ampil irrigation canal has been incorporated in the model setup, to study the
influence of abstracting water from the Pursat river. The assumptons and technical
specifications for the canal are described in Section 4.6.

A summary of the water balance for this scenario is seen in the following table.
Detailed water balances for each sub-catchment are presented in Appendix 4.

The general conclusion when comparing to the base situation is that the canal
conveys sufficient water to the Dauntri – Svay Don Keo catchment, that there will
always be an outflow from the catchment as a whole. The outflow from the
catchment is increased in all months of the year, including the dry months. This
means that all present water demands can be met.

Table 4.3: Summary water balance with the Damnak Ampil Canal
Rainfall Evapo- Storage Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
ration and losses availability uses uses uses
[m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s]
January 3,9 19,6 -24,2 8,6 0,1 1,5 0,4 6,7
February 4,9 7,1 -8,6 6,4 0,1 1,5 0,4 4,5
March 45,2 45,2 -6,6 6,6 0,1 2,9 0,4 3,2
April 84,6 84,6 -7,5 7,5 0,1 2,9 0,4 4,2
May 163,2 135,7 17,3 10,2 0,1 2,9 0,4 6,9
June 143,6 126,9 -1,5 18,2 0,1 2,9 0,4 14,8
July 151,4 111,1 -22,7 63,0 0,1 12,5 0,4 50,1
August 197,7 98,3 -27,3 126,6 0,1 12,5 0,4 113,7
September 256,7 77,7 14,4 164,6 0,1 12,5 0,4 151,7
October 246,8 85,6 35,6 125,6 0,1 12,5 0,4 112,7
November 121,0 102,3 -25,9 44,6 0,1 12,5 0,4 31,7
December 19,7 78,3 -75,7 17,1 0,1 1,5 0,4 15,2
Year 119,9 81,0 -11,1 49,9 0,1 6,5 0,4 42,9

It is important to emphasize that while this holds true for the catchment as a whole,
it does not apply to the Dauntri river itself, which does not receive additional water
from the Pursat river. This is clearly seen in the tables of each individual sub-
catchment in Appendix 4.

Groundwater
No groundwater data has been available for the study wherefore a direct
assessment of this resource could not be made. Instead, the groundwater flow has
been determined indirectly through calibration of the NAM model. Practically this
is obtained by adjusting the various parameters until a reasonable fit exist between
observed total runoff and simulated total runoff. Through the various exchange
functions in the model (threshold values for overland flow, interflow and
groundwater flow) the groundwater flow (or base flow) comes implicitly as a
result.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 38

The figure below shows the simulated relative contribution of the groundwater
flow to the total runoff for Dauntri Sub-basin. The base case is shown. The table
below contains average monthly values of the ration between the groundwater flow
and the total runoff.

Figure 4.11: Ratio between groundwater flow and total runoff

Table 4.4: Monthy simulated ratio between groundwater flow and total runoff
Month Groundwater flow : total runoff
J 1
F 1
M 1
A 1
M 1
J 0.37
J 0.01
A 0.11
S 0.28
O 0.39
N 0.52
D 0.90

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 39

4.3 Candidate sub-projects


This section relates to ToR, Task 23: Assessment of impacts of each sub-projects on downstream water
uses; and Task 24: NWISP candidate sub-projects

Related data (submitted electronically)


D-W-balance-4of5yrs.xls Dauntri Sub-basin, calculated water balance, present conditions,
with water uses and availability, in 4 out of 5 years, whole sub-basin
and details
D-W-balance-scenarios.xls Dauntri Sub-basin, calculated water balance, alternative scenarios:
Damnak-Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects, and and impact of
climate change

There are four proposed candidate sub-projects in the catchment, namely Kreuch
Sauch, Anlong Svay, Roneam Prayol and Prek Chik.

Two sets of water balances have been calculated: One without an ssumed climate
change, and one including the (uncertain) effects of a climate change. Both sets
include the Damnak Ampil Canal.

Damnak-Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects included: This scenario


incorporates the Damnak Ampil Canal as well as the proposed candidate sub-
projects in the model. The candidate sub-projects are simply treated as the present
irrigation systems, namely with a demand of 2 l/s/ha and no return flows. Return
flows may occur in the future, but disregarding them is on the conservative side
with regards to water availability. The following table gives a summary of the
water balance for this scenario. For details, please refer to Appendix 4.

Table 4.5: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects
Rainfall Evapo- Storage Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
ration and losses availability uses uses uses
[m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s]
January 3,9 19,6 -24,2 8,6 0,1 1,9 0,4 6,3
February 4,9 7,1 -8,8 6,6 0,1 1,9 0,4 4,3
March 45,2 45,2 -7,0 7,0 0,1 3,3 0,4 3,2
April 84,6 84,6 -7,9 7,9 0,1 3,3 0,4 4,2
May 163,2 135,7 16,9 10,6 0,1 3,3 0,4 6,9
June 143,6 126,9 -1,5 18,2 0,1 3,3 0,4 14,4
July 151,4 111,1 -22,7 63,0 0,1 23,7 0,4 38,9
August 197,7 98,3 -27,3 126,6 0,1 23,7 0,4 102,5
September 256,7 77,7 14,4 164,6 0,1 23,7 0,4 140,5
October 246,8 85,6 35,6 125,6 0,1 23,7 0,4 101,5
November 121,0 102,3 -26,4 45,1 0,1 23,7 0,4 20,9
December 19,7 78,3 -75,7 17,1 0,1 1,9 0,4 14,8
Year 119,9 81,0 -11,2 50,1 0,1 11,4 0,4 38,2
The main conclusion for the catchment as a whole, in comparison with the previous
simulation described, is that the catchment outflows are reduced in the wet season,
whereas it is unchanged in the dry season. The reason for this is that there are no
dry season irrigation in the proposed candidate sub-projects, except at Prek Chik.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 40

However, looking at the detailed results for Stung Dauntri river, it can be
concluded that the Prek Chik candidate sub-projects will not be able to receive all
of its water demand. The insufficient amounts of water held back for the Prek Chik
candidate sub-project, has further as a consequence that downstream flows are
further reduced, extending the period with zero or near zero aoutflows from the
catchment.

The remaining candidate sub-projects Krouch Saeuch, Anlong Svay and Roneam
Mneash have sufficient water when combined with the Damnak-Ampil irrigation
Canal. Without the canal, the Anlong Svay candidate sub-projects will be short of
water in periods, whereas the demands from Krouch Saeuch and Roneam Mneash
are just fulfilled. However, the fulfilment for the latter two are on the expense of
flows downstream from these projects.

A detailed analysis can therefore be carried out in which the optimal allocation of
water at the three abstraction points along the Damnak-Ampil Canal is determined.

Damnak-Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects, and climate change: The assumed


changes are a decrease of 2 % in the rainfall and and an increase in evaporation of
2%. These changes have been imposed on the rainfall and evaporation series that
were used for the base situation simulation. No other changes have been considered
as compared with the previous scenario.

Results are shown in the table below. Detailed water balances for each sub-
catchment are presented in Appendix 2.

The climate change mainly involves a change in the catchment outflow during the
wet season, and to a lesser degree during the dry season.

Table 4.6: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects, and climate change
Rainfall Evapo- Storage Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
ration and losses availability uses uses uses
[m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s]
January 3,9 19,6 -24,0 8,4 0,1 1,9 0,4 6,1
February 4,9 7,1 -8,8 6,6 0,1 1,9 0,4 4,3
March 45,2 45,2 -6,9 6,9 0,1 3,3 0,4 3,2
April 84,6 84,6 -7,9 7,9 0,1 3,3 0,4 4,2
May 163,2 135,7 17,0 10,5 0,1 3,3 0,4 6,8
June 143,6 126,9 2,3 14,5 0,1 3,3 0,4 10,7
July 151,4 111,1 -11,5 51,8 0,1 23,7 0,4 27,7
August 197,7 98,3 -20,1 119,4 0,1 23,7 0,4 95,3
September 256,7 77,7 21,3 157,7 0,1 23,7 0,4 133,6
October 246,8 85,6 41,2 120,1 0,1 23,7 0,4 96,0
November 121,0 102,3 -22,8 41,5 0,1 23,7 0,4 17,4
December 19,7 78,3 -75,2 16,5 0,1 1,9 0,4 14,2
Year 119,9 81,0 -8,0 46,8 0,1 11,4 0,4 34,9

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 41

4.4 Water availability


This section relates to ToR, Task 24: NWISP candidate sub-projects

Related data (submitted electronically)


Subprojects.xls Water availability for candidate sub-projects, and irrigable areas

On the basis of the analyses described above, the present section elaborates on the
water availability for candidate sub-projects in the sub-basin.

St. Kambot
There is one candidate sub-project on this river: Krouch Saeuch. It is located within
the command area of the Damnak Ampil Canal.

Figure 4.12: Schematization of St. Kambot

Flow from Damnak Ampil Canal

Krouch Saeuch
scheme

Flow to the Great Lake

Not all the water available at each location should be used for irrigation. As
estimated in Section 4.1, the domestic demand may increase by a factor 3-6 within
a period of 30 years. Also, livestock breeding may increase. However, these
demands are small in comparion with the over-all water availability. Today,
between them, they are estimated at around 0,43 m3/s for the entire sub-basin. A 5-
fold increase would amount to 2.1 m3/s. They have been included in the
availability estimates in proportion to the catchment area of each scheme, not
because they are significant but in order not to forget about them.

The estimated, manageable water availability is shown in the following table.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 42

Table 4.7: Estimated water availability at Krouch Saeuch


Inflow From Damnak Ampil Other uses Manageable
low estimate high estimate low estimate high estimate
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) = (6) =
(1) + (2) - (4) (1) + (3) - (4)
J 0,0 1,6 2,8 0,09 1,5 2,7
F 0,0 1 1,8 0,09 0,9 1,7
M 0,0 1 1,8 0,09 0,9 1,7
A 0,0 1 1,8 0,09 0,9 1,7
M 0,0 1,6 2,8 0,09 1,5 2,7
J 0,1 2 3,5 0,09 2,1 3,6
J 2,0 3 5,3 0,09 4,9 7,1
A 5,3 3 5,3 0,09 8,2 10,5
S 7,3 3 5,3 0,09 10,2 12,5
O 5,3 3 5,3 0,09 8,2 10,4
N 1,2 3 5,3 0,09 4,1 6,4
D 0,3 2 3,5 0,09 2,2 3,7

Catchment area: 186km2 (St. Kambot)


(2): Assuming that 20 percent of the flow is directed to St. Kambot (could be more or less)
(3): Assuming that 35 percent of the flow is directed to St. Kambot (could be more or less)
The water availability is the estimated availability in 4 out of 5 years under present conditions, including
present withdrawals for irrigation; present and future withdrawals for domestic and livestock; and
excluding any future expansion of irrigation withdrawals

St. Svay Donkeo


The two candidate sub-projects are located upstream and downstream of each
other, as shown in the figure below. The water availability for the downstream one,
Roneam Prayol, is influenced by the implementation of the upstream one, Anlong
Svay.

In consequence, the water availability can conveniently be presented as


1 Water available for the Anlong Svay scheme; and
2 water available to share between this scheme and the Roneam Prayol scheme.

Hereby, the water available for Anlong Svay is included in the water available to
share between the schemes.

The two schemes are within the command area of the Damnak Ampil Canal, which
is manageable to within its capacity, subject to water being available at its intake.

The estimated water availability is shown in the following tables.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 43

Figure 4.13: Schematization of St. Svay Donkeo

Flow from
Damnak
Ampil Canal Anlong Svay
scheme

Roneam Prayol
scheme

Flow to the Great Lake

Table 4.8: Estimated water availability at Anlong Svay


Inflow From Damnak Ampil Other uses Manageable
low estimate high estimate low estimate high estimate
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) = (6) =
(1) + (2) - (4) (1) + (3) - (4)
J 0,2 2,4 4,0 0,19 2,4 4,0
F 0,0 1,5 2,5 0,19 1,3 2,3
M 0,0 1,5 2,5 0,19 1,3 2,3
A 0,0 1,5 2,5 0,19 1,3 2,3
M 0,0 2,4 4,0 0,19 2,2 3,8
J 0,6 3 5,0 0,19 3,3 5,4
J 5,3 4,5 7,5 0,19 9,6 12,6
A 12,7 4,5 7,5 0,19 17,0 20,0
S 17,1 4,5 7,5 0,19 21,4 24,4
O 12,6 4,5 7,5 0,19 16,9 19,9
N 3,6 4,5 7,5 0,19 7,9 10,9
D 0,9 3 5,0 0,19 3,7 5,7

Catchment area: 413km2 (St. Svay Donkeo)


(2), (5): Assuming that 30 percent of the flow is directed to St. Svay Donkeo (could be more or less)
(3), (6): Assuming that 50 percent of the flow is directed to St. Svay Donkeo (could be more or less)
The water availability is the estimated availability in 4 out of 5 years under present conditions, including
present withdrawals for irrigation; present and future withdrawals for domestic and livestock; and
excluding any future expansion of irrigation withdrawals

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 44

Table 4.9: Estimated water availability at Roneam Prayol


Inflow From Damnak Ampil Other uses To share
low estimate high estimate low estimate high estimate
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) = (6) =
(1) + (2) - (4) (1) + (3) - (4)
J 0,2 2,4 4,0 0,21 2,4 4,0
F 0,0 1,5 2,5 0,21 1,3 2,3
M 0,0 1,5 2,5 0,21 1,3 2,3
A 0,0 1,5 2,5 0,21 1,3 2,3
M 0,0 2,4 4,0 0,21 2,2 3,8
J 0,6 3 5,0 0,21 3,3 5,3
J 5,7 4,5 7,5 0,21 9,9 12,9
A 13,9 4,5 7,5 0,21 18,2 21,2
S 18,8 4,5 7,5 0,21 23,1 26,1
O 13,7 4,5 7,5 0,21 18,0 21,0
N 3,8 4,5 7,5 0,21 8,1 11,1
D 0,9 3 5,0 0,21 3,7 5,7

Catchment area: 458km2 (entire upstream area) (St. Svay Donkeo)


(2), (5): Assuming that 30 percent of the flow is directed to St. Svay Donkeo (could be more or less)
(3), (6): Assuming that 50 percent of the flow is directed to St. Svay Donkeo (could be more or less)
(5), (6): Water available to share between Anlong Svay and Roneam Prayol
The water availability is the estimated availability in 4 out of 5 years under present conditions, including
present withdrawals for irrigation; present and future withdrawals for domestic and livestock; and
excluding any future expansion of irrigation withdrawals

St. Dauntri
There is one candidate sub-project on this river: Prek Chik. The estimated water
availability is shown in the following table.

Figure 4.14: Schematization of St. Dauntri

Prek Chik
scheme

Flow to the Great Lake

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 45

Table 4.10: Estimated water availability at Prek Chik


Inflow Other uses Manageable
m3/s m3/s m3/s
(1) (2) (3) =
(1) - (2)
J 0,6 0,33 0,3
F 0,2 0,33 -0,1
M 0,1 0,33 -0,3
A 0,0 0,33 -0,3
M 0,0 0,33 -0,3
J 1,2 0,33 0,9
J 8,6 0,33 8,2
A 21,6 0,33 21,3
S 29,4 0,33 29,1
O 21,4 0,33 21,1
N 5,6 0,33 5,2
D 1,8 0,33 1,5

Catchment area: 728 km2 (entire upstream area) (St. Svay Dauntri)
The water availability is the estimated availability in 4 out of 5 years under present conditions, including
present withdrawals for irrigation; present and future withdrawals for domestic and livestock; and
excluding any future expansion of irrigation withdrawals

Table 4.10 indicates a visible water shortage in February through April. In this
connection, the thought has been raised whether the shortage can be mitigated by
extending the Damnak Ampil Canal all the way to St. Dauntri 1. Technically, this
may or may not be feasible, as far as in the past, the canal linked with St. Dauntri -
although with a flow direction that was the opposite of today's, so that the canal
drew water from St. Dauntri, rather than supplying water to it.

If it is possible to augment the flow in this way, it will obviously make a significant
difference to the benefit of the Prek Chik scheme. This is illustrated in Table 4.14
at the end of the following section.

4.5 Allocation of manageable flows


Manageable flow (or water availability)
The manageable flow is the water that can technically be withdrawn for off-stream uses at a given
river section.
The manageable flow is determined as the upstream generation of water (by net rainfall and storage
exchange) minus upstream off-stream uses.
The manageable flow is available to share between
• off-stream uses at the given river section
• off-stream uses downstream; and
• in-stream (non-consumptive) uses downstream.
The allocation can depend on the value generated, observation of exsiting water uses, and other
aspects.

1
Please refer to Section 3.5 for a description of the canal

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 46

Downstream water uses


The following table lists the estimated manageable flows downstream of each
candidate sub-project.

The table indicates that consumption exceeds the availability in the following
periods:
• St. Kambot: January through March;
• St. Svay Donkeo: January through June, and November; and
• St. Dauntri: February/March to May.

In these periods, the areas in question rely on inflow from upstream to serve their
demands.

In the rest of the year, the water availability exceeds the consumption, even in the
absence of inflow from upstream (in case that all water were diverted to the
candidate sub-projects).

St. Kambot and St. Svay Donkeo (with 3 of the candidate sub-projects) are within
the command area of the Damnak Ampil Canal. As illustrated in the previous
section, this canal makes quite a difference to the water availability.

Table 4.11: Manageable flows downstream of candidate sub-projects


Kr Saeurch AnlongSvay R Prayol Prek Chik
St. Kambot St. Svay Donkeo St. Dauntri
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
J -0,35 -0,04 -0,05 0,28
F -0,52 -0,20 -0,18 0,00
M -0,41 -0,85 -0,77 -0,34
A -0,44 -0,88 -0,79 -0,39
M -0,43 -0,87 -0,79 -0,37
J 0,12 -0,35 -0,34 0,54
J 3,45 0,93 0,53 5,13
A 9,38 6,55 5,34 15,03
S 12,93 9,91 8,21 20,94
O 9,29 6,46 5,27 14,88
N 2,10 -0,35 -0,56 2,88
D 0,19 0,47 0,39 1,18

Values are water generated in 4 out of 5 years minus present off-stream uses, extracted from MIKE
Basin baseline simulation (Appendix 4, Table A4.5)
Inflow from upstream not included
Negative values indicate that inflows from upstream are relied upon to serve present demand
Values include present estimated withdrawals for irrigation, domestic use and livestock
Contributions from the Damnak Ampil Canal are not included

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 47

In-stream water uses


Environmental flows (and other in-stream demands) have not been included in the
analysis. An allocation of (for example) 2 l/s/km2 (or 3.0 m3/s for the entire sub-
basin) would exceed the present water availability from December through June
and is simply not possible to achieve. On the other hand, 2 l/s/km2 is around the
flow required on the average for the entire Mekong Basin to keep the saline sea
water out of the Mekong Delta. It is an open question, however, how the
contributions to this flow should be functionally allocated within the Mekong
Basin, considering that much more water is available elsewhere.

Areas that can be irrigated with the available water


The area that can be irrigated with the available water will change from one month
to another, and will depend on the withdrawal demand. The withdrawal demand, in
turn, depends on the crops, the cultivation routines, the direct rainfall, and the
water losses in the irrigation system (conveyance losses, seepage and infiltration).

Today, during an average rainy season, the farmers can raise one purely rainfed
crop, although the yield is affected by water stress (which means that the water
availability is less than ideal). This indicates a present withdrawal demand of
somewhere around 0,5 l/s/ha minus direct rainfall - which would allow the farmers
to cultivate their present wet season rice crops, with the present yield, in years with
rainfall less than average.

Short- and medium-term rice varieties require more water than long-term varieties,
and dry season paddy cultivation requires more water that wet season cultivation,
whereas many crops other than rice require less water.

Withdrawal demands
According to MOWRAM's design manual for irrigation schemes (draft, Dec 03)
Crop water requirement: 1,700 m3/mth (December) to 2,300 m3/month (April),
or 0.6-0,9 l/s/ha, assuming a crop factor 1.1 for paddy and including percolation 2 mm/day
Over-all system efficiency: Varying between 60 percent to schemes up to 50 ha and 51 percent for
schemes above 400 ha
This gives a withdrawal demand of between 1.1 and 1.7 l/s/ha in December to April
The MOWRAM Manual notes that 'experience in other countries has indicated that crop yields are
not significantly reduced if water supplied is within 85-90% of optimum'.

The area that can be irrigated with a given amount of water can be calculated as the
rainfall deficit divided by the flow that is available. The rainfall deficit is the
difference between the irrigation demand and the direct rainfall. It is shown in the
following table for assumed withdrawal demands of 0.5, 1 and 2 l/s/ha. The former
value is an indication of present practices in the wet season, while the latter value
indicates possible future practices in the dry season.

Table 4.12: Rainfall deficit, Dauntri sub-basin


Withdrawal demand 0.5 l/s/ha 1 l/s/ha 2 l/s/ha
Rainfall Demand Deficit Demand Deficit Demand Deficit
(1) (2) (3) = (4) (5) = (6) (7) =
(2) - (1) (4) - (1) (6) - (1)
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
J 3 134 131 268 265 536 533

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 48

F 4 122 118 244 240 488 484


M 33 134 101 268 235 536 503
A 62 130 68 259 197 518 456
M 120 134 14 268 148 536 416
J 105 130 25 259 154 518 413
J 111 134 23 268 157 536 425
A 145 134 0 268 123 536 391
S 189 130 0 259 70 518 329
O 181 134 0 268 87 536 355
N 88 130 42 259 171 518 430
D 14 134 120 268 254 536 522

Note: Values are for 4 out of 5 years

The corresponding irrigable areas are shown in the following tables.

Table 4.13a: Irrigable areas (a), withdrawal demand 0.5 l/s/ha


Krouch Sauch Anlong Svay Roneam Prayol Prek Chik
to share
Low High Low High Low High
estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
J 3.097 5.552 4.917 8.191 4.888 8.162 561
F 1.890 3.441 2.706 4.774 2.663 4.731 0
M 2.426 4.416 3.473 6.127 3.418 6.072 0
A 3.504 6.380 5.018 8.853 4.938 8.772 0
M 29.130 52.220 42.500 73.286 42.096 72.882 0
J 21.699 37.504 35.507 56.580 35.224 56.297 9.500
J 57.213 83.507 111.771 146.828 116.140 151.198 96.064
A n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
S n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
O n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
N 25.783 39.803 49.103 67.795 50.281 68.973 32.698
D 4.908 8.258 8.214 12.681 8.348 12.815 3.271

n/a: Cultivation not limited by water availability (irrigation supplies not required)

Table 4.13b: Irrigable areas (b), withdrawal demand 1 l/s/ha


Krouch Sauch Anlong Svay Roneam Prayol Prek Chik
to share
Low High Low High Low High
estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
J 1.531 2.745 2.431 4.049 2.417 4.035 277
F 929 1.692 1.331 2.347 1.309 2.326 0
M 1.042 1.898 1.493 2.633 1.469 2.609 0

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 49

A 1.201 2.187 1.720 3.035 1.693 3.007 0


M 2.743 4.917 4.002 6.900 3.964 6.862 0
J 3.462 5.983 5.665 9.026 5.619 8.981 1.516
J 8.361 12.203 16.334 21.457 16.972 22.095 14.038
A 17.941 22.846 36.998 43.539 39.584 46.125 46.422
S 37.736 46.044 78.995 90.072 85.168 96.245 107.463
O 25.226 32.166 51.998 61.251 55.620 64.873 65.072
N 6.265 9.672 11.931 16.474 12.218 16.760 7.945
D 2.319 3.901 3.881 5.991 3.944 6.054 1.545

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 50

Table 4.13c: Irrigable areas (c), withdrawal demand 2 l/s/ha


Krouch Sauch Anlong Svay Roneam Prayol Prek Chik
to share
Low High Low High Low High
estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
J 761 1.365 1.209 2.013 1.201 2.006 138
F 461 839 660 1.164 649 1.153 0
M 487 887 697 1.230 686 1.219 0
A 519 945 743 1.311 731 1.299 0
M 975 1.749 1.423 2.454 1.410 2.441 0
J 1.291 2.232 2.113 3.367 2.096 3.350 565
J 3.088 4.507 6.032 7.924 6.268 8.160 5.185
A 5.641 7.184 11.633 13.690 12.446 14.503 14.596
S 8.042 9.813 16.835 19.196 18.151 20.511 22.902
O 6.176 7.876 12.731 14.997 13.618 15.883 15.932
N 2.492 3.847 4.746 6.553 4.860 6.667 3.160
D 1.128 1.898 1.888 2.915 1.919 2.946 752

As mentioned in Section 4.4, the possibility exists to increase the inflow to the Prek
Chik scheme by extending the Damnak Ampil Canal all the way to St. Dauntri. As
an illustration of the effect, an estimate has been made based on the tentative
assumption that Prek Chik receives an amount of 20 percent of the flow that is
diverted from St. Pursat for distribution via the Damnak Ampil Canal. (In rality, a
lower or a higher flow rate could equally well be assumed, since the system is
highly manageable).

Table 4.14: Irrigable area at Prek Chik assuming a supply from the Damnak Ampil Canal
Inflow From Damn. Other uses Manageable Irrigable area
Ampil Canal
(1) (2) (3) (4) = 0,5 l/s/ha 1 l/s/ha 2 l/s/ha
(1) + (2) - (3)
m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s ha ha ha
J 0,6 1,6 0,3 1,9 3.835 1.896 942
F 0,2 1,0 0,3 0,9 1.866 918 455
M 0,1 1,0 0,3 0,7 1.944 835 390
A 0,0 1,0 0,3 0,7 2.579 884 382
M 0,0 1,6 0,3 1,3 24.942 2.348 835
J 1,2 2,0 0,3 2,9 30.573 4.877 1.819
J 8,6 3,0 0,3 11,2 131.121 19.162 7.077
A 21,6 3,0 0,3 24,3 n/a 52.963 16.653
S 29,4 3,0 0,3 32,1 n/a 118.540 25.263
O 21,4 3,0 0,3 24,1 n/a 74.325 18.198
N 5,6 3,0 0,3 8,2 51.390 12.487 4.967
D 1,8 2,0 0,3 3,5 7.738 3.655 1.779

Example: If the withdrawal demand is 1 l/s/ha, the manageable flow in January is equivalent with an area of 1,896 ha
(2): Taken as 20 percent of the monthly withdrawal from St. Pursat. (This is an assumption rather than a recommendation)
n/a: Cultivation not limited by water availability (irrigation supplies not required)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 51

5 Morphology, floods and drought

5.1 Data
This section relates to ToR, Task 2: Collection of hydro-meteorological and hydraulic data and
information

Information about morphological processes was collected in July-August 2006 in


connection with the present study.

5.2 Morphology
Bank erosion and accretion takes place along the alluvial reaches of rivers and
streams, sometimes as a gradual process that proceeds for years in a predictable
way, and sometimes rather abruptly. In the present study area, the erosion rate is
generally slow to moderate.

Bank erosion can cause damage to property, buildings and infrastructure (including
irrigation infrastructure), while accretion can increase the flood risk and affect fish
habitats and mish migration.

Locations of particular erosion and accretion are shown in the figure below.

Figure 5.1: Erosion and accretion

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 52

5.3 Floods and drought


This section relates to ToR, Task 23: Assessment of impacts of each sub-project on downstream water
uses; and Task 24: NWISP candidate sub-projects

Related data (submitted electronically)


Agriculture-2006.xls PRD survey (Jul-Aug 06): Cultivation practices; cultivation areas;
cropping cycles; labour input; livestock; use of fertilizers and
pesticides; farm gate prices; obstacles to cultivation

Flooded areas in 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 are shown in a thematic map
(submitted separately).

Effects of floods and drought exist over most of the sub-basin, to an extent that
depends on the cultivation cycle. Normally, a drought is regarded as a drought only
if it occurs during cultivation. The effects vary from one village to another, over
short distances, often within each commune.

In general, drought problems are much more widespread and more frequent.

The following tables show drought-affected areas and the general occurrence of
floods and drought in the sub-basin.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 53

Table 5.1: Cultivation areas affected by floods and drought


Province District Commune 2005, flood Drought 2004, flood Drought
ha ha ha ha
Pursat Krokor AnsaChambak 15 66
Kbal Trach 20 137
Anlung Tnoat 28 25 92
Snar Ansar 24 8 270
Ou Sandann 18 164
Boeng Kantout … 250
Tnoat Chum … 265
Kampung Po 20 12 46
Cheu Tom 45 285
Svay Sor 20 251
Battambang Maung Reusey Maung 5622
Kear 3112
Prey Svay 5354
Reusey Krang 320 1987
Chrey 61 1629
Taloas 115 3180
Kokoah 2230
Robos Mongkol 2430
Prek Chik 2564
Prey Tralach 1200
Prey Toch 7798
Total: 496 190 45 38932

Data: District Agriculture Offices

Table 5.2: Occurrence of floods and drought


Province District Commune Village Flood Drought
Pousat Bakan Boeng Khnar Chamkar Leu 1994,96,97,2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Boeng Khnar Chamkar Leu 1996 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Boeng Khnar Ma 1997 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Boeng Khnar Rung 1996,97,2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Boeng Khnar Rung 1996 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Boeng Khnar Sakor 1996 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Boeng Khnar Sakor 1997 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Khnar Totueng Doem Roka 1996 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Khnar Totueng Doem Roka 1995,96,2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Khnar Totueng Phtek Sla 1996, 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Khnar Totueng Phtek Sla 1996,97,2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Meteuk Ma 1996 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Meteuk Meteuk 2000 Every year
Pousat Bakan Meteuk Oupreal 2000 Every year
Pousat Bakan Meteuk Trang 2000 Every year
Pousat Bakan Outapoang Sdock Khlock 2000 Every year
Pousat Bakan Outapoang Tanai 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Phtek Rong Thlok Donkor 0 Usally

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 54

Province District Commune Village Flood Drought


Pousat Bakan Phtek Rung Prey Kanlong 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Svaydaunkeo Chrab 1997 and 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Svaydaunkeo Chrab 2000 Usally
Pousat Bakan Svaydaunkeo Kampang 2000 Every year
Pousat Bakan Svaydaunkeo Nikumkrom 2000 Every year
Pousat Bakan Talor Burchres 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Talor Prey Rong 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Talor Prey Toa 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Talor Prey Veang 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Talor Thmey 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Trapeang Chong Bakan 2000 Every year
Pousat Bakan Trapeang Chong Kroal Krobei 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Trapeang Chong Pit Trang 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Trapeang Chong Snai Tol 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Trapeang Chong Thmey 0 Usally
Pousat Bakan Trapeang Chong Thmey Usally Usally
B.Bang Moung Russey Kear Kear Mouy 2000 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Kear Kear Mouy 0 2006
B.Bang Moung Russey Moung Pen 0 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Moung Russey Mouy 2000 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Moung Russey Mouy 0 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Prek Chik Chke Kham Prus 2000 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Prek Chik Chke Kham Prus 2004 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Prek Chik Prek Chik 0 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Prek Chik Prek Taven 0 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Robos Monkol Boeng Bei 0 2004
B.Bang Moung Russey Robos Monkol Boeng Bei 0 Every year
B.Bang Moung Russey Robos Monkol Prek Am 2000 2004

Data: 68 household surveys in Dauntri Sub-basin 2006


Flood damage: Damage to crops, livestock and infrastructure
Drought damage: Damage to crops and livestock disease
For details, please refer to data table Agriculture-2006.xls

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 55

6 Aquatic environment

6.1 Data
This section relates to ToR, Task 25: Exisiting WQ data and classification

Data used in the evaluation and assessment of the aquatic environment is mainly
from the commune database 2004 as presented in the previous chapters regarding
population and livestock estimates.

Besides this also satellite images from LandSat 2005 have been used in the analysis
including data on landuse from 1993, 1997 and 2002.

No water quality data have been available for the studied sub-catchments. Only
data from Tonle Sap Lake have been available to a limited extent.

The work has included:


• compilation and processing of input data for pollution load estimation;
• compilation and processing of input data for MIKE Basin Water Quality
model; and
• post-processing of simulation results.

The output of the MIKE Basin WQ model presented below is only covers the
Dauntri study area. The water balance used is based on the preceding water balance
calculations.

No monitoring data on water quality has been available for the study areas. Thus,
the results presented in the chapter do not reflect calibrated concentration level.
Instead pollution loads and water quality parameters have been adjusted to reach
expected concentrations levels based on measurements available from rivers in the
coastal area of Cambodia.

6.2 Pollution loads


This section relates to ToR, Task 26: Point and non-point sources

Related data (submitted electronically)


Area-population.xls Area and population (2002-04) within the study area; buffaloes,
cows, horses, goats, pigs, and poultry; families using fertilizer; by
province, district and commune
Agriculture-2006.xls PRD survey Jul-Aug 2006: Cultivation practices; cropping cycles;
labour input; livestock; use of fertilizers and pesticides; farmgate
prices; obstacles to cultivation

Cultivation areas
The available information for this project states that on average 1 crop is cultivated
per year. The areas and the corresponding estimates of fertilizer utilization are
listed below.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 56

Table 6.1: Distribution of areas for rice cultivation and estimated fertiliser application, per commune in
Dauntri catchment
ID PROVINCE DISTRICT COMMUNE Area Rice Rice Fertiliser P Fertiliser N
km2 ha pct kg/year kg/year
20601 Battambang Moung Ruessei Moung 39 6964 179 43811 125592
20602 Battambang Moung Ruessei Kear 96 3549 37 92053 263886
20603 Battambang Moung Ruessei Prey Svay 144 7577 53 172360 494099
20604 Battambang Moung Ruessei Ruessei Krang 163 9337 57 188680 540882
20605 Battambang Moung Ruessei Chrey 288 2538 9 64288 184292
20606 Battambang Moung Ruessei Ta Loas 52 1878 36 47334 135690
20607 Battambang Moung Ruessei Kakaoh 47 2823 61 71139 203932
20609 Battambang Moung Ruessei Robas Mongkol 124 5129 41 117087 335650
20610 Battambang Moung Ruessei Prek Chik 139 3719 27 83680 239883
20611 Battambang Moung Ruessei Prey Tralach 274 4102 15 117883 337932
21304 Battambang Koas Krala Doun Ba 151 10711 71 241004 690879
21306 Battambang Koas Krala Chhnal Moan 241 736 3 16571 47504
150101 Pursat Bakan Boeng Bat Kandaol 10 203 21 6856 19654
Dauntri

150102 Pursat Bakan Boeng Khnar 57 4122 73 76539 219412


150103 Pursat Bakan Khnar Totueng 54 3711 69 86400 247681
150104 Pursat Bakan Me Tuek 262 4856 19 97993 280914
150105 Pursat Bakan Ou Ta Paong 292 5812 20 142730 409158
150106 Pursat Bakan Rumlech 53 4470 84 104624 299921
150107 Pursat Bakan Snam Preah 12 121 10 6870 19693
150108 Pursat Bakan Svay Doun Kaev 30 6043 202 33594 96302
150109 Pursat Bakan Ta Lou 305 3332 11 144621 414580
150110 Pursat Bakan Trapeang Chong 70 5576 80 79171 226958
150401 Pursat Phnum Kravanh Bak Chenhchien 15 594 40 13376 38345
150403 Pursat Phnum Kravanh Phteah Rung 150 4007 27 90165 258474
150407 Pursat Phnum Kravanh Samraong 36 68 2 1538 4410
150503 Pursat Sampov Meas Lolok Sa 7 174 24 3920 11237
150602 Pursat Veal Veaeng Krapeu Pir 536 115 0 2579 7392
150604 Pursat Veal Veaeng Pramaoy 36 10 0 230 659

Data on rice cultivation are (i) from the commune database and (ii) collected from local agricultural authorities. Statistics refer to
the proportion of each commune that lies within the study area. Numbers for Moung and Svay Don Kaeo commune were not
correct since total cultivated area exceeded total commune area. Instead a cultivation percentage of 50 % pct have been
assumed for both communes

Pollutant loads
The pollution load calculated and load reaching the water bodies in the different
subcatchments are discussed in more detail in the following section.

To establish a priority programme of potential actions it is important to know the


main sources of pollution and the pollution load from these. It is especially
important to know the role and amount of the different sources of pollution for
determining priorities. Based on the estimations above and use of the Load Module
of the Mike Basin model the overall load of BOD, Total-nitrogen and Total-
phosphorus in the two sub-catchments have been estimated for the major pollution
sources. Furthermore, it has been used to calculate the amount of the separate
pollutants that ends up in the rivers and also for quantification of the pressure of
human activities for each of the sub-catchments. For each of the catchments also a
calculation has been made on the distribution of the calculated load between point
and non-point sources.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 57

Table 6.2: Overall generated load of BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus (t/year) in the
Dauntri catchment
Source BOD (T/y) Total-Nitrogen Total-
(T/y) Phosphorus (T/y)
Point sources NS NS NS
Non-sewered population 2850 520 170
Live stock (generated) 24150 3300 1060
Fertiliser (used) - 6480 2260
Background load incl. precipitation 1850 1850 190

A short discussion of the different potential sources and their significance is given
below considering the categories: point sources, non-sewered population,
background load including precipitation, livestock and fertiliser use.

Point sources
The present load from point sources is very low or non-existent for the moment but
potential point sources in the future could be wastewater treatment plants,
industries, and hotels giving rise to significant load to certain stretches of the
rivers.

Non-sewered population
The population today is not connected to a wastewater system and the pollution
load from this source will also end up in the river system after different forms of
reduction and decay which is considered as described above. The generated load
from this source of BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus can be estimated to 2850, 520
and 170 tons/year, respectively for the Dauntri Sub-basin.

Background load
As the nutrients are naturally occurring in the nature, the natural processes and
cycling of elements will contribute to the overall load of the catchments. These
estimations are based on findings from other areas.

Livestock
The livestock on the farms in the catchment areas contributes significantly to the
overall generated load of the river system. Based on the statistics described above
on livestock numbers in the households it can be estimated that approximately
24150, 3300 and 1060 tons/year of BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus, respectively,
are produced in the Dauntri Sub-basin.

Mineral fertiliser
Based on the received information regarding fertiliser use the amount applied make
up a significant proportion of the estimated generated load in each of the catchment
areas. Based on the area of agricultural land and the use of unit figures of nitrogen
and phosphorus application a total amount of 6480 and 2260 tons/year are used in
the Dauntri Sub-basin.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 58

Using the Load Module of Mike Basin the load of BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus
for the different sub-catchments in the two catchments have been calculated. The
figures also indicate in which sub-catchments the pressure from human activities
are most significant.

BOD
In the figure below the load of BOD is shown for each sub-catchment.

Figure 6.1: Amount of annual BOD load by sub-catchment

From this figure it can be seen that the BOD load reaching the receiving waters
will be biggest in sub-catchments covering the mid-stretches of the Dauntri
catchment and especially in the districts of Bakan and Moung Russei.

The figure also show the distribution of receiving water load between domestic and
non-point load. This shows clearly that in all sub-catchments the non-point load is
the highest.

In Table 6.3 below the estimated pollution load of BOD to each subcatchment of
the river is presented. The total load, the load for non-point pollution sources and
domestic load has been calculated.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 59

Table 6.3: Estimated BOD load reaching the river in each subcatchment
ID Name Area BODTotal BODNonPoint BODDomestic
km2 kg kg kg
1 Catchment1 185 78476 74802 3673
2 Catchment2 367 212861 184276 28586
3 Catchment4 121 77069 72782 4287
4 Catchment6 104 71841 66891 4950
5 Catchment7 331 217344 197220 20124
6 Catchment8 156 64560 60614 3945
7 Catchment10 95 57074 52473 4602
8 Catchment12 74 54663 50720 3943
9 Catchment14 27 21594 20266 1328
10 Catchment15 24 25852 23128 2724
11 Catchment16 191 133281 117050 16231
12 Catchment17 504 188462 169487 18975
13 Catchment18 28 28003 24927 3077
14 Catchment19 122 119405 108092 11313
15 Catchment20 45 37794 34255 3539
16 Catchment21 413 119111 106338 12773
17 Catchment22 186 157131 139879 17252
18 Catchment23 196 61865 61192 673
19 Catchment24 6 2102 2097 5
20 Catchment25 216 42833 42637 196
21 Catchment26 155 23074 22993 82

Figure 6.2: Map showing the location of the different sub-catchments of the Dauntri
catchment

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 60

Nitrogen
The highest contribution of nitrogen to the receiving waters originates in the sub-
catchments covering the districts of Moung Russei and Bakan.

Substantial differences in the receiving water load between the upper and some of
the mid-stretches of the Dauntri Sub-basin can be seen. Compared to the BOD load
there is indications that the proportion of nitrogen load from non-point sources
might be even more pronounced.

Figure 6.3: Amount of annual Total Nitrogen load by sub-catchment

In Table 6.4 below the estimated pollution load of total-nitrogen to each


subcatchment of the river is presented. The total load, the load for non-point
pollution sources and domestic load has been calculated.

Table 6.4. Estimated nitrogen load reaching the river in each subcatchment
ID Name Area N_Total N_Nonpoint N_Domestic
km2 kg kg kg
1 Catchment1 185 74001 73603 397
2 Catchment2 367 152864 149499 3365
3 Catchment4 121 57414 56945 469
4 Catchment6 104 46215 45714 501
5 Catchment7 331 145750 143431 2319
6 Catchment8 156 70179 69727 453
7 Catchment10 95 45184 44646 538
8 Catchment12 74 36852 36410 441

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 61

ID Name Area N_Total N_Nonpoint N_Domestic


km2 kg kg kg
9 Catchment14 27 14444 14298 146
10 Catchment15 24 16887 16567 320
11 Catchment16 191 102936 101008 1928
12 Catchment17 504 154872 152591 2281
13 Catchment18 28 18069 17705 363
14 Catchment19 122 73364 72014 1350
15 Catchment20 45 25411 24996 415
16 Catchment21 413 89829 88192 1638
17 Catchment22 186 79691 77551 2140
18 Catchment23 196 67394 67322 72
19 Catchment24 6 2353 2353 1
20 Catchment25 216 51698 51676 22
21 Catchment26 155 29653 29643 10

Phosphorus
The phosphorus load shows a similar pattern as for nitrogen when indicating the
pressure of human impact.

Again the highest overall phosphorus load to the river system is generated in
Moung Russei and Bakan districts.

Figure 6.4: Amount of annual Total Phosphorous load by sub-catchment

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 62

In Table 6.5 below the estimated pollution load of total-phosphorus to each


subcatchment of the river is presented. The total load, the load for non-point
pollution sources and domestic load has been calculated.

Table 6.5: Estimated phosphorus load reaching the river in each subcatchment
ID Name Area PtotTotal PtotNonPoint PtotDomestic
km2 kg kg kg
1 Catchment1 185 7176 6993 183
2 Catchment2 367 15857 14831 1026
3 Catchment4 121 7152 6925 227
4 Catchment6 104 5359 5145 214
5 Catchment7 331 18839 17896 943
6 Catchment8 156 8556 8347 209
7 Catchment10 95 5636 5428 208
8 Catchment12 74 4753 4566 187
9 Catchment14 27 2165 2090 74
10 Catchment15 24 3044 2898 146
11 Catchment16 191 13966 13262 704
12 Catchment17 504 16225 15448 778
13 Catchment18 28 3032 2873 159
14 Catchment19 122 11004 10503 501
15 Catchment20 45 3775 3606 170
16 Catchment21 413 6596 6235 362
17 Catchment22 186 10998 10338 660
18 Catchment23 196 4901 4869 32
19 Catchment24 6 205 204 0
20 Catchment25 216 2347 2341 6
21 Catchment26 155 1274 1271 3

The results above are estimates on pollutant loads entering the river. The results
give an indication on how the relative differences in concentration may look like
and which catchments may contribute relatively more than others to pollution
levels expected in the river system.

The plan plot showing pollutant loads entering the river system discriminates
between non-point and point types of sources. In general the plots indicate that
non-point sources in general are far more important than point sources (e.g.
domestic sources from population). However this cannot be verified but compared
to the above load amount generated it seems reasonably. However, a number of
local conditions may affect the transport and retention of different source types and
it is important to obtain monitoring data covering both low flow and high flow
periods in order to verify that this is also actually the case.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 63

6.3 Water quality


This section relates to ToR, Task 27: Aqautic environment in representative reaches

The different water uses require a raw water quality that is adequate for the
particular use, whether domestic, fisheries, industrial, or for agriculture. And most
water uses generate a return flow, the water being released as sewage from
households, businesses and industries, or as tailwater from irrigation systems and
mines.

A MIKE Basin Water Quality model was setup for the Dauntri study area based on
the water balance. The water balance is based on down stream discharges
calculated from the water level measurements and Q/h relations which are
available for 1998 – 2005. Calculated discharges have been translated into area
specific runoffs as input for the MIKE Basin model.

Results are summarised below and are elaborated in Appendix 5.

Water quality simulations


This section presents the results from the water quality simulations. Two types of
simulation results are presented.
• Time series plot for a selected location in the river
• Plan plot showing average and maximum concentrations

Below is shown the simulated concentrations of BOD, total-nitrogen and total


phosphorus.

The time series plot shown below indicated relative high concentrations of all the
simulated compounds in the dry season and reaching maximum concentrations in
May in the period with very low flow in the catchment.

BOD
The simulated average concentration of BOD during the present conditions show
that the concentration levels will increase in the lower reaches of the Dauntri
catchment and especially a small stretch in the mid-reaches will show relatively
high concentrations. The calculations indicate that an up to two to three times
increase might occur in the lower reaches of the catchment However the
calculation indicate using the assumptions given above that the present quality
conditions should be good in most of the catchment. During periods with low flow
the simulations indicate more or less the same pattern but higher concentration
levels.

Ammonia
The average annual concentrations of ammonia in the main part of the catchment in
general meets the requirements for good quality except some short stretches in
some of the branches where the quality might reach fair qulity. However, the
calculations indicate that in periods with low flow during the dry season the quality
conditions regarding ammonia might be poor as the levels found in the lower
reaches might be five to six times higher than the upper reaches

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 64

Figure 6.5: Time series simulation results for the outlet of St. Dauntri. Results for BOD,
ammonia, nitrate and total phosphorous

N3|BOD [mg/l]

25

20

15

10

2000 2001

N3|NH4 [mg/l]

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

2000 2001

N3|NO3 [mg/l]

1.5

1.0

0.5

2000 2001

N3|P_tot [mg/l]

1.0

0.5

2000 2001

Nitrate
Regarding nitrate the average concentrations indicates that good quality conditions
might occur in all river stretches except a small stretch on Svay Don Keo, where
the quality might be poor to bad.. The calculations indicate however that during the
dry season the quality conditions in the lower reaches will be decreasing showing
concentration levels higher than in the wet season.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 65

Total-phosphorus
The total-phosphorus concentrations in the upper parts of Dauntri show levels up to
approx. 2 times the less affected parts. However, it looks like good quality
conditions occur in most of the catchment. During the dry season an increase in
concentration level occurs in all the lower reaches of the catchment.

6.4 Implications of irrigation development


This section relates to ToR, Task 23: Assessment of impacts of each sub-projects on downstream water
uses

The impact of the candidate scheme on the water quality conditions will be
evaluated in the following. The candidate scheme evaluated includes all candidate
irrigation projects and allocation of water from Pursat River.

The comparison have been made under the assumption that all pollution loads and
retention in the system will be similar to the present situation, so that the only
change that will occur will be the changed water flow due to the irrigation
schemes.

The calculated changes in water discharge are shown in the figures below.
The figures show clearly that the discharge through the northern most branch of the
Dauntri catchment will be reduced during the rainy season for the candidate sub-
projects and also that the discharge in the dry season will be very low.
In some river stretches the water flow in the dry season increases compared to the
present situation due to the potential contribution from Pursat River. The difference
in water discharge in this area is indicated in the figure below for the present
situation and for the candidate sub-projects.

Figure 6.6: Simulated discharge for reference scenario (black) and the candidate sub-projects (blue) at
node 3 at the outlet of St. Dauntri

N3|Net flow to node - Candidate project [m^3/s]


N3|Net flow to node - reference [m^3/s]

50

40

30

20

10

2000 2001

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 66

Figure 6.7: Changes in water discharge at Node 185 from the present situation and the candidate scheme
including the irrigation schemes and allocation of water from Pursat River

The simulations indicate that relative small changes will take place in the
concentrations of BOD, ammonium, nitrate and total phosphorus in the northern
branch in the catchment area. The biggest changes will for all compounds be in the
end of the dry season and slightly later than in the present situation. In the early
part of the dry season even lower concentrations than at present might occur
according to the simulated results.

BOD
The simulated average concentration of BOD for the candidate sub-projects
including the irrigation schemes and water allocation from Pursat River have been
calculated. The concentration show a similar situation as for the present situation
but with slightly lower values in some of the mid reaches and significantly lower
concentration in the mid part of Svay Don Keo. Figure 6.24 show the simulated
differences in concentration levels between the candidate sub-projects and the
present situation. These calculations indicate that the levels in the lower reaches
will be at the same level or slightly lower in the average situation.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 67

Figure 6.8: Time series simulation results for the outlet of St. Dauntri after irrigation
development. Results for BOD, ammonia, nitrate and total phosphorous

N3|NH4 - Candidate project [mg/l]


N3|NH4 - reference [mg/l]

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

2000 2001

N3|P_tot - Canditate project [mg/l]


N3|P_tot - reference [mg/l]

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

2000 2001

Ammonium
The simulated concentrations of ammonium show almost no changes in the most
part of the catchment. In the Dauntri part the simulations indicate a slight increase
in the upper reaches and a slight decrease in the mid-reaches. The biggest change
can be found in Svay Don Keo where the allocation of water will increase the
amount of water in the dry season leading to lower concentrations of ammonium in
this part.

Nitrate
The simulated concentrations of nitrate for the candidate sub-projects show that the
concentrations in most of the Dauntri catchment will change very little, with an
increase between 0 and 0.07 mg/l. The biggest changes will occur in the mid parts
of Svay Don Keo.

Total Phosphorus
The simulated concentrations of total-phosphorus show a similar pattern as the
other compounds and indicates a slight reduction of total-phosphorus
concentrations in the mid parts of Dauntri river and significant reductions at a
small stretch in the mid parts of Svay Don Keo.
Conclusion
The simulations indicate that the quality conditions for the compounds could be
good and this seems to be in accordance with recent water quality monitoring
programs, undertaken by MOWRAM, MRC and WUP-FIN, that the general

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 68

pollution level is fairly low at present. The simulations conducted for the candidate
sub-projects indicate very limited changes in the quality conditions in the Dauntri
catchment except for in a small stretch of the Svay Don Keo where water
transferred from the Pursat river provides more water in the dry season compared
to the present situation. The proposed irrigation schemes will generally result in a
reduction in water quality as less water will be available for dilution of the
pollutants but the allocation of water from Pursat river will compensate for this.

It should be pointed out that in the future, in case of crop diversification and related
increased use of pesticides and fertiliser, it is important to consider and prevent
serious environmental impacts in general, and contamination of edible fish in
particular in the catchment.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 69

7 Fisheries
The fishery in this sub-basin is associated with its three main rivers: Dauntri
(Muong), Svay Don Keo and St. Kambot (Preah Mlou) 2.

7.1 Dauntri River


The river seems to have been completely blocked at the site of the Chong Sanay
barrage structures. However, the flood in 2000 has cut through the dam and created
a new by-pass for migrating fishes. The fish migration is no longer denied. Fishing
activities have been observed in both upstream and downstream of the structures.

Further upstream, the river is blocked by a structure of Prekchik 17April. Under the
current situation, this structure without gate regulators still allows a possible fish
migration during the rainy season, when water level raises up. Fishing was
observed during consultant visit and reported by local communities at upstream of
this structure. Although the fishing practice here is only for family purpose, the
rehabilitation of this irrigation scheme should include fishways to avoid possible
negative impacts on the aquatic diversities including the family type fishery that
still remains commonly in this area.

7.2 Svay Don Keo River


The fishing activities are observed, during the consultant visit, significant along
this river. Fishing is seen in the river, irrigation canals and in the rice fields.

Kampang irrigation scheme is the only irrigation structure across the river
downstream of National Road No. 5, but without blocking the river (no gate
regulator). The passage between different parts of the river and the rice fields or
flood plain is observed in a good favourable condition for fish migration both
locally and laterally. This favourable condition could explained the more active
fishing practice in this river sub-basin observed by the consultant comparing to
other sub-basins of the two studied basins.

Further upstream, at Roneam Proyol irrigation scheme, the fish migration remains
also possible during rainy season, when the water level raises, due to present
absence of gates of this irrigation scheme. The rehabilitation of this irrigation
scheme in the future should include fishways to avoid possible negative impacts on
the aquatic diversities in this river sub-basin.

7.3 St. Kambot


Along its course, the river is cut into several segments by irrigation strucutres such
as: Koas Khsach, Voat Leab, Preah Mlu, etc. These irrigation schemes are located
downstream of the National Road No. 5. However, during the high water level, the
regulator s seem not to be a barrier to the fish migration, because of a general flood
over the area. Therefore fishes are able to bypass the structures during the upstream

2
St. Kambot shifts its name to Preah Mlou downstream of National Road 5. In this
present study, the former name is used for the river as a whole.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 70

migration. This phenomenon could also help enriching rice field fishery, which is
commonly observed by the consultant in this area.

Further upstream, the Krouch Sach irrigation is the only irrigation structure with
fishway found by the consultant in the studied areas. This fishway seems to be very
effective, as local communities around this structure reported high fish yield at up
stream of this structure. This high yield is reported un-declined up to now. Based
on consultant observation, the design of this scheme seems very helpful for fishery
in the area. The fishway makes fish migration possible, while the structure increase
more permanent water body, thus gives some additional benefit for fish refuge in
dry season as well as to the local people, who usually fully exploit the
impoundment for fishing.

It is recommended that similar type of fishway should be installed in every


irrigation structure that involve with blocking the river.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 71

8 Socio-economics

8.1 Data
This section relates to ToR, Task 1: Collection of general data and information

Related data (submitted electronically)


Area-population.xls Area and population (2002-04) within the study area; buffaloes,
cows, horses, goats, pigs, and poultry; families using fertilizer; by
province, district and commune
Cultivation-livestock.xls Cultivation areas and livestock (2005), by province, district and
commune
Agriculture-2006.xls PRD survey Jul-Aug 2006: Cultivation practices; cropping cycles;
labour input; livestock; use of fertilizers and pesticides; farmgate
prices; obstacles to cultivation

Data and information is available from


• government reports, official publications by various ministries, consultant
reports, and other relevant available literature
• previous studies carried out by ADB and WUP-FIN;
• secondary data from a variety of sources including the National Institute of
Statistics and the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (MAFF),
commune databases and various projects; and
• surveys conducted under the present study in July-August 2006.

8.2 Socio-economic context


This section relates to ToR, Task 19: Economic analysis of water utilization

The Dauntri Sub-basin covers an area of 3,680km2 in Battambang and Pursat


Provinces. Around 45% of this area is in Battambang. Prevailing socio-economic
conditions are described briefly below.

Population and population growth rates


The Dauntri Sub-basin has an estimated population of around 237,013
(considerably larger than that of the Boribo basin) and is growing at a rate of
around 1.5% (compared with the national rate of 2.5%) Migration rates vary from
2-3% in Pursat to 3-5% in Battambang.

Income and poverty


Battambang is one of the least poor provinces bordering The Great Lake. It is
estimated that around 40% of the population lives below the consumption-based
poverty line (MRC, 2003) in Pursat, while the population of Battambang is
relatively better off with around 26% of the population living in poverty. The
difference in poverty levels between the provinces may be attributed to the
proximity of Battambang to important trade posts and employment opportunities
along the Thai border.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 72

Average gross household cash income among households surveyed in the Dauntri
Sub-basin is US$666 per year (or US$128 per person) compared to average
national GDP per capita in 2004 of around US$363 (ADB, 2006). The difference in
cash income between the two basins is due to (i) much lower off-farm income and
(ii) lower income from livestock sales in Dauntri basin. This figure also assumes
that 40% of the total annual rice yield is sold.

Table 8.1: Sources of cash income in each sub-basin


Income source Boribo Dauntri
US$ per household US$ per household
per year per year
Paddy cultivation 14 242
Livestock 308 147
Fish sales 1 27
Poultry sales 6 21
Other sources of on-farm income 301 75
Off-farm income 53 153
Total: 682 666

Source: Data from household surveys

The table clearly shows the dependency of households in the sub-basin on their
land as their main source of wealth 3 and highlights their vulnerability to the
impacts of drought and severe floods. Note again that the income levels shown in
Figure 8.1 do not account for the costs associated with undertaking these income-
generating activities. Unlike the Boribo Sub-basin, however, crop production is the
largest contributor to household income in the Dauntri basin, providing around
40% of total household income from paddy cultivation alone. The sale of
supplementary crops such as pineapples and vegetables is an important source of
cash income.

Figure 8.1: Household income structure

Average household cash income (2005)

23%

37% Paddy cultivation


Livestock
Poultry
Fisheries
11%
Paid work
4% Off-farm
3%
22%

Source: project survey data

3
Here income is used in the economic sense and does not necessarily refer to cash
income. Furthermore, livestock is valued at its stock value (i.e. as an asset) rather
than as a flow value

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 73

Employment
All the households surveyed are engaged in agriculture as the main source of
employment. However, there are more possibilities for employment outside of
agriculture in Battambang as evidenced by the fact that around 25% of the
provincial population is employed in the services sector and 4% in the industrial
sector (MRC, 2003). In Pursat, only 17% of the labour force is employed outside of
agriculture.

As in the Boribo Sub-basin, seasonal migration is a common phenomenon with


around 30-40% of households in the study area having at least one member
employed in either Phnom Penh or market towns along the Thai border for up to 8
months of the year. Women working in garment factories in Phnom Penh are able
to earn US$30 per month while men working in the Thai border areas earn up to
US$60 per month, providing an important source of supplementary cash income to
households.

Access to water and sanitation


The Dauntri Sub-basin population has poor access to safe water and sanitation
facilities. At the time of the last census in 1998, it was estimated that only around
12% of the population in Pursat had access to safe water and sanitation (MRC,
2003). Households in Battambang province are twice as likely to have access to
safe water supplies and three times as likely to have access to sanitation facilities,
but it is believed that among rural households, these percentages are much lower.
None of the households interviewed had piped water supplies, for example.

The majority of the sub-basin population harvests rainwater during the wet season
which is stored in large jars. This is supplemented with water collected from
nearby rivers and streams.

Water quality has not been reported as a problem but with growing populations of
both humans and livestock, and increasing applications of chemical fertilizers and
pesticides in agriculture, poor water quality may become an issue, especially in the
dry season.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 74

Figure 8.2: Main sources of drinking water in Pursat and Battambang Provinces

Main source of drinking water - Pursat Province

4% 0% 1% 5%
2% Piped
Tube / piped w ell
Protected dug w ell
Unprotected dug w ell
40% Spring / river / stream
48%
Bought
Other

Main sources of drinking water - Battambang Province

11% 1% 4%
19% Piped
Tube / piped w ell
1% Protected dug w ell
Unprotected dug w ell
Spring / river / stream
12%
Bought
52%
Other

Data: UNDP (2006)

Health
The health of people living in the Dauntri Sub-basin is generally poor due to low
levels of access to clean water and sanitation. Diarrhea related to poor water quality
is common among children. Some households were reporting up to 10 incidences
per child during the dry season.

Child malnutrition is a major problem in Pursat where around half the child
population is undernourished, and is significant in Battambang where around 38%
of the child population suffers from the condition (MRC, 2003). Again, it is
believed that poor diet, rather than food or rice shortages, is the main cause of
malnutrition among children. Based on information provided by farmers during the
field surveys, average annual rice yields are more than sufficient to meet family
needs. On average, paddy farmers in the Dauntri Sub-basin have the potential to
sell almost 8 tonnes per year.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 75

Land holdings
Findings from village surveys reveal that the average cultivated area per household
is around 3 hectares (double that of Boribo). The relatively larger size of land
holdings allows farmers to benefit more from economies of scale although the
problems of poor soils and dry season water shortages restrict the types of crops
that can be grown and the amount of land that can be put into production at any one
time. Generally, households devote most of their cultivated area to wet season
paddy as wet season yields tend to be higher than dry season yields.

Literacy
Education and training standards are extremely low by developing country
standards. Literacy in Pursat and Battambang provinces is around 80% for men but
much lower (60%) for women. Less than 20% of the population complete primary
school and less than 10% are educated to a secondary school level (MRC, 2003).

Low levels of education limit the options available to households to diversify their
livelihoods away from subsistence farming, again making them extremely
vulnerable to factors affecting agricultural productivity.

Physical infrastructure
National Road 5 between Pursat and Battambang bisects the sub-basin but
otherwise the physical infrastructure serving villages in the Dauntri Sub-basin is
relatively undeveloped and roads are poorly maintained. Most of the roads and cart
tracks become impassable during the wet season, isolating many rural communities
and limiting opportunities to market surplus agricultural produce. Rivers and
streams are thus important transport conduits in the wet season, allowing people to
travel between villages located near waterways.

The proposed upgrade of the railway between Phnom Penh and Poipet may
facilitate access by local farmers to markets in Battambang and along the Thai
border, but only if the railway proves to be a more cost-effective means of
transportation than road.

Summary
The residents of Dauntri Sub-basin are predominantly poor rice farmers, but are
relatively better off than those living in the Boribo Sub-basin. Not only are the soils
here more suitable for agricultural production, resulting in higher yields, but
average landholdings are also larger, which means that households are often able to
sell up to 8 tonnes of rice per year. Supplementary crops are also easier to grow
and nearly all production of such crops is for sale.

Rural households do not have access to safe water supplies and consequently suffer
poor health which also affects their agricultural productivity. Like the Boribo Sub-
basin, livestock raising is an important source of wealth but livestock health
depends on the availability of sufficient water for drinking and fodder.

Summary socio-economic indicators for Dauntri Sub-basin are presented in Table


8.2 below.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 76

Table 8.2: Summary socio-economic indicators for Pursat, Battambang and the study
area

Daun Try / Pursat Battambang


Indicator
Svay Don Keo Province# Province#
Demographics
Population 237,013 360,400 793,100

Population growth rate (% p.a.) 1.5

Population density (persons/km2) 56 28.4 67.8

Migrant population (%) 2.8 3.6

Health & welfare


Infant mortality rate (per 1,000
104 80
live births)
Proportion of population aged 0-
47.2 44.4
14 (%)
Child malnutrition (%) 48.6 38.7

Ave household size 5.2 5.3


GDP per capita (US$)
Ave household landholdings (ha)

% of population living below


40.7 26.4
consumption-based poverty line
% of population with access to
12.3 21.6
safe water supply
% of population with access to
11.7 36.9
sanitation
Ave household livestock holdings
(cows, buffaloes, pigs)

Education
82.5 (male) 82.1 (male)
Literacy rate (%)
59.5 (female) 60.7 (female)
Primary attainment rate (%) 16.7 19.4
Lower secondary attainment rate
8 7.9
(%)

Employment
Labour force participation rate (%) 74.2 66.2
Agricultural Employment (%) 82.6 71
Industrial Employment (%) 2.1 4.1
Services Employment (%) 15.3 25
Unemployment (%) 3.5 8

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 77

8.3 Water utilization


This section relates to ToR, Task 19: Economic analysis of water utilization

This section provides a snapshot of knowledge about current water use in the
Dauntri Sub-basin. It identifies and quantifies (as far as possible) the water uses
and services by socio-economic sector thereby providing some insight into the
relative socio-economic importance of water uses to the sub-basin residents. The
economic importance of each water use is analysed in Section 8.3.

Irrigated agriculture and forestry


Water is essential to the agricultural sector for irrigation, drinking water for
livestock and cleaning. It is estimated that around 46% of the total sub-basin area is
under cultivation (Table 8.3), but only a small fraction of the cultivated area
receives any form of irrigation.

Table 8.3: Cultivated areas in Dauntri Sub-basin


Total Wet paddy Dry paddy Other crops
Basin area (ha) 354,190
Cultivated area (ha) 162,300 153,800 600 8,500
Percent of basin area 46 43 0.2 2.4
Irrigated area (ha) 2,320 1,720 600
Percent of total cultivated area 1.4 1.1 0.4

Source: Cultivated area by land use analysis (2005) (Table 2.2); distribution of cultivated area estimated
from data contained in the commune database and collected from local authorities; irrigation areas
according to Table 2.4

In the Dauntri Sub-basin, 10 to 50% of the commune areas are used for rice
production. Wet season paddy is by far the predominant crop (see Figure 8.3) with
la very small part of the cultivated area devoted to dry season paddy and other
supplementary crops (Table 8.3) such as beans, pineapples, potatoes and other
vegetables. Unlike the Boribo Sub-basin where supplementary crops are grown
primarily for subsistence use, in the Dauntri Sub-basin they are grown primarily for
sale.

All the households interviewed reported experiencing drought for at least one
month of the year, during which time both animal health and crop productivity
suffer. Severe flooding appears to be less of an issue with only 20% of households
reporting damages to crops and livestock during the floods of 2000. However, the
impacts of flooding can be devastating. One household in Rung village (Boeng
Khnar district) estimated its losses as 90% of crop value and 30% of livestock
value during the floods of 2000.

Irrigated agriculture is the largest user of water in the Dauntri basin, presently
consuming around 204 million m3 per annum, compared to domestic and livestock
uses which use 2 and 11 million m3 respectively. Most agriculture is rainfed with
only around 2% of the total land area receiving any form of irrigation. However,
where irrigation is possible, the benefits are substantial. The total potential irrigable
area is estimated to be around 44,674 ha in the wet season and 303 ha in the dry
season. This implies a reduction of dry season irrigation by around 55% from 470

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 78

ha today while only 4% of the irrigation potential is being exploited in the wet
season.

Figure 8.3: Irrigated cropping areas in Dauntri Sub-basin

Irrigation areas in Dauntry Basin (2005)

1% 1%

Wet paddy
Dry paddy
Supplementary crops

98%

Data from commune database and district authorities

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 79

Table 8.4: Irrigated crop areas


District Commune Paddy (ha) Other Irrigation Crops (Ha)
Wet paddy Dry paddy Corn Potato Bean Sugar Cane Pineapple Vegetable
Maung Reusey Maung 9,009 4 12 10 15 7 7 34
Maung Reusey Kear 3,500 3 8 6 6 4 4 14
Maung Reusey Prey Svay 7,562 .... 6 2 2 ….. ….. 7
Maung Reusey Reusey Krang 8,650 339 1 ….. 2 ….. ….. 5
Maung Reusey Chrey 4,019 152 ….. ….. 8 ….. ….. 7
Maung Reusey Taloas 4,830 16 ….. ….. 2 ….. ….. 3
Maung Reusey Kokoah 5,180 .... ….. ….. 1 ….. ….. 2
Maung Reusey Robos Mongkol 5,340 .... ….. ….. 2 ….. ….. 1
Maung Reusey Prek Chik 4,000 3 6 ….. 20 6 40 25
Maung Reusey Prey Tralach 3,500 .... 132 37 6 4 15 25
Koas Krala Doun Ba
Koas Krala Chhnal Moan
Bakan Snam Preach 5,647 22 19 4 10 100 4 6
Bakan Trapeangchong 3,905 12 24 6 10 139 8 10
Bakan Boengbatkandol 6,015 24 2 4 3 ….. 3 …..
Bakan Boeng Khnar 3,300 13 2 3 4 ….. 10 …..
Bakan Metuek 4,369 80 1 2 4 ….. 12 2
Bakan Outapoang 6,300 310 2 6 6 ….. 22 9
Bakan Svaydaunkeo 2,097 280 1 3 4 1 16 ….
Bakan Khnar Totueng 3,670 5 2 6 6 1 10 11
Bakan Rumlech 4,052 4 4 7 8 1 36 9
Bakan Talor 4,691 5 24 24 40 49 65 8
Phnum Kravanh Bak Chenhchien
Phnum Kravanh Phteah Rung
Phnum Kravanh Samraong
Sampov Meas Lolok Sa
Veal Veaeng Krapeu Pir
Veal Veaeng Pramaoy
Total 99,636 1,272 246 120 159 312 252 178

*Note that these irrigation areas refer to the total commune area

Demands for irrigation water can be expected to increase over time as more food is
required to support a growing population. It is difficult to predict exactly how
much additional water will be required as much depends on the mix of crops
grown, technological uptake and water-use efficiency. Access to markets,
agricultural extension and the terms of trade offered to farmers will also impact
agricultural productivity.

Future demands for irrigation water (Table 8.5) are estimated based on the
following assumptions:
• The full development of potential irrigation areas such that water utilization
is limited by the water availability rather than by distribution capacity
• Improvements in water and land-use efficiencies
• A partial shift towards crops that are less water-consuming and more
valuable than rice

During the course of the household surveys, all farmers interviewed noted water as
a main constraint to cultivation while half said that lack of appropriate technology
was an issue.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 80

Table 8.5: Future demands for irrigation in Dauntri basin


Present Future
Irrigation demands 204 Mm3/year 356 Mm3/year

Forestry
47 percent of the Dauntri Sub-basin is covered by evergreen, semi-evergreen or
deciduous forest (PRD Interpretation from Landsat ETM (2005). Agronomically,
natural forest may be the largest consumer of water in the basin. The forest
receives all of its required water from annual rainfall and by tapping residual soil
moisture plus water from shallow aquifers during the dry season. Overall water
consumption decreases in land denuded of forest and cultivated with annuals, but
there will be an accompanying change in seasonal flows into the mainstream and
possible long-term climate change effects (Nesbitt, 2005).

Livestock
As noted earlier, livestock is regarded as both a source of income and as a
livelihood safety net to be sold in response to shocks such as illness or expenses
associated with marriage or death. Animal sales are a major source of income for
subsistence farmers who see them as ‘banks’ for accumulation of wealth. Based on
information from project surveys, around 89% of all households in the study area
raise cows, and around 69% of all households raise pigs. Most households also
raise chickens and/or ducks, with an average stock of 9 per household. However,
there are 10-14 households in Svay Don Keo and Russey Krang communes who
raise poultry on a commercial basis.

Estimates of water consumption by large animals range from 50 to 120 litres of


water per animal per day. Table 8.6 shows present livestock water demands based
on both low and high estimates of daily water consumption.

Table 8.6: Present livestock water demands in Dauntri Sub-basin (2005)

Total
Daily water Daily water Total annual Water
annual
demand per demand per water Water demands demands
Head water
animal animal (m3) - demands (m3) - (m3/s) - LOW (m3/s) -
demands
(m3) - LOW HIGH HIGH HIGH
(m3) - LOW
Buffalo 20,057 0.05 366,040 0.12 878,497 0.948 10.168
Cows 64,297 0.05 1,173,420 0.10 2,346,841 3.040 27.163
Pigs 40,333 0.03 441,646 0.05 736,077 1.144 8.519
Poultry 386,026 0.01 1,408,995 0.02 2,817,990 3.650 32.616
Total 510,713 3,390,102 6,779,404

* Livestock numbers are based on a combination of project surveys and information contained in
commune databases

Based on recent over-all changes in livestock population for Cambodia as a whole,


it is possible to project future livestock demands, assuming that:
• Animal population growth rates will remain more or less stable over the next
10 years

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 81

• Livestock productivity among subsistence farmers will not be heavily


impacted by the spread of animal diseases such as avian influenza
• Possible changes in market prices will not influence the holding patterns of
subsistence farmers in Boribo Sub-basin

The figures in Table 8.7 are based on conservative (low) estimates of daily
livestock water demands.

Table 8.7: Projected livestock water demands to 2030

2030 annual 2030 water


2005 2030
water demand demands
population population
(m3) (m3/s)
Buffalo 20,057 8,023 146,416 0.005
Cows 64,297 99,660 1,818,801 0.058
Pigs 40,333 57,475 629,346 0.020
Poultry 386,026 916,812 3,346,363 0.106
Total 510,713 1,081,969 5,940,926

Domestic consumption
Today, in the project area, with its large rural population, domestic water uses are
limited by the infrastructure (withdrawal capacity and distribution capacity), and
also, in some places and in part of the year, by the immediate raw water
availability.

Information from the household surveys revealed the following:


• Most households in the study area collect and store rainwater in large 225
litre jars during the wet season. Each household will have between 3 and 5
jars. The harvested rainwater is used for drinking and cooking only and will
last until around Feb/March.
• Bathing and washing is done in nearby rivers and ponds.
• Those households living within 100 metres of rivers and streams tend to fetch
drinking water from the nearest source. Households who have to collect
water from streams or rivers generally spend about 1 hour per week doing so.
• During the dry season households will either purchase water from delivery
trucks (around 10,000 riel per load = 1,250 litres) in more built up areas, or
fetch water from rivers in rural areas. Those households who cannot afford to
pay for water are able obtain it from the nearest pagoda or community well.

Estimated daily water consumption in the Dauntri Sub-basin is around 50 litres per
person, or a total of 11.5 million litres per day. This is high in comparison with
estimates of per capita consumption for Cambodia as a whole – 20.7 litres per
person per day in rural areas and 65.1 litres per person per day in urban areas
(MRC Jun 03).

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 82

Demands for domestic water are expected to increase over the coming years as a
result of:
• Population growth, including the impacts of migration. Net migration may be
negative, since there are no significant urban centres (such as provincial
towns) in the study area. The possibility exists that at a certain stage, the
population of the study area will stagnate, and, later on, decrease, reflecting
an anticipated shift of livelihood opportunities from rural to urban areas, as
well as new agricultural technologies with a much higher labour efficiency.
• Increased per capita demand because of better education about the benefits of
water for good hygiene
• Improved lifestyles with more widespread use of water-using technologies
and an expanded coverage of piped water supplies direct to each household

Assuming a conservative population growth rate of 0% per annum (low) and a


more typical one of 2% (high) as well as an increase in per capita demands of
between 1 and 2 litres per day per year until 2015, consumption levels are
projected to be around the levels shown in Table 8.8. Based on these assumptions,
domestic demand in 25 years’ time will be somewhere between 2 and 5 times the
present demand. This is still a small part of the available water in the area, but the
increase must be kept in mind in connection with the predicted increased demand
for other purposes, particularly irrigation.

Table 8.8: Projected domestic consumption demands


2004 2030 (low) 2030 (high)
Population 237,013 270,245 439,108
Daily per capita consumption (litres)* 23 49 75
Total annual demand (m m3) 1.99 4.24 10.86

* assumes an increase of 1 litre per capita per day under the low growth scenario and 2 litres per capita
per day under the high growth scenario. The present unit demand of 23 l/d is from TSBMO (Mar 03); the
present population is from the Commune Database; other values are estimates

Fisheries
Fisheries in the Dauntri Sub-basin (like elsewhere in the Mekong basin) is
enormously important both commercially and for subsistence livelihoods. Fish
provide a vital source of nutrients to the people of the Tonle Sap and the
surrounding area (Ahmed et. al., 1998) and are also an important component of
households’ cash economy. Fish provide self-employment, wage employment (for
men and women in the fishing lots on Tonle Sap Lake), direct nutrition, indirect
nutrition, and other livelihood needs (by cash sale or barter for other produce).

Both subsistence and commercial fishing takes place in the Dauntri Sub-basin.
While most households are involved in subsistence fishing in the wet season (10
days per month in the wet season), only a very small number of villagers do any
kind of commercial fishing. Around 30% of total fish catch is either sold or
exchanged for rice.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 83

No data on fisheries productivity in the basin was collected for the purposes of this
study, but based on studies by the MRC Fisheries Program, it is estimated that
average consumption of fish and other aquatic products (OAP) in the Lower
Mekong Basin as a whole is about 36 kg/person/year. Applying this figure to the
population of Dauntri implies a present annual demand of around 8,500
tonnes.With a growing population (and assuming no change in diet), future
demands are expected to rise to around 11,600 tonnes per year by 2030 (under a
conservative population growth rate of 1.2%).

Actual production estimates vary widely, and are subject to a number of


methodological debates centred around whether catch or consumption should be
used as the basis for measuring yield. The estimated fish yield of the Great Lake
and the Tonle Sap river itself is as high as 139-190 kg/ha/year (by Van Zalinge et
al 2001). Annual fish productivity in the Cambodian floodplains is estimated to be
around 243kg/ha. This is a high-end estimate based on work near Phnom Penh by
Dubeau et al 4 (see Beecham and Cross, 2005).

The productivity and sustainability of fisheries – and hence their ability to meet
rising demands - depends on a number of factors including:
• fishing practices
• total fishing effort
• river flows
• barriers to migration
• access to, and from floodplain habitats; and
• the floodplain area that is inundated in the wet season, which in turn depends
on the annual maximum flood height.

There is, as yet, no standard functional form for evaluating the impact of changes
in river flow levels to changes in fisheries productivity but recent advances have,
however, been made in modelling how fisheries productivity may be affected by
changes in hydrological flow levels using indicators relating to habitat availability
and migration (Beecham & Cross, 2005).

Preserving the Mekong fishery is central to food security in the region. The wild
fishery is particularly important for the poorest rural households, making
significant contributions to their nutrition, food security and income (MRC, 2003).

Industry
There are no significant industrial activities in the Dauntri Sub-basin at present.

Future industrial development in the area is limited by the poor infrastructure


network and generally low levels of education among sub-basin residents. It is not
therefore expected to impact, or be impacted upon by, water availability.

4
Dubeau, P., Poeu, O. and Sjorslev, J. (2001) Estimating fish and aquatic animal
productivity /yield per area in Kampong Tralach: An integrated approach.
http://www.mekonginfo.org/

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 84

Navigation
The roads and tracks in the study area are generally very poor and virtually
impassible during the wet season. Many villagers thus rely on waterborne transport
when they need to travel beyond their own village in the wet season.

Irrigation development in the sub-basin is not expected to impact upon river


navigability during the wet season.

Tourism and recreation


As mentioned in regard to the Boribo basin, Pursat province is the gateway to the
Cardamom mountains and, together with its location not far from Phnom Penh,
offers significant tourism potential. However, the poor condition of the access road
(impassable during the wet season) and extremely limited tourist facilities are
reflected in the low number of visitors to the region. Furthermore, access to the
mountains is more likely to be developed further south of the Dauntri Sub-basin
(i.e. through the Boribo Sub-basin) to minimise the distance between the
mountainous area and National Road No. 5.

Micro-hydropower
There are no known active or planned micro-hydropower schemes in the Dauntri
basin. The scale of such schemes is such that, if implemented, they would have no
impact upon water availability.

Maintenance of aquatic ecosystems for livelihood support and environmental


sustainability
Apart from the direct use value that rivers provide in the form of water for
irrigation, livestock, domestic and industrial consumption and fisheries production,
they are also important for the maintenance of aquatic ecosystems. Riverine
ecosystems in Cambodia support a highly diverse aquatic animal and plant
community, many of which are valuable foods and medicines for rural households.

Summary
As is the case with the Boribo basin, agriculture is also the biggest user of water in
the Dauntri Sub-basin and is likely to expand its share of water demand
significantly if the basin’s irrigation potential is fully exploited (Figure 8.4).
Domestic demands are almost insignificant by comparison (in terms of volume),
although they are important in value. With the available data, it is not possible to
quantify industrial demands but these are negligible at present and expected to
continue to be so. Instream demands (such as fisheries and ecology) are also
difficult to quantify, not least of all because the relationships between productivity
and water flows are generally not yet well understood. Note how the profile of
demand is almost identical to that of Boribo, the scale of total demand is up to
three times greater even though the per capita and per unit area demands are the
same.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 85

Figure 8.4: Present and future composition of major extractive water demands

Present and future composition of extractive water demands in


the Dauntry Basin

400
350

Million cubic metres


300
250
Present
200
Future
150
100
50
0
Livestock Irrigation Domestic

8.4 Economic analysis


This section relates to ToR, Task 19: Economic analysis of water utilization

This section attempts to quantify, in monetary terms, the value of water uses in the
Dauntri Sub-basin.

Irrigated agriculture
The value of water used for irrigation can be broadly estimated by determining the
net value of irrigated crop harvests.

Wet season paddy is the principal crop. with only relatively small areas of dry
season paddy and other supplementary crops receiving any form of irrigation.
Supplementary crops are, however, more widely grown in Dauntri than in Boribo,
and all output is sold.

The valuation approach can be summarised as follows:


• Although a large share of production is for subsistence, using economic
prices for all irrigated crops is justified on the basis that farmers would
otherwise need to acquire these products in the market.
• Values are calculated per hectare and per household on the basis of the net
profits to farmers once production costs have been accounted for.
• Crop production costs were not widely available for supplementary crops and
thus estimates of the approximate returns to production were based on limited
information from reports containing farm production budgets. Using this
information, production costs are estimated at around 75% for fruit and
vegetables. This takes into account both the direct costs of crop production
and the opportunity cost of family labour and land.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 86

Table 8.9: Crop budget summary for Dauntri Sub-basin


Unit WS rice DS Rice Corn Potatoes Beans Sugarcane Pineapple Vegetables
Irrigated area ha 99,636.00 1,272.00 246.00 120.00 159.00 312.00 252.00 178.00
Yield t/ha 2.20 3.70 2.00 2.00 2.00 16.40 10.00 2.00
Price US$/kg 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.27 0.69 0.11 0.24 0.19
Gross value US$/ha 264.00 444.00 185.06 546.01 1,378.67 1,818.18 2,355.89 372.16
Production costs 139.09 87.38 138.80 409.50 1,034.00 1,363.64 1,766.92 279.12
Seed US$/ha 12.00 12.00
Labour US$/ha 97.50 45.00
Fertiliser US$/ha 17.81 17.81
Pesticide US$/ha 0.00 0.79
Water US$/ha 11.78 11.78
Pumping costs US$/ha
Net crop income US$/ha 124.91 356.62 46.27 136.50 344.67 454.55 588.97 93.04
Cultivated area per househo ha 2.25 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00
Ave h/hold income US$ 280.88 10.24 0.26 0.37 1.24 3.20 3.35 0.37

Assumptions:
1/ Labour is valued at US$1.50 per day (both hired and family); wet season rice requires around 65 days of labour per ha
2/ Seed costs US$0.12 per kg. To cultivate 1 ha of rice requires approx 100kg of seed
3/ Fertiliser is applied at a rate of around 60kg/ha. One kg costs 1,232 riel
4/ Pesticides are applied at a rate of around 0.4 bottles per ha. One bottle costs 8.166 riel
5/ Yields for supplementary crops are based on MAFF (2004-5) statistics for Pursat
6/ Producer prices for supplementary crops are based on FAOStat database for Cambodia (2003)
7/ In the absence of detailed data, production costs for supplementary costs are assumed to be 75% of farmgate prices.
This is consistent with values obtained from individual farm budget studies

Despite the low profitability of agriculture, it employs more than 80% of the
workforce (in terms of person-days) and accounts for around 70% of total
household income. In Dauntri district, the production and sale of supplementary
crops provides a valuable source of income to households.

Improving the irrigation system would allow more farmers to engage in dry season
paddy production but is unlikely to have the desired effect on poverty unless
irrigation improvements are accompanied by:
• investments in appropriate technologies (including higher yield varieties,
more water efficient crops and cropping techniques, a shift to higher value
crops)
• agricultural extension (including marketing and value-adding), access to
markets (including storage, transport infrastructure and the terms of trade
offered to farmers)
• some form of agricultural insurance for farmers who are prepared to diversify
against the risks of external shocks and stresses such as drought and severe
flooding

Livestock
As mentioned earlier, livestock is regarded as both a source of income and as a
livelihood safety net. Animal sales are a major source of income for subsistence
farmers who see them as ‘banks’ for accumulation of wealth. However, in most
cases, livestock are only sold in times of need, for instance in response to shocks
such as illness or expenses associated with marriage or death.

The value added by water to livestock is estimated as follows:


• Livestock health (and thus value) is assumed to be directly (but not linearly)
related to the availability of sufficient volumes of water for drinking and
cleaning. However, water is only one of a number of requirements for good
animal health. Since the relationship between water consumption and animal

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 87

value is not known, the net benefit values in Table 23 reflect the total value
of livestock that water availability supports. They do not reflect the value-
added by water alone.
• The gross value of livestock to individual households is equivalent to the
market value of total stock holdings (and not simply cash sales) at any given
time
• The net value of livestock includes the cost of purchase and raising

Table 8.10: Livestock value in Dauntri Sub-basin

Raising
Gross costs from
Number of Gross Net value to Net value
value to Purchase time of
head in Sales value value to the the basin to each
each costs purchase
Dauntry (US$/head) basin (US$ (US$ household
household (US$/head) to time of
basin millions) millions) (US$)
(US$) sale
(US$/head)
Cows 64,297 289 19 420 169 0 7.75 175
Buffalo 20,050 289 6 131 169 0 2.42 55
Pigs 40,333 108 4 99 24 36 1.94 44
Poultry 386,026 3 1 25 0 0 1.12 25
Total 510,706 30 674 13 298

Assumptions:
1/ Market price of chicken is 8000 riel/kg. Each head of chicken produces 1.5kg of meat
2/ Households purchase young cows and buffaloes (<3 years) at a cost of 600,000 - 800,000 riel.
3/ Households are able to sell mature cows and buffaloes (>3 years) at a price of 1,200, 000 riel.
4/ Costs of raising cows and buffalo are minimal (but not zero)
5/ Each household spends 2,000 riel per day on pig feed (for 2-3 pigs) or 1,000 riel per day per pig
6/ Replacement/purchase costs of poultry are zero. The poultry population regenerates itself.
7/ Households sell cows and buffalo on average once every 3 years
8/ Pigs are sold every 4-6 months

Information from the household surveys shows that on average, households earn
around US$150 per year from the sale of livestock, but the net value of total
holdings (shown in Table 8.10) is up to two times higher and provides an important
safety net to these households in times of need.

It is important to note that the water-related benefits presented above are believed
to be overstated for the following reasons:
• They do not reflect the value-added by water alone, but rather the total net
benefits of livestock, where water is just one of a number of inputs.
• The full economic costs of livestock husbandry have not been considered. In
practice, there are real costs associated with the feeding and care of animals,
including provision of shelter, medication, etc.

During times of drought and severe flood, livestock productivity is adversely


affected. Farmers interviewed in Psar and Melum communes reported losses of
between 20-40% of their livestock during the floods of 2000. Livestock reportedly
suffer ill-health during times of drought, which are an annual occurrence in Boribo
Sub-basin. Although the diseases may not be fatal, they require expensive
treatment which lowers the total net benefits that households are able to obtain
from their livestock holdings.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 88

Domestic consumption
The value of water for household consumption is based on estimates of household
willingness-to-pay (WTP).

Most households in the study area collect and store rainwater in large 225 litre jars
during the wet season. Each household will have between 3 and 5 jars. The
harvested rainwater is used for drinking and cooking only and will last until around
Feb/March, where after households either purchase water from vendors (in urban
areas) or fetch it from rivers in rural areas.

Those households who purchase water from vendors spend up to US$2 per m3
(information from household surveys). Those households who cannot afford to pay
for water are able obtain it from the nearest pagoda or community well. Assuming
that all households hold the same value for a reliable source of clean drinking water
(regardless of ability to pay), the value of the benefits derived from drinking water
can be set equivalent to the willingness-to-pay for water from vendors.

Water also has significant real costs of supply. Various kinds of costs are involved
(Briscoe, 1996; Cotton et al, 1991; Winpenny, 1994; Herrington, 1987; Rogers,
Bhatia and Huber, 1997; Webster, 1998):
• Supply costs (the capital and recurrent costs associated with the installation
of the necessary infrastructure required to treat, transport and provide service
levels, operation and maintenance costs of this infrastructure and the
depreciation costs which accrue over the life of the project as parts need to be
repaired or upgraded).
• Opportunity costs (the value of water in its next best alternative use). The
size of the opportunity cost depends on the value of the water in its highest
alternative current-use value.
• Environmental costs (both direct and indirect, relating to the abstraction,
distribution and use of the resource)

Together, the opportunity and supply or use costs make up what is commonly
referred to as the ‘economic cost’ of water.

Table 8.10 shows average tariffs and unit production costs for the Phnom Penh
water supply authority. It is assumed that district authorities will face similar, if not
higher unit production costs.

Table 8.11: Average tariff and unit production costs


Average tariff Unit production cost
USD/m3 USD/m3
Phnom Penh 0.244 0.082

Source: ADB (2004): Water in Asian cities

Based on this information, the annual net benefits of domestic water supplies are
estimated to be in the region of US$81 per household (Table 8.11).

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 89

Table 8.12: Net benefits of domestic water supply

Unit
WTP US$/m3 1.927711
Cost of provision US$/m3 0.082
Net benefit US$/m3 1.845711
Net benefit per
US$ 80.57144
household

Assumptions:
Vendors sell water for 10,000 riel per truck load (1,250
1/
litres)
The unit costs of production are based on data from
2/
Phnom Penh Water Supply Authority (ADB, 2004)

Fisheries
Net fishery values can be estimated as the yield, times average farm-gate price less
the cost of harvesting or production.

A very simplistic analysis of the potential gross value of fish in the Dauntri Sub-
basin is shown in the table below.

Table 8.13: Value of the potential fish yield in Dauntri Sub-basin


Area of water (ha) 408
Fish productivity (kg/ha) 150
Fish yield (kg) 61,200
Fish value (US$) 41,616
Fish value per ha (US$) 102

Assumptions:
Ave fish density is uniform across all water bodies in
1/
the Boribo sub-basin
Fish productivity is based on work by Van Zalinge et al
2/
(2001)
Fish value is based on farmgate prices for capture
3/
fisheries (MRC, 2006)

To estimate the net value (i.e. sales value less costs of raising and production), the
production costs are estimated to be around 30% of gross (or sales) value (MRC,
2006). This works out to approximately US$21,000.

Standard functional forms for the evaluation of the relationship between water
flows and the value of fish production (necessary to calculate the value added by
water to the value of fisheries) are not readily available. However, productivity is
known to be a function of multiple factors including:

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 90

• fishing practices
• total fishing effort
• river flows
• barriers to river migration
• access to and from floodplain habitats and habitat changes

Recent advances have, however, been made in modelling how fisheries


productivity may be affected by changes in hydrological flow levels (MRC, 2005)
using indicators relating to habitat availability and migration. However, the
parameters required to calculate the productivity changes were not available for the
project area at the time of this study.

From a household perspective, the value of the fishery can be simply estimated on
the basis of the value of household consumption and sales. If each household in
Boribo Sub-basin is assumed to consume around 100kg per year, then the value of
fish to each household is around US$70 per annum.

Summary
The findings of the analysis above, suggest that – from a household perspective –
agriculture is indeed the most valuable use of water (see Fig. 8.5). The net benefits
per household are still low (< US$1 per day) but are significantly higher than in
Boribo basin, owing primarily to higher yields and diversification beyond rice to
cash crops. Livestock raising provides equivalent net worth in terms of the average
value of livestock held by each household.

Figure 8.5: Value added by water to livelihoods in Dauntri Sub-basin

Value added by water to livelihoods in Dauntry/Svay Don Keo


sub-basin

350
Net benefits (US$/household)

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Irrigated agriculture Livestock Domestic Fisheries
consumption

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 91

8.5 Water user groups


This section provides background information for ToR Task 17: Inventory of water users committees

Information on Water User Groups (WUGs) was collected from the PDWRAMs.

The WUGs were established with support from the SEILA Program and
PDWRAM.

There are four WUGs in Daunti Sub-basin:


1 Kampang Water User Group. This Water User Group is already registered
with MOWRAM. The WUG uses the water from Kampang irrigation system.
2 Boeng Kanthor Water User Group. This WUG is already registered with
MOWRAM. The WUG uses the water from Boeng Kanthor reservoir.
3 Boeng Kan Seng WUG. This WUG is not yet registered. The WUG plans to
use the water from Boeng Kanseng reservoir.
4 Prek Am WUG. This WUG is already registered with PDWRAM. The WUG
uses the water from Prek Am irrigation system

Based on the field survey and interview, we found out that those WUGs do not
work at all because:
- The irrigation scheme are not yet complete, it has only the main canal and the
tributaries are not yet rehabilitated. So the supply of water for farmers are not
efficient.
- The water regulation does not work well
- The capacity of the Water User Group Committee is limited
- Lack of budget for O&M of the irrigation system because the community
members are not willing to pay because of inefficient service of water supply.

For example in Prek Am WUG, the people said that they do not get any benefit
from the irrigation scheme because in the wet season the cultivated areas mostly
flooded and in the dry season this irrigation scheme is also dry up no water for
irrigation. This is the main reason that people do not to participate in the Water
User Group.

Table 8.14: Water User Groups in Dauntri Sub-basin


No Community Province District Commune Registered
1 Kampang Pursat Bakan Svaydaunkeo yes
2 Boeng Kanthor Pursat Bakan Metoek yes
3 Boeng Kanseng Pursat Bakan Otapourng Not yet
4 Prek Am Battambang Moung Reiseiy Robas Monkul yes

Data: PDWRAM in Pursat and Battambang province

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 92

References
(References marked 'EL' are available in the Electronic Library)

CTI and DHI (Aug 03): Consolidation of hydro-meteorological data and multi-functional hydrological roles of Tonle Sap
Lake and its vicinities, Phase II. Final reports. CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and DHI – Water &
Environment. Client: Mekong River Commission (EL)
CTI (May 04): Consolidation of hydro-meteorological data and multi-functional hydrological roles of Tonle Sap Lake and its
vicinities, Phase III. Final report. CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. And DHI – Water & Environment. Client:
Mekong River Commission (EL)
Halcrow (Dec 03): Ranking criteria report. Irrigation Rehabilitation Study in Cambodia, prepared for the Mekong Secretariat
by Sir William Halcrow and Partners Ltd. in association with Mandala Agricultural Development Corporation.
Contract CAM.IRS 238.93, UNDP Grant 3.3.37/92/UNP, B/L 21
Halcrow (Apr 04): Inventory & analysis of existing systems. Volume 1: Main report; Volume 2: Banteay Meanchey,
Battambang, Kampot, Kandal; and Volume 6: Pursat, Siem Reap, Svay Rieng, Takeo. Irrigation Rehabilitation Study
in Cambodia, prepared for the Mekong Secretariat by Sir William Halcrow and Partners Ltd. in association with
Mandala Agricultural Development Corporation. Contract CAM.IRS 238.93, UNDP Grant 3.3.37/92/UNP, B/L 21
Halcrow (Jun 04): Final report: Main report; Annex A: Hydrology; Annex B: Agronomy; Annex C: Lowland rice soils of
Cambodia; Annex D: Socio-economics; and Annex F: Environmental assessment. Irrigation Rehabilitation Study in
Cambodia, prepared for the Mekong Secretariat by Sir William Halcrow and Partners Ltd. in association with
Mandala Agricultural Development Corporation. Contract CAM.IRS 238.93, UNDP Grant 3.3.37/92/UNP, B/L 21
JICA and MRD (May 02): The study on groundwater development in Central Cambodia. Final report prepared for Japan
International Cooperation Agency and Ministry of Rural Development, Cambodia, by Kokusai Kogyo Co. Ltd.
MOWRAM (March 2002): Smallholder water and land management in Cambodia. Prepared for Ministry of Water Resources
and Meteorology with the assistance of M. P. Mosley as Project Report 5 under the North West Irrigation Sector
Project, Part A: Capacity-building in Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology, Cambodia, funded by ADB (TA
3758-CAM)
MRC-BDP (Nov 05): National Sector Reviews. BDP Library Volume 13, October 2004, revised November 2005. Mekong
River Commission
MRC-WUP-JICA (Mar 04a): The study on hydro-meteorological monitoring for water quantity rules in Mekong River Basin.
Final report, Volume I (Main report), prepared by CTI and Nippon Koei (EL)
MRC-WUP-JICA (Mar 04b): The study on hydro-meteorological monitoring for water quantity rules in Mekong River Basin.
Final report, Volume 2a (supporting documents 1: Improvement of hydrological stations; 2: Gap filling of rainfall
data; 3: Hydrological monitoring; 4: Development of hydro-hydraulic model for the Cambodian floodplains; 5:
Application of hydro-hydraulic model; and 6: Water use in the Lower Mekong Basin), prepared by CTI and Nippon
Koei (EL)
MRC-WUP-JICA (Mar 04c): The study on hydro-meteorological monitoring for water quantity rules in Mekong River Basin.
Final report, Volume 2b (supporting documents 7: Maintenance of flows on the Mekong mainstream; 8: institutional
strengthening; and 9: Water use management), prepared by CTI and Nippon Koei (EL)
MRC-WUP-JICA (Mar 04d): The study on hydro-meteorological monitoring for water quantity rules in Mekong River Basin.
Final report, Volume III (Summary), prepared by CTI and Nippon Koei (EL)
Le van Sanh (June 02): Mission Report, Analysis of Hydrological Data at Stations around the Great Lake and on Mekong,
Bassac Rivers in 1960s and from 1998 to 2001. Phnom Penh
Nanni, Marcella (April 2001): End of assignment report, submitted to MOWRAM (Cambodia) by SMEC International Pty.
Ltd. under the Agricultural Hydraulics Component of the Agricultural Productivity Improvement Project
Nhim Sophea (Mar 06): Water quality data assessment 2005, MRC water quality monitoring network. Water Quality Office,
Department of Hydrology and River Works, MOWRAM
OADA (Mar 03): Study report on Kamping Puoy Irrigation Scheme Rehabilitation project in Battambang Province, the
Kingdom of Cambodia. Overseas Agricultural Development Association
WUP-FIN (Aug 02b): Data report. MRC Water Utilization Program, WUP-FIN component - Modelling of the flow regime
and water quality of the Tonle Sap Karri Eloheimo, Seppo Hellsten, Teemu Jantunen, Janos Jozsa, Mikko Kiirikki,
Hannu Lauri, Jorma Koponen, Juha Sarkkula, Olli Varis, and Markku Virtanen (EL)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 93

Appendix 1: Thematic maps


Note: This appendix is intended to provide an overview. The maps are submitted separately

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 94

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 95

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 96

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 97

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 98

Appendix 2: Data files


Note: The data files are submitted separately

Table A2.1: Time series data


File name Contents
R@9stations-allyears.xls Daily, monthly and annual rainfall at Battambang (8 years), Kg Chhnang (55 years),
Pursat (60 years), Krakor (36 years), Kravanh (10 years), Svay Donkeo (6 years), Talo
(6 years), Bamnak (15 years) and Boeung Khnar (7 years)
R@Pursat-12-05 Daily and monthly rainfall data from Pursat 1912-2005 (53 years), with summary
statistics
R@16stations-01-04.xls Monthly rainfall data from 16 stations from 2001-2004 (4 years), with summary statistics
R@3stations-7years.xls Monthly rainfall data from Battambang, Pursat and Kg Chhnang, from 1939, 1996, and
2001-05 (7 years)
E@2stations-96-04.xls Daily and monthly evaporation at Pochentong 2000-04 and Siem Reap 1996-2000
WL@KgChhnang-95-04.xls Daily water level at Kg Chhnang 1995-2004 (10 years)
WL@PrekKdam-95-04.xls Daily water level at Prek Kdam 1995-2004 (10 years)
Q@PrekKdam-64-73.xls Daily and monthly flow at Prek Kdam 1964-73 (10 years)
WL-Q@Boribo-98-05.xls Daily water level and calulated flow at Boribo (St. 590101) Jun 98 - Dec 05 (7.5 years)
WL-Q@Maung-01-02.xls Daily water level and calulated flow at Maung Russey (St. Dauntri) (St. 5501101)
Jun 01 - Dec 02 (1.5 years)
Q@4stations.xls Flow records from St. Boribo (91 months), St. Dauntri (19 months), and St. Pursat (72
and 58 months)

Table A2.2a: Data tables: Geography. livelihoods


File name Contents
Area-population.xls Area and population (2002-04) within the study area; buffaloes, cows, horses, goats,
pigs, and poultry; families using fertilizer; by province, district and commune
Communes-catchments.xls Commune areas within each sub-catchment
Elevations.xls Distribution of land elevation within each sub-basin
Forestcover.xls Forest cover within each sub-basin (1993, 1997, 2002, 2005), and rate of change
Soils.xls Soil classification in each sub-basin
Geology.xls Geological classification of each sub-basin
Protectedareas.xls Protected areas in each sub-basin
Agriculture-2006.xls PRD survey Jul-Aug 2006: Cultivation practices; cropping cycles; labour input; livestock;
use of fertilizers and pesticides; farmgate prices; obstacles to cultivation
B-farming-econ-03-05.xls Boribo sub-basin, PRD survey Jul-Aug 2006: Economy of farming households
(2003-05)

Table A2.2b: Data tables: Water uses


File name Contents
Domesticdemand.xls Present and projected domestic water demand in each sub-basin
Irrigation.xls Wet and dry season irrigated areas, actual and potential, in each sub-basin
Subprojects.xls Water availability for candidate sub-projects, and irrigable areas

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 99

Table A2.2c: Data tables: Water balance


File name Contents
Monitoringstations.xls Rainfall, water level and flow monitoring stations inside or near the study area
B-W-balance-4of5yrs.xls Boribo Sub-basin, calculated water balance, present conditions, with water uses and
availability, in 4 out of 5 years, whole sub-basin and details
B-W-balance-scenarios.xls Boribo Sub-basin, calculated water balance, alternative scenarios: Increased domestic
consumption, 50-50 and 100-0 diversion at Bamnak, and impact of climate change
D-W-balance-4of5yrs.xls Dauntri Sub-basin, calculated water balance, present conditions, with water uses and
availability, in 4 out of 5 years, whole sub-basin and details
D-W-balance-scenarios.xls Dauntri Sub-basin, calculated water balance, alternative scenarios: Damnak Ampil
Canal, candidate sub-projects, and impact of climate change
Wells.xls Inventory of groundwater wells and yield
Wells-KgChhnang.xls Inventory of groundwater wells in Kg Chhnang, with yield and geological layers

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 100

Appendix 3: Water management structures


St. Dauntri (St. Moung)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 101

St. Svay Donkeo

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 102

St. Kambot (Preahmlu)

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 103

Appendix 4: Water balance tables


Note: The water balance tables are also submitted as electronic data files

Table A4.1: Summary water balance, base situation

Base situation
Rainfall Evaporation Storage and Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
losses availability uses uses uses from catchment
[m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s]
January 3.9 19.6 -19.2 3.6 0.066 1.466 0.360 1.7
February 4.9 7.1 -4.4 2.2 0.066 1.466 0.360 0.3
March 45.2 45.2 -3.4 3.4 0.066 2.933 0.360 0.0
April 84.6 84.6 -3.4 3.4 0.066 2.933 0.360 0.0
May 163.2 135.7 24.2 3.4 0.066 2.933 0.360 0.0
June 143.6 126.9 10.3 6.4 0.066 2.933 0.360 3.0
July 151.4 111.1 -7.7 48.0 0.066 12.489 0.360 35.1
August 197.7 98.3 -12.3 111.6 0.066 12.489 0.360 98.7
September 256.7 77.7 29.4 149.6 0.066 12.489 0.360 136.7
October 246.8 85.6 50.6 110.6 0.066 12.489 0.360 97.7
November 121.0 102.3 -15.3 34.0 0.066 12.489 0.360 21.0
December 19.7 78.3 -67.5 8.8 0.066 1.466 0.360 6.9
Yearly 119.9 81.0 0.1 38.8 0.066 6.548 0.360 31.8

Table A4.2: Summary water balance, base situation with Damnak Ampil Canal

Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Rainfall Evaporation Storage and Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
losses availability uses uses uses from catchment
[m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s]
January 3.9 19.6 -24.2 8.6 0.066 1.466 0.360 6.7
February 4.9 7.1 -8.6 6.4 0.066 1.466 0.360 4.5
March 45.2 45.2 -6.6 6.6 0.066 2.933 0.360 3.2
April 84.6 84.6 -7.5 7.5 0.066 2.933 0.360 4.2
May 163.2 135.7 17.3 10.2 0.066 2.933 0.360 6.9
June 143.6 126.9 -1.5 18.2 0.066 2.933 0.360 14.8
July 151.4 111.1 -22.7 63.0 0.066 12.489 0.360 50.1
August 197.7 98.3 -27.3 126.6 0.066 12.489 0.360 113.7
September 256.7 77.7 14.4 164.6 0.066 12.489 0.360 151.7
October 246.8 85.6 35.6 125.6 0.066 12.489 0.360 112.7
November 121.0 102.3 -25.9 44.6 0.066 12.489 0.360 31.7
December 19.7 78.3 -75.7 17.1 0.066 1.466 0.360 15.2
Yearly 119.9 81.0 -11.1 49.9 0.066 6.548 0.360 42.9

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 104

Table A4.3: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects

Scenario with Damnak Ampil Channel and Candidate projects included


Rainfall Evaporation Storage and Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
losses availability uses uses uses from catchment
[m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s]
January 3.9 19.6 -24.2 8.6 0.066 1.866 0.360 6.3
February 4.9 7.1 -8.8 6.6 0.066 1.866 0.360 4.3
March 45.2 45.2 -7.0 7.0 0.066 3.333 0.360 3.2
April 84.6 84.6 -7.9 7.9 0.066 3.333 0.360 4.2
May 163.2 135.7 16.9 10.6 0.066 3.333 0.360 6.9
June 143.6 126.9 -1.5 18.2 0.066 3.333 0.360 14.4
July 151.4 111.1 -22.7 63.0 0.066 23.689 0.360 38.9
August 197.7 98.3 -27.3 126.6 0.066 23.689 0.360 102.5
September 256.7 77.7 14.4 164.6 0.066 23.689 0.360 140.5
October 246.8 85.6 35.6 125.6 0.066 23.689 0.360 101.5
November 121.0 102.3 -26.4 45.1 0.066 23.689 0.360 20.9
December 19.7 78.3 -75.7 17.1 0.066 1.866 0.360 14.8
Yearly 119.9 81.0 -11.2 50.1 0.066 11.448 0.360 38.2

Table A4.4: Summary water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change

Scenario with Damnak Ampil Channel and Candidate projects and climate change included
Rainfall Evaporation Storage and Water Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
losses availability uses uses uses from catchment
[m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s] [m3/s]
January 3.9 19.6 -24.0 8.4 0.066 1.866 0.360 6.1
February 4.9 7.1 -8.8 6.6 0.066 1.866 0.360 4.3
March 45.2 45.2 -6.9 6.9 0.066 3.333 0.360 3.2
April 84.6 84.6 -7.9 7.9 0.066 3.333 0.360 4.2
May 163.2 135.7 17.0 10.5 0.066 3.333 0.360 6.8
June 143.6 126.9 2.3 14.5 0.066 3.333 0.360 10.7
July 151.4 111.1 -11.5 51.8 0.066 23.689 0.360 27.7
August 197.7 98.3 -20.1 119.4 0.066 23.689 0.360 95.3
September 256.7 77.7 21.3 157.7 0.066 23.689 0.360 133.6
October 246.8 85.6 41.2 120.1 0.066 23.689 0.360 96.0
November 121.0 102.3 -22.8 41.5 0.066 23.689 0.360 17.4
December 19.7 78.3 -75.2 16.5 0.066 1.866 0.360 14.2
Yearly 119.9 81.0 -8.0 46.8 0.066 11.448 0.360 34.9

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 105

Table A4.5a: Water balance, base situation. Catchments 23, 25 and 26.

Catchment 23 Base situation


Area (km2): 196.3 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.17 0.21 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.17
feb 0.07 0.28 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.07
mar 0.03 2.49 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.03
apr 0.01 4.70 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.01
may 0.02 9.04 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.02
jun 0.34 7.97 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.34
jul 2.66 8.40 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 2.66
aug 6.18 10.96 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 6.18
sep 8.29 14.24 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 8.29
oct 6.13 13.67 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 6.13
nov 1.86 6.69 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 1.86
dec 0.49 1.07 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.49

Catchment 25 Base situation


Area (km2): 215.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.18 0.23 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.18
feb 0.07 0.31 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.07
mar 0.03 2.74 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.03
apr 0.01 5.16 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.01
may 0.02 9.93 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.02
jun 0.38 8.75 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.38
jul 2.92 9.22 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 2.92
aug 6.79 12.04 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.79
sep 9.10 15.63 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 9.10
oct 6.73 15.01 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.73
nov 2.04 7.35 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 2.04
dec 0.54 1.17 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.54

Catchment 26 Base situation


Area (km2): 154.5 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.13 0.17 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.13
feb 0.05 0.22 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.05
mar 0.02 1.96 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.02
apr 0.01 3.70 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.01
may 0.01 7.12 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.01
jun 0.27 6.28 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.27
jul 2.09 6.61 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 2.09
aug 4.87 8.63 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.87
sep 6.52 11.21 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 6.52
oct 4.83 10.76 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.83
nov 1.46 5.27 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 1.46
dec 0.38 0.84 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.38

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 106

Table A4.5b: Water balance, base situation. Catchments 24, 8 and 2

Catchment 24 Base situation


Area (km2): 6.16 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.01 0.01 0.31 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.32
feb 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.13
mar 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.05
apr 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.02
may 0.00 0.28 0.03 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.03
jun 0.01 0.25 0.64 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.65
jul 0.08 0.26 5.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.10
aug 0.19 0.34 11.66 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.85
sep 0.26 0.45 15.63 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15.89
oct 0.19 0.43 11.56 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.75
nov 0.06 0.21 3.51 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.56
dec 0.02 0.03 0.92 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.93

Catchment 8 Base situation


Area (km2): 155.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.13 0.17 0.49 0.0019 0.0000 0.0098 0.61
feb 0.05 0.23 0.19 0.0019 0.0000 0.0098 0.24
mar 0.02 1.98 0.08 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 0.06
apr 0.01 3.73 0.03 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 0.01
may 0.01 7.18 0.05 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 0.03
jun 0.27 6.33 1.00 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 1.23
jul 2.11 6.67 7.76 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 8.55
aug 4.91 8.70 18.03 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 21.62
sep 6.58 11.30 24.18 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 29.44
oct 4.87 10.85 17.88 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 21.43
nov 1.48 5.31 5.42 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 5.58
dec 0.39 0.85 1.42 0.0019 0.0000 0.0098 1.80

Catchment 2 Base situation


Area (km2): 366.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.31 0.40 0.61 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.74
feb 0.13 0.53 0.24 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.18
mar 0.05 4.65 0.06 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
apr 0.02 8.77 0.01 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
may 0.03 16.88 0.03 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
jun 0.64 14.89 1.23 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 1.57
jul 4.97 15.69 8.55 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 12.06
aug 11.55 20.47 21.62 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 31.71
sep 15.48 26.59 29.44 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 43.45
oct 11.45 25.52 21.43 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 31.42
nov 3.47 12.50 5.58 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 7.59
dec 0.91 1.99 1.80 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 2.52

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 107

Table A4.5c: Water balance, base situation. Catchments 1, 17 and 21

Catchment 1 Base situation


Area (km2): 184.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.20 0.74 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.89
feb 0.06 0.27 0.18 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.23
mar 0.03 2.35 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
apr 0.01 4.42 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
may 0.02 8.51 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
jun 0.32 7.51 1.57 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 1.77
jul 2.51 7.91 12.06 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 13.69
aug 5.82 10.32 31.71 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 36.65
sep 7.80 13.40 43.45 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 50.38
oct 5.77 12.87 31.42 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 36.31
nov 1.75 6.30 7.59 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 8.46
dec 0.46 1.01 2.52 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 2.98

Catchment 17 Base situation


Area (km2): 503.89 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.43 0.55 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.38
feb 0.17 0.73 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.12
mar 0.07 6.40 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
apr 0.03 12.06 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
may 0.04 23.21 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
jun 0.88 20.47 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.57
jul 6.83 21.56 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 6.30
aug 15.87 28.14 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 15.34
sep 21.28 36.55 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 20.75
oct 15.74 35.09 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 15.21
nov 4.77 17.18 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 4.24
dec 1.25 2.74 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 1.20

Catchment 21 Base situation


Area (km2): 412.57 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.35 0.45 0.00 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 0.19
feb 0.14 0.60 0.00 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 0.00
mar 0.06 5.24 0.00 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 0.00
apr 0.02 9.87 0.00 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 0.00
may 0.04 19.00 0.00 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 0.00
jun 0.72 16.76 0.00 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 0.56
jul 5.59 17.66 0.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 5.26
aug 13.00 23.04 0.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 12.66
sep 17.42 29.92 0.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 17.09
oct 12.89 28.73 0.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 12.55
nov 3.91 14.06 0.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 3.57
dec 1.03 2.24 0.00 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 0.87

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 108

Table A4.5d: Water balance, base situation. Catchments 20, 18 and 15

Catchment 20 Base situation


Area (km2): 45.26 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.04 0.05 0.19 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 0.20
feb 0.02 0.07 0.00 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 0.00
mar 0.01 0.57 0.00 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 0.00
apr 0.00 1.08 0.00 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 0.00
may 0.00 2.08 0.00 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 0.00
jun 0.08 1.84 0.56 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 0.56
jul 0.61 1.94 5.26 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 5.65
aug 1.43 2.53 12.66 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 13.87
sep 1.91 3.28 17.09 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 18.78
oct 1.41 3.15 12.55 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 13.75
nov 0.43 1.54 3.57 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 3.78
dec 0.11 0.25 0.87 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 0.95

Catchment 18 Base situation


Area (km2): 27.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 0.20 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 0.10
feb 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 0.00
mar 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 0.00
apr 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 0.00
may 0.00 1.27 0.00 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 0.00
jun 0.05 1.12 0.56 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 0.41
jul 0.37 1.18 5.65 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 5.42
aug 0.87 1.54 13.87 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 14.13
sep 1.16 2.00 18.78 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 19.34
oct 0.86 1.92 13.75 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 14.01
nov 0.26 0.94 3.78 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 3.44
dec 0.07 0.15 0.95 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 0.89

Catchment 15 Base situation


Area (km2): 24.32 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 0.47 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 0.39
feb 0.01 0.04 0.12 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 0.02
mar 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 0.00
apr 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 0.00
may 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 0.00
jun 0.04 0.99 0.98 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 0.85
jul 0.33 1.04 11.72 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 11.54
aug 0.77 1.36 29.48 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 29.73
sep 1.03 1.76 40.09 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 40.60
oct 0.76 1.69 29.22 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 29.46
nov 0.23 0.83 7.69 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 7.40
dec 0.06 0.13 2.09 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 2.04

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 109

Table A4.5e: Water balance, base situation, catchments 16, 19 and 14

Catchment 16 Base situation


Area (km2): 190.51 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.21 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.12
feb 0.07 0.28 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.02
mar 0.03 2.42 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
apr 0.01 4.56 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
may 0.02 8.77 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
jun 0.33 7.74 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.12
jul 2.58 8.15 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 2.26
aug 6.00 10.64 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.68
sep 8.05 13.82 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 7.72
oct 5.95 13.27 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.62
nov 1.80 6.49 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 1.48
dec 0.47 1.04 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.43

Catchment 19 Base situation


Area (km2): 121.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 0.00 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 0.07
feb 0.04 0.18 0.00 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 0.00
mar 0.02 1.54 0.00 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 0.00
apr 0.01 2.91 0.00 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 0.00
may 0.01 5.60 0.00 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 0.00
jun 0.21 4.94 0.00 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 0.11
jul 1.65 5.21 0.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 1.12
aug 3.83 6.80 0.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 3.30
sep 5.14 8.83 0.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 4.60
oct 3.80 8.47 0.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 3.27
nov 1.15 4.15 0.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 0.62
dec 0.30 0.66 0.00 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 0.27

Catchment 14 Base situation


Area (km2): 26.53 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 0.05
feb 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 0.01
mar 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.00
apr 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.00
may 0.00 1.22 0.00 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.00
jun 0.05 1.08 0.05 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.04
jul 0.36 1.14 0.56 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 0.56
aug 0.84 1.48 1.65 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 2.13
sep 1.12 1.92 2.30 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 3.07
oct 0.83 1.85 1.63 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 2.11
nov 0.25 0.90 0.31 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 0.20
dec 0.07 0.14 0.13 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 0.20

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 110

Table A4.5f: Water balance, base situation. Catchments 10, 12 and 4

Catchment 10 Base situation


Area (km2): 95.48 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.08 0.10 0.56 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 0.61
feb 0.03 0.14 0.05 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 0.05
mar 0.01 1.21 0.00 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 0.00
apr 0.01 2.29 0.00 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 0.00
may 0.01 4.40 0.00 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 0.00
jun 0.17 3.88 1.01 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 0.93
jul 1.29 4.09 14.36 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 14.94
aug 3.01 5.33 37.53 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 39.83
sep 4.03 6.93 51.39 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 54.71
oct 2.98 6.65 37.19 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 39.46
nov 0.90 3.25 9.09 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 9.28
dec 0.24 0.52 2.67 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 2.88

Catchment 12 Base situation


Area (km2): 7397 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.06 8.05 0.03 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 0.07
feb 0.03 10.73 0.00 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 0.01
mar 0.01 93.89 0.00 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.00
apr 0.00 177.05 0.00 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.00
may 0.01 340.68 0.00 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.00
jun 0.13 300.45 0.05 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.03
jul 1.00 316.54 0.56 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 0.66
aug 2.33 413.11 1.65 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 3.08
sep 3.12 536.51 2.30 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 4.53
oct 2.31 515.05 1.63 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 3.05
nov 0.70 252.16 0.31 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 0.11
dec 0.18 40.24 0.13 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 0.29

Catchment 4 Base situation


Area (km2): 120.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 0.68 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 0.78
feb 0.04 0.17 0.06 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 0.09
mar 0.02 1.53 0.00 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 0.00
apr 0.01 2.89 0.00 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 0.00
may 0.01 5.55 0.00 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 0.00
jun 0.21 4.90 0.96 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 0.97
jul 1.63 5.16 15.60 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 15.97
aug 3.80 6.73 42.91 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 45.44
sep 5.09 8.74 59.23 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 63.06
oct 3.77 8.39 42.51 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 45.00
nov 1.14 4.11 9.39 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 9.26
dec 0.30 0.66 3.17 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 3.46

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 111

Table A4.5g: Water balance, base situation. Catchments 6, 22 and 7

Catchment 6 Base situation


Area (km2): 103.63 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.09 0.11 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
feb 0.04 0.15 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
. mar 0.01 1.32 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
apr 0.01 2.48 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
may 0.01 4.77 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jun 0.18 4.21 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jul 1.40 4.43 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.01
aug 3.26 5.79 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.87
sep 4.38 7.52 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 2.99
oct 3.24 7.22 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.85
nov 0.98 3.53 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.00
dec 0.26 0.56 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00

Catchment 22 Base situation


Area (km2): 185.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.20 0.00 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 0.00
feb 0.06 0.27 0.00 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 0.00
mar 0.03 2.36 0.00 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 0.00
apr 0.01 4.44 0.00 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 0.00
may 0.02 8.55 0.00 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 0.00
jun 0.32 7.54 0.00 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 0.15
jul 2.52 7.95 0.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 1.98
aug 5.85 10.37 0.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 5.31
sep 7.84 13.47 0.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 7.31
oct 5.80 12.93 0.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 5.27
nov 1.76 6.33 0.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 1.22
dec 0.46 1.01 0.00 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 0.28

Catchment 7 Base situation


Area (km2): 330.56 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.28 0.36 0.00 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 0.00
feb 0.11 0.48 0.00 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 0.00
mar 0.05 4.20 0.00 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 0.00
apr 0.02 7.91 0.00 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 0.00
may 0.03 15.22 0.00 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 0.00
jun 0.58 13.43 0.15 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 0.26
jul 4.48 14.15 1.98 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 5.43
aug 10.41 18.46 5.31 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 14.69
sep 13.96 23.98 7.31 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 20.23
oct 10.33 23.02 5.27 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 14.56
nov 3.13 11.27 1.22 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 3.32
dec 0.82 1.80 0.28 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 0.47

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 112

Table A4.6a: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, catchments 23, 25 and 26

Catchment 23 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 196.3 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.17 0.21 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.17
.
feb 0.07 0.28 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.07
mar 0.03 2.49 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.03
apr 0.01 4.70 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.01
may 0.02 9.04 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.02
jun 0.34 7.97 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.34
jul 2.66 8.40 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 2.66
aug 6.18 10.96 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 6.18
sep 8.29 14.24 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 8.29
oct 6.13 13.67 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 6.13
nov 1.86 6.69 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 1.86
dec 0.49 1.07 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.49

Catchment 25 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 215.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.18 0.23 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.18
feb 0.07 0.31 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.07
mar 0.03 2.74 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.03
apr 0.01 5.16 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.01
may 0.02 9.93 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.02
jun 0.38 8.75 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.38
jul 2.92 9.22 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 2.92
aug 6.79 12.04 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.79
sep 9.10 15.63 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 9.10
oct 6.73 15.01 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.73
nov 2.04 7.35 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 2.04
dec 0.54 1.17 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.54

Catchment 26 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 154.5 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.13 0.17 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.13
feb 0.05 0.22 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.05
mar 0.02 1.96 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.02
apr 0.01 3.70 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.01
may 0.01 7.12 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.01
jun 0.27 6.28 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.27
jul 2.09 6.61 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 2.09
aug 4.87 8.63 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.87
sep 6.52 11.21 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 6.52
oct 4.83 10.76 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.83
nov 1.46 5.27 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 1.46
dec 0.38 0.84 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.38

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 113

Table A4.6b: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, catchments 24, 8 and 2

Catchment 24 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 6.16 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.01 0.01 0.31 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.32
feb 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.13
mar 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.05
apr 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.02
may 0.00 0.28 0.03 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.03
jun 0.01 0.25 0.64 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.65
jul 0.08 0.26 5.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.10
aug 0.19 0.34 11.66 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.85
sep 0.26 0.45 15.63 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15.89
oct 0.19 0.43 11.56 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.75
nov 0.06 0.21 3.51 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.56
dec 0.02 0.03 0.92 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.93

Catchment 8 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 155.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.13 0.17 0.49 0.0019 0.0000 0.0098 0.61
feb 0.05 0.23 0.19 0.0019 0.0000 0.0098 0.24
mar 0.02 1.98 0.08 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 0.06
apr 0.01 3.73 0.03 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 0.01
may 0.01 7.18 0.05 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 0.03
jun 0.27 6.33 1.00 0.0019 0.0210 0.0098 1.23
jul 2.11 6.67 7.76 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 8.55
aug 4.91 8.70 18.03 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 21.62
sep 6.58 11.30 24.18 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 29.44
oct 4.87 10.85 17.88 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 21.43
nov 1.48 5.31 5.42 0.0019 1.3060 0.0098 5.58
dec 0.39 0.85 1.42 0.0019 0.0000 0.0098 1.80

Catchment 2 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 366.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.31 0.40 0.61 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.74
feb 0.13 0.53 0.24 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.18
mar 0.05 4.65 0.06 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
apr 0.02 8.77 0.01 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
may 0.03 16.88 0.03 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
jun 0.64 14.89 1.23 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 1.57
jul 4.97 15.69 8.55 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 12.06
aug 11.55 20.47 21.62 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 31.71
sep 15.48 26.59 29.44 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 43.45
oct 11.45 25.52 21.43 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 31.42
nov 3.47 12.50 5.58 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 7.59
dec 0.91 1.99 1.80 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 2.52

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 114

Table A4.6c: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, catchments 1, 17 and 21

Catchment 1 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 184.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.20 0.74 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.89
feb 0.06 0.27 0.18 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.23
mar 0.03 2.35 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
apr 0.01 4.42 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
may 0.02 8.51 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
jun 0.32 7.51 1.57 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 1.77
jul 2.51 7.91 12.06 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 13.69
aug 5.82 10.32 31.71 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 36.65
sep 7.80 13.40 43.45 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 50.38
oct 5.77 12.87 31.42 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 36.31
nov 1.75 6.30 7.59 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 8.46
dec 0.46 1.01 2.52 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 2.98

Catchment 17 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 503.89 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.43 0.55 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.38
feb 0.17 0.73 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.12
mar 0.07 6.40 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
apr 0.03 12.06 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
may 0.04 23.21 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
jun 0.88 20.47 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.57
jul 6.83 21.56 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 6.30
aug 15.87 28.14 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 15.34
sep 21.28 36.55 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 20.75
oct 15.74 35.09 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 15.21
nov 4.77 17.18 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 4.24
dec 1.25 2.74 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 1.20

Catchment 21 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 412.57 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.35 0.45 0.80 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 0.99
feb 0.14 0.60 1.67 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 1.65
mar 0.06 5.24 1.67 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 1.57
apr 0.02 9.87 2.03 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 1.90
may 0.04 19.00 2.91 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 2.79
jun 0.72 16.76 3.94 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 4.51
jul 5.59 17.66 5.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 10.26
aug 13.00 23.04 5.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 17.66
sep 17.42 29.92 5.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 22.09
oct 12.89 28.73 5.00 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 17.55
nov 3.91 14.06 1.89 0.0063 0.2910 0.0394 5.46
dec 1.03 2.24 2.09 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 2.96

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 115

Table A4.6d: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, catchments 20, 18 and 15

Catchment 20 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 45.26 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.04 0.05 0.99 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 1.00
feb 0.02 0.07 1.65 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 1.63
mar 0.01 0.57 1.57 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 1.49
apr 0.00 1.08 1.90 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 1.82
may 0.00 2.08 2.79 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 2.71
jun 0.08 1.84 4.51 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 4.50
jul 0.61 1.94 10.26 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 10.65
aug 1.43 2.53 17.66 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 18.87
sep 1.91 3.28 22.09 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 23.78
oct 1.41 3.15 17.55 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 18.75
nov 0.43 1.54 5.46 0.0008 0.2130 0.0049 5.67
dec 0.11 0.25 2.96 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 3.04

Catchment 18 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 27.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.00 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 0.90
feb 0.01 0.04 1.63 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 1.52
mar 0.00 0.35 1.49 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 1.29
apr 0.00 0.66 1.82 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 1.62
may 0.00 1.27 2.71 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 2.51
jun 0.05 1.12 4.50 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 4.35
jul 0.37 1.18 10.65 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 10.42
aug 0.87 1.54 18.87 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 19.13
sep 1.16 2.00 23.78 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 24.34
oct 0.86 1.92 18.75 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 19.01
nov 0.26 0.94 5.67 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 5.33
dec 0.07 0.15 3.04 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 2.98

Catchment 15 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 24.32 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.27 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 1.19
feb 0.01 0.04 1.63 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 1.53
mar 0.00 0.31 1.29 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 1.13
apr 0.00 0.58 1.62 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 1.45
may 0.00 1.12 2.51 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 2.35
jun 0.04 0.99 4.92 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 4.80
jul 0.33 1.04 16.72 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 16.54
aug 0.77 1.36 34.48 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 34.73
sep 1.03 1.76 45.09 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 45.60
oct 0.76 1.69 34.22 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 34.46
nov 0.23 0.83 9.58 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 9.29
dec 0.06 0.13 4.18 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 4.13

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 116

Table A4.6e: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, catchments 16,19 and 14.

Catchment 16 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 190.51 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.21 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.12
feb 0.07 0.28 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.02
mar 0.03 2.42 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
apr 0.01 4.56 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
may 0.02 8.77 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
jun 0.33 7.74 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.12
jul 2.58 8.15 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 2.26
aug 6.00 10.64 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.68
sep 8.05 13.82 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 7.72
oct 5.95 13.27 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.62
nov 1.80 6.49 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 1.48
dec 0.47 1.04 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.43

Catchment 19 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 121.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 2.30 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 2.37
feb 0.04 0.18 1.67 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 1.67
mar 0.02 1.54 1.67 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 1.58
apr 0.01 2.91 2.03 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 1.93
may 0.01 5.60 2.91 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 2.82
jun 0.21 4.94 3.94 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 4.05
jul 1.65 5.21 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 6.12
aug 3.83 6.80 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 8.30
sep 5.14 8.83 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 9.60
oct 3.80 8.47 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 8.27
nov 1.15 4.15 4.39 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 5.01
dec 0.30 0.66 3.09 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 3.35

Catchment 14 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 26.53 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.18 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 1.20
feb 0.01 0.04 0.84 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 0.84
mar 0.00 0.34 0.79 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.73
apr 0.00 0.64 0.97 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.91
may 0.00 1.22 1.41 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 1.35
jun 0.05 1.08 2.03 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 2.01
jul 0.36 1.14 3.06 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 3.06
aug 0.84 1.48 4.15 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 4.63
sep 1.12 1.92 4.80 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 5.57
oct 0.83 1.85 4.13 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 4.61
nov 0.25 0.90 2.50 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 2.40
dec 0.07 0.14 1.68 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 1.74

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 117

Table A4.6f: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, catchments 10,12 and 4

Catchment 10 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 95.48 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.08 0.10 2.51 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 2.56
feb 0.03 0.14 2.40 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 2.40
mar 0.01 1.21 1.86 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 1.63
apr 0.01 2.29 2.36 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 2.12
may 0.01 4.40 3.70 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 3.46
jun 0.17 3.88 6.93 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 6.85
jul 1.29 4.09 21.86 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 22.44
aug 3.01 5.33 45.03 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 47.33
sep 4.03 6.93 58.89 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 62.21
oct 2.98 6.65 44.69 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 46.96
nov 0.90 3.25 13.17 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 13.36
dec 0.24 0.52 6.30 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 6.51

Catchment 12 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 7397 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.06 8.05 1.18 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 1.22
feb 0.03 10.73 0.84 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 0.84
mar 0.01 93.89 0.79 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.65
apr 0.00 177.05 0.97 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.82
may 0.01 340.68 1.41 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 1.26
jun 0.13 300.45 2.03 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 2.00
jul 1.00 316.54 3.06 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 3.16
aug 2.33 413.11 4.15 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 5.58
sep 3.12 536.51 4.80 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 7.03
oct 2.31 515.05 4.13 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 5.55
nov 0.70 252.16 2.50 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 2.31
dec 0.18 40.24 1.68 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 1.84

Catchment 4 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 120.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 3.78 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 3.88
feb 0.04 0.17 3.24 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 3.27
mar 0.02 1.53 2.28 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 2.10
apr 0.01 2.89 2.94 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 2.75
may 0.01 5.55 4.73 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 4.54
jun 0.21 4.90 8.85 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 8.86
jul 1.63 5.16 25.60 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 25.97
aug 3.80 6.73 52.91 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 55.44
sep 5.09 8.74 69.23 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 73.06
oct 3.77 8.39 52.51 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 55.00
nov 1.14 4.11 15.67 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 15.54
dec 0.30 0.66 8.35 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 8.64

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 118

Table A4.6g: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, catchments 6, 22 and 7

Catchment 6 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 103.63 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.09 0.11 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
feb 0.04 0.15 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
mar 0.01 1.32 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
apr 0.01 2.48 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
may 0.01 4.77 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jun 0.18 4.21 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jul 1.40 4.43 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.01
aug 3.26 5.79 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.87
sep 4.38 7.52 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 2.99
oct 3.24 7.22 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.85
nov 0.98 3.53 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.00
dec 0.26 0.56 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00

Catchment 22 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 185.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.20 2.30 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 2.28
feb 0.06 0.27 1.67 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.55
mar 0.03 2.36 1.67 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.51
apr 0.01 4.44 2.03 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.87
may 0.02 8.55 2.91 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 2.75
jun 0.32 7.54 3.94 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 4.09
jul 2.52 7.95 5.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 6.98
aug 5.85 10.37 5.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 10.31
sep 7.84 13.47 5.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 12.31
oct 5.80 12.93 5.00 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 10.27
nov 1.76 6.33 4.39 0.0074 0.4840 0.0436 5.61
dec 0.46 1.01 3.09 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 3.37

Catchment 7 Scenario with Damnak Ampil channel included


Area (km2): 330.56 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.28 0.36 2.28 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 1.93
feb 0.11 0.48 1.55 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 1.03
mar 0.05 4.20 1.51 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 1.10
apr 0.02 7.91 1.87 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 1.42
may 0.03 15.22 2.75 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 2.32
jun 0.58 13.43 4.09 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 4.21
jul 4.48 14.15 6.98 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 10.43
aug 10.41 18.46 10.31 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 19.69
sep 13.96 23.98 12.31 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 25.23
oct 10.33 23.02 10.27 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 19.56
nov 3.13 11.27 5.61 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 7.71
dec 0.82 1.80 3.37 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 3.56

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 119

Table A4.7a: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects,
catchments 23, 25 and 26

Catchment 23 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 196.3 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.17 0.21 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.17
feb 0.07 0.28 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.07
mar 0.03 2.49 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.03
apr 0.01 4.70 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.01
may 0.02 9.04 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.02
jun 0.34 7.97 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.34
jul 2.66 8.40 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 2.66
aug 6.18 10.96 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 6.18
sep 8.29 14.24 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 8.29
oct 6.13 13.67 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 6.13
nov 1.86 6.69 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 1.86
dec 0.49 1.07 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.49

Catchment 25 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 215.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.18 0.23 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.18
feb 0.07 0.31 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.07
mar 0.03 2.74 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.03
apr 0.01 5.16 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.01
may 0.02 9.93 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.02
jun 0.38 8.75 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.38
jul 2.92 9.22 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 2.92
aug 6.79 12.04 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.79
sep 9.10 15.63 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 9.10
oct 6.73 15.01 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.73
nov 2.04 7.35 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 2.04
dec 0.54 1.17 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.54

Catchment 26 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 154.5 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.13 0.17 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.13
feb 0.05 0.22 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.05
mar 0.02 1.96 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.02
apr 0.01 3.70 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.01
may 0.01 7.12 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.01
jun 0.27 6.28 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.27
jul 2.09 6.61 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 2.09
aug 4.87 8.63 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.87
sep 6.52 11.21 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 6.52
oct 4.83 10.76 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.83
nov 1.46 5.27 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 1.46
dec 0.38 0.84 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.38

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 120

Table A4.7b: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects,
catchments 24, 8 and 2

Catchment 24 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 6.16 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.01 0.01 0.31 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.32
feb 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.13
mar 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.05
apr 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.02
may 0.00 0.28 0.03 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.03
jun 0.01 0.25 0.64 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.65
jul 0.08 0.26 5.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.10
aug 0.19 0.34 11.66 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.85
sep 0.26 0.45 15.63 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15.89
oct 0.19 0.43 11.56 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.75
nov 0.06 0.21 3.51 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.56
dec 0.02 0.03 0.92 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.93

Catchment 8 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 155.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.13 0.17 0.49 0.0019 0.4000 0.0098 0.21
feb 0.05 0.23 0.19 0.0019 0.4000 0.0098 0.00
mar 0.02 1.98 0.08 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.00
apr 0.01 3.73 0.03 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.00
may 0.01 7.18 0.05 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.00
jun 0.27 6.33 1.00 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.83
jul 2.11 6.67 7.76 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 2.55
aug 4.91 8.70 18.03 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 15.62
sep 6.58 11.30 24.18 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 23.44
oct 4.87 10.85 17.88 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 15.43
nov 1.48 5.31 5.42 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 0.00
dec 0.39 0.85 1.42 0.0019 0.4000 0.0098 1.40

Catchment 2 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 366.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.31 0.40 0.21 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.34
feb 0.13 0.53 0.00 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.00
mar 0.05 4.65 0.00 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
apr 0.02 8.77 0.00 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
may 0.03 16.88 0.00 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
jun 0.64 14.89 0.83 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 1.17
jul 4.97 15.69 2.55 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 6.06
aug 11.55 20.47 15.62 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 25.71
sep 15.48 26.59 23.44 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 37.45
oct 11.45 25.52 15.43 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 25.42
nov 3.47 12.50 0.00 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 2.01
dec 0.91 1.99 1.40 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 2.12

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 121

Table A4.7c: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects,
catchments 1, 17 and 21

Catchment 1 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 184.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.20 0.34 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.49
feb 0.06 0.27 0.00 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.00
mar 0.03 2.35 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
apr 0.01 4.42 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
may 0.02 8.51 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
jun 0.32 7.51 1.17 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 1.37
jul 2.51 7.91 6.06 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 7.69
aug 5.82 10.32 25.71 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 30.65
sep 7.80 13.40 37.45 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 44.38
oct 5.77 12.87 25.42 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 30.31
nov 1.75 6.30 2.01 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 2.88
dec 0.46 1.01 2.12 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 2.58

Catchment 17 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 503.89 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.43 0.55 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.38
feb 0.17 0.73 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.12
mar 0.07 6.40 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
apr 0.03 12.06 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
may 0.04 23.21 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
jun 0.88 20.47 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.57
jul 6.83 21.56 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 6.30
aug 15.87 28.14 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 15.34
sep 21.28 36.55 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 20.75
oct 15.74 35.09 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 15.21
nov 4.77 17.18 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 4.24
dec 1.25 2.74 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 1.20

Catchment 21 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 412.57 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.35 0.45 0.80 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 0.99
feb 0.14 0.60 1.67 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 1.65
mar 0.06 5.24 1.67 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 1.57
apr 0.02 9.87 2.03 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 1.90
may 0.04 19.00 2.91 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 2.79
jun 0.72 16.76 3.94 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 4.51
jul 5.59 17.66 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 6.26
aug 13.00 23.04 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 13.66
sep 17.42 29.92 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 18.09
oct 12.89 28.73 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 13.55
nov 3.91 14.06 1.89 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 1.46
dec 1.03 2.24 2.09 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 2.96

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 122

Table A4.7d: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects,
catchments 20, 18 and 15

Catchment 20 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 45.26 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.04 0.05 0.99 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 1.00
feb 0.02 0.07 1.65 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 1.63
mar 0.01 0.57 1.57 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 1.49
apr 0.00 1.08 1.90 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 1.82
may 0.00 2.08 2.79 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 2.71
jun 0.08 1.84 4.51 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 4.50
jul 0.61 1.94 6.26 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 6.05
aug 1.43 2.53 13.66 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 14.27
sep 1.91 3.28 18.09 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 19.18
oct 1.41 3.15 13.55 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 14.15
nov 0.43 1.54 1.46 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 1.07
dec 0.11 0.25 2.96 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 3.04

Catchment 18 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 27.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.00 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 0.90
feb 0.01 0.04 1.63 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 1.52
mar 0.00 0.35 1.49 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 1.29
apr 0.00 0.66 1.82 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 1.62
may 0.00 1.27 2.71 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 2.51
jun 0.05 1.12 4.50 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 4.35
jul 0.37 1.18 6.05 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 5.82
aug 0.87 1.54 14.27 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 14.53
sep 1.16 2.00 19.18 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 19.74
oct 0.86 1.92 14.15 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 14.41
nov 0.26 0.94 1.07 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 0.73
dec 0.07 0.15 3.04 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 2.98

Catchment 15 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 24.32 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.27 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 1.19
feb 0.01 0.04 1.63 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 1.53
mar 0.00 0.31 1.29 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 1.13
apr 0.00 0.58 1.62 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 1.45
may 0.00 1.12 2.51 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 2.35
jun 0.04 0.99 4.92 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 4.80
jul 0.33 1.04 12.12 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 11.94
aug 0.77 1.36 29.88 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 30.13
sep 1.03 1.76 40.49 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 41.00
oct 0.76 1.69 29.62 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 29.86
nov 0.23 0.83 4.98 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 4.69
dec 0.06 0.13 4.18 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 4.13

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 123

Table A4.7e: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects,
catchments 16, 19 and 14

Catchment 16 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 190.51 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.21 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.12
feb 0.07 0.28 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.02
mar 0.03 2.42 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
apr 0.01 4.56 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
may 0.02 8.77 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
jun 0.33 7.74 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.12
jul 2.58 8.15 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 2.26
aug 6.00 10.64 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.68
sep 8.05 13.82 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 7.72
oct 5.95 13.27 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.62
nov 1.80 6.49 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 1.48
dec 0.47 1.04 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.43

Catchment 19 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 121.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 2.30 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 2.37
feb 0.04 0.18 1.67 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 1.67
mar 0.02 1.54 1.67 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 1.58
apr 0.01 2.91 2.03 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 1.93
may 0.01 5.60 2.91 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 2.82
jun 0.21 4.94 3.94 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 4.05
jul 1.65 5.21 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 6.12
aug 3.83 6.80 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 8.30
sep 5.14 8.83 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 9.60
oct 3.80 8.47 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 8.27
nov 1.15 4.15 4.39 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 5.01
dec 0.30 0.66 3.09 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 3.35

Catchment 14 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 26.53 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.18 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 1.20
feb 0.01 0.04 0.84 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 0.84
mar 0.00 0.34 0.79 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.73
apr 0.00 0.64 0.97 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.91
may 0.00 1.22 1.41 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 1.35
jun 0.05 1.08 2.03 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 2.01
jul 0.36 1.14 3.06 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 3.06
aug 0.84 1.48 4.15 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 4.63
sep 1.12 1.92 4.80 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 5.57
oct 0.83 1.85 4.13 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 4.61
nov 0.25 0.90 2.50 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 2.40
dec 0.07 0.14 1.68 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 1.74

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 124

Table A4.7f: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects,
catchments 10, 12 and 4

Catchment 10 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 95.48 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.08 0.10 2.51 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 2.56
feb 0.03 0.14 2.40 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 2.40
mar 0.01 1.21 1.86 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 1.63
apr 0.01 2.29 2.36 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 2.12
may 0.01 4.40 3.70 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 3.46
jun 0.17 3.88 6.93 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 6.85
jul 1.29 4.09 17.26 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 17.84
aug 3.01 5.33 40.43 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 42.73
sep 4.03 6.93 54.29 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 57.61
oct 2.98 6.65 40.09 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 42.36
nov 0.90 3.25 8.57 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 8.76
dec 0.24 0.52 6.30 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 6.51

Catchment 12 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 7397 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.06 8.05 1.18 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 1.22
feb 0.03 10.73 0.84 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 0.84
mar 0.01 93.89 0.79 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.65
apr 0.00 177.05 0.97 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.82
may 0.01 340.68 1.41 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 1.26
jun 0.13 300.45 2.03 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 2.00
jul 1.00 316.54 3.06 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 3.16
aug 2.33 413.11 4.15 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 5.58
sep 3.12 536.51 4.80 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 7.03
oct 2.31 515.05 4.13 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 5.55
nov 0.70 252.16 2.50 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 2.31
dec 0.18 40.24 1.68 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 1.84

Catchment 4 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 120.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 3.78 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 3.88
feb 0.04 0.17 3.24 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 3.27
mar 0.02 1.53 2.28 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 2.10
apr 0.01 2.89 2.94 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 2.75
may 0.01 5.55 4.73 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 4.54
jun 0.21 4.90 8.85 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 8.86
jul 1.63 5.16 21.00 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 21.37
aug 3.80 6.73 48.31 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 50.84
sep 5.09 8.74 64.63 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 68.46
oct 3.77 8.39 47.91 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 50.40
nov 1.14 4.11 11.07 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 10.94
dec 0.30 0.66 8.35 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 8.64

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 125

Table A4.7g: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal and candidate sub-projects,
catchments 6, 22 and 7

Catchment 6 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 103.63 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.09 0.11 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
feb 0.04 0.15 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
mar 0.01 1.32 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
apr 0.01 2.48 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
may 0.01 4.77 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jun 0.18 4.21 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jul 1.40 4.43 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.01
aug 3.26 5.79 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.87
sep 4.38 7.52 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 2.99
oct 3.24 7.22 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.85
nov 0.98 3.53 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.00
dec 0.26 0.56 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00

Catchment 22 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 185.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.20 2.30 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 2.28
feb 0.06 0.27 1.67 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.55
mar 0.03 2.36 1.67 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.51
apr 0.01 4.44 2.03 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.87
may 0.02 8.55 2.91 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 2.75
jun 0.32 7.54 3.94 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 4.09
jul 2.52 7.95 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 6.38
aug 5.85 10.37 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 9.71
sep 7.84 13.47 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 11.71
oct 5.80 12.93 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 9.67
nov 1.76 6.33 4.39 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 5.01
dec 0.46 1.01 3.09 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 3.37

Catchment 7 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects channel included


Area (km2): 330.56 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.28 0.36 2.28 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 1.93
feb 0.11 0.48 1.55 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 1.03
mar 0.05 4.20 1.51 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 1.10
apr 0.02 7.91 1.87 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 1.42
may 0.03 15.22 2.75 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 2.32
jun 0.58 13.43 4.09 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 4.21
jul 4.48 14.15 6.38 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 9.83
aug 10.41 18.46 9.71 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 19.09
sep 13.96 23.98 11.71 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 24.63
oct 10.33 23.02 9.67 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 18.96
nov 3.13 11.27 5.01 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 7.11
dec 0.82 1.80 3.37 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 3.56

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 126

Table A4.8a: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change,
catchments 23, 25 and 26
.
Catchment 23 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change
Area (km2): 196.3 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.16 0.21 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.15
feb 0.06 0.28 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.06
mar 0.03 2.49 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.02
apr 0.01 4.70 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.01
may 0.00 9.04 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.00
jun 0.12 7.97 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.12
jul 2.02 8.40 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 2.02
aug 5.79 10.96 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 5.78
sep 7.91 14.24 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 7.91
oct 5.83 13.67 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 5.82
nov 1.68 6.69 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 1.68
dec 0.46 1.07 0.00 0.0002 0.0000 0.0014 0.46

Catchment 25 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 215.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.17 0.23 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.17
feb 0.07 0.31 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.07
mar 0.03 2.74 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.03
apr 0.01 5.16 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.01
may 0.00 9.93 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.00
jun 0.13 8.75 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.13
jul 2.22 9.22 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 2.22
aug 6.35 12.04 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.35
sep 8.68 15.63 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 8.68
oct 6.40 15.01 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 6.40
nov 1.85 7.35 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 1.85
dec 0.50 1.17 0.00 0.0001 0.0000 0.0003 0.50

Catchment 26 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 154.5 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.12 0.17 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.12
feb 0.05 0.22 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.05
mar 0.02 1.96 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.02
apr 0.01 3.70 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.01
may 0.00 7.12 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.00
jun 0.09 6.28 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.09
jul 1.59 6.61 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 1.59
aug 4.55 8.63 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.55
sep 6.23 11.21 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 6.23
oct 4.58 10.76 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 4.58
nov 1.32 5.27 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 1.32
dec 0.36 0.84 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.36

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 127

Table A4.8b: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change,
catchments 24, 8 and 2

Catchment 24 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 6.16 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.00 0.01 0.29 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.30
feb 0.00 0.01 0.12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.12
mar 0.00 0.08 0.05 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.05
apr 0.00 0.15 0.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.02
may 0.00 0.28 0.01 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.01
jun 0.00 0.25 0.22 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.23
jul 0.06 0.26 3.81 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.87
aug 0.18 0.34 10.91 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.09
sep 0.25 0.45 14.91 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15.16
oct 0.18 0.43 10.98 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 11.16
nov 0.05 0.21 3.17 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.22
dec 0.01 0.03 0.86 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.87

Catchment 8 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 155.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.12 0.17 0.45 0.0019 0.4000 0.0098 0.17
feb 0.05 0.23 0.18 0.0019 0.4000 0.0098 0.00
mar 0.02 1.98 0.07 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.00
apr 0.01 3.73 0.03 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.00
may 0.00 7.18 0.01 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.00
jun 0.09 6.33 0.34 0.0019 0.4210 0.0098 0.00
jul 1.60 6.67 5.89 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 0.18
aug 4.59 8.70 16.87 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 14.15
sep 6.28 11.30 23.07 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 22.03
oct 4.62 10.85 16.99 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 14.29
nov 1.34 5.31 4.91 0.0019 7.3060 0.0098 -1.08
dec 0.36 0.85 1.33 0.0019 0.4000 0.0098 1.28

Catchment 2 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 366.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.29 0.40 0.17 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.27
feb 0.12 0.53 0.00 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 0.00
mar 0.05 4.65 0.00 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
apr 0.02 8.77 0.00 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
may 0.01 16.88 0.00 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
jun 0.22 14.89 0.00 0.0137 0.2300 0.0603 0.00
jul 3.77 15.69 0.18 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 2.49
aug 10.80 20.47 14.15 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 23.49
sep 14.77 26.59 22.03 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 35.33
oct 10.88 25.52 14.29 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 23.71
nov 3.14 12.50 -1.08 0.0137 1.3900 0.0603 0.60
dec 0.85 1.99 1.28 0.0137 0.1100 0.0603 1.95

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 128

Table A4.8c: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change,
catchments 1, 17 and 21

Catchment 1 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 184.8 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.15 0.20 0.27 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.42
feb 0.06 0.27 0.00 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 0.05
mar 0.02 2.35 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
apr 0.01 4.42 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
may 0.00 8.51 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
jun 0.11 7.51 0.00 0.0012 0.1100 0.0047 0.00
jul 1.90 7.91 2.49 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 3.51
aug 5.45 10.32 23.49 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 28.06
sep 7.45 13.40 35.33 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 41.90
oct 5.48 12.87 23.71 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 28.31
nov 1.58 6.30 0.60 0.0012 0.8700 0.0047 1.31
dec 0.43 1.01 1.95 0.0012 0.0000 0.0047 2.37

Catchment 17 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 503.89 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.40 0.55 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.35
feb 0.16 0.73 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 0.11
mar 0.06 6.40 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
apr 0.03 12.06 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
may 0.01 23.21 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
jun 0.30 20.47 0.00 0.0036 0.2840 0.0199 0.00
jul 5.19 21.56 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 4.66
aug 14.85 28.14 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 14.32
sep 20.30 36.55 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 19.77
oct 14.95 35.09 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 14.42
nov 4.32 17.18 0.00 0.0036 0.5070 0.0199 3.79
dec 1.17 2.74 0.00 0.0036 0.0300 0.0199 1.12

Catchment 21 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 412.57 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.33 0.45 0.80 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 0.97
feb 0.13 0.60 1.67 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 1.64
mar 0.05 5.24 1.67 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 1.56
apr 0.02 9.87 2.03 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 1.90
may 0.01 19.00 2.91 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 2.76
jun 0.25 16.76 3.94 0.0063 0.1120 0.0394 4.04
jul 4.25 17.66 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 4.91
aug 12.16 23.04 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 12.82
sep 16.62 29.92 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 17.29
oct 12.24 28.73 5.00 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 12.91
nov 3.54 14.06 1.89 0.0063 4.2910 0.0394 1.09
dec 0.96 2.24 2.09 0.0063 0.1110 0.0394 2.89

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 129

Table A4.8d: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change,
catchments 20, 18 and 15

Catchment 20 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 45.26 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.04 0.05 0.97 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 0.98
feb 0.01 0.07 1.64 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 1.62
mar 0.01 0.57 1.56 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 1.48
apr 0.00 1.08 1.90 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 1.81
may 0.00 2.08 2.76 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 2.68
jun 0.03 1.84 4.04 0.0008 0.0790 0.0049 3.98
jul 0.47 1.94 4.91 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 4.56
aug 1.33 2.53 12.82 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 13.34
sep 1.82 3.28 17.29 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 18.29
oct 1.34 3.15 12.91 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 13.43
nov 0.39 1.54 1.09 0.0008 0.8130 0.0049 0.66
dec 0.11 0.25 2.89 0.0008 0.0260 0.0049 2.97

Catchment 18 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 27.52 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 0.98 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 0.87
feb 0.01 0.04 1.62 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 1.50
mar 0.00 0.35 1.48 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 1.29
apr 0.00 0.66 1.81 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 1.62
may 0.00 1.27 2.68 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 2.48
jun 0.02 1.12 3.98 0.0010 0.1910 0.0045 3.80
jul 0.28 1.18 4.56 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 4.24
aug 0.81 1.54 13.34 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 13.55
sep 1.11 2.00 18.29 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 18.80
oct 0.82 1.92 13.43 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 13.65
nov 0.24 0.94 0.66 0.0010 0.5940 0.0045 0.29
dec 0.06 0.15 2.97 0.0010 0.1230 0.0045 2.90

Catchment 15 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 24.32 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.22 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 1.13
feb 0.01 0.04 1.61 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 1.51
mar 0.00 0.31 1.29 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 1.12
apr 0.00 0.58 1.62 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 1.45
may 0.00 1.12 2.48 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 2.31
jun 0.01 0.99 3.79 0.0008 0.1640 0.0039 3.64
jul 0.25 1.04 8.90 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 8.63
aug 0.72 1.36 27.87 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 28.07
sep 0.98 1.76 38.57 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 39.04
oct 0.72 1.69 28.07 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 28.28
nov 0.21 0.83 4.08 0.0008 0.5100 0.0039 3.78
dec 0.06 0.13 4.02 0.0008 0.1030 0.0039 3.97

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 130

Table A4.8e: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change,
catchments 16,19 and 14

Catchment 16 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 190.51 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.15 0.21 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.11
feb 0.06 0.28 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.02
mar 0.02 2.42 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
apr 0.01 4.56 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
may 0.00 8.77 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
jun 0.11 7.74 0.00 0.0058 0.1770 0.0316 0.00
jul 1.96 8.15 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 1.63
aug 5.62 10.64 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.29
sep 7.68 13.82 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 7.35
oct 5.65 13.27 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 5.33
nov 1.63 6.49 0.00 0.0058 0.2890 0.0316 1.31
dec 0.44 1.04 0.00 0.0058 0.0060 0.0316 0.40

Catchment 19 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 121.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 2.30 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 2.36
feb 0.04 0.18 1.67 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 1.67
mar 0.02 1.54 1.67 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 1.58
apr 0.01 2.91 2.03 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 1.93
may 0.00 5.60 2.91 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 2.81
jun 0.07 4.94 3.94 0.0040 0.0760 0.0264 3.91
jul 1.25 5.21 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 5.72
aug 3.59 6.80 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 8.05
sep 4.90 8.83 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 9.37
oct 3.61 8.47 5.00 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 8.08
nov 1.04 4.15 4.39 0.0040 0.5030 0.0264 4.90
dec 0.28 0.66 3.09 0.0040 0.0070 0.0264 3.33

Catchment 14 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 26.53 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.02 0.03 1.18 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 1.20
feb 0.01 0.04 0.83 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 0.84
mar 0.00 0.34 0.79 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.73
apr 0.00 0.64 0.97 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 0.91
may 0.00 1.22 1.40 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 1.35
jun 0.02 1.08 1.96 0.0004 0.0560 0.0023 1.91
jul 0.27 1.14 2.86 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 2.78
aug 0.78 1.48 4.03 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 4.45
sep 1.07 1.92 4.68 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 5.40
oct 0.79 1.85 4.04 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 4.47
nov 0.23 0.90 2.45 0.0004 0.3540 0.0023 2.32
dec 0.06 0.14 1.67 0.0004 0.0000 0.0023 1.73

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 131

Table A4.8f: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate sub-projects and climate change,
catchments 10, 12 and 4

Catchment 10 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 95.48 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.08 0.10 2.44 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 2.48
feb 0.03 0.14 2.37 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 2.37
mar 0.01 1.21 1.86 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 1.63
apr 0.00 2.29 2.36 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 2.12
may 0.00 4.40 3.66 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 3.42
jun 0.06 3.88 5.55 0.0016 0.2330 0.0091 5.37
jul 0.98 4.09 13.05 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 13.31
aug 2.81 5.33 37.81 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 39.91
sep 3.85 6.93 51.78 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 54.92
oct 2.83 6.65 38.07 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 40.19
nov 0.82 3.25 7.40 0.0016 0.7040 0.0091 7.51
dec 0.22 0.52 6.09 0.0016 0.0190 0.0091 6.29

Catchment 12 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 7397 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.06 8.05 1.18 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 1.22
feb 0.02 10.73 0.83 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 0.84
mar 0.01 93.89 0.79 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.65
apr 0.00 177.05 0.97 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 0.82
may 0.00 340.68 1.40 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 1.25
jun 0.04 300.45 1.96 0.0014 0.1420 0.0075 1.85
jul 0.76 316.54 2.86 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 2.72
aug 2.18 413.11 4.03 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 5.31
sep 2.98 536.51 4.68 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 6.77
oct 2.20 515.05 4.04 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 5.34
nov 0.63 252.16 2.45 0.0014 0.8880 0.0075 2.19
dec 0.17 40.24 1.67 0.0014 0.0130 0.0075 1.82

Catchment 4 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 120.54 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.10 0.13 3.70 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 3.79
feb 0.04 0.17 3.21 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 3.24
mar 0.02 1.53 2.27 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 2.09
apr 0.01 2.89 2.94 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 2.75
may 0.00 5.55 4.67 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 4.47
jun 0.07 4.90 7.22 0.0014 0.1910 0.0073 7.09
jul 1.24 5.16 16.04 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 16.01
aug 3.55 6.73 45.22 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 47.51
sep 4.86 8.74 61.69 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 65.27
oct 3.58 8.39 45.53 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 47.84
nov 1.03 4.11 9.69 0.0014 1.2600 0.0073 9.46
dec 0.28 0.66 8.10 0.0014 0.0000 0.0073 8.38

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 132

Table A4.8g: Water balance with Damnak Ampil Canal, candidate subprojects and climate change,
catchments 6, 22 and 7

Catchment 6 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 103.63 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.08 0.11 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
feb 0.03 0.15 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00
mar 0.01 1.32 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
apr 0.01 2.48 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
may 0.00 4.77 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jun 0.06 4.21 0.00 0.0078 0.3240 0.0473 0.00
jul 1.07 4.43 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.00
aug 3.05 5.79 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.66
sep 4.18 7.52 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 2.78
oct 3.08 7.22 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 1.68
nov 0.89 3.53 0.00 0.0078 1.3360 0.0473 0.00
dec 0.24 0.56 0.00 0.0078 0.2010 0.0473 0.00

Catchment 22 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 185.68 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.15 0.20 2.30 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 2.27
feb 0.06 0.27 1.67 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.55
mar 0.02 2.36 1.67 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.51
apr 0.01 4.44 2.03 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 1.86
may 0.00 8.55 2.91 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 2.74
jun 0.11 7.54 3.94 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 3.88
jul 1.91 7.95 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 5.78
aug 5.47 10.37 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 9.34
sep 7.48 13.47 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 11.35
oct 5.51 12.93 5.00 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 9.37
nov 1.59 6.33 4.39 0.0074 1.0840 0.0436 4.85
dec 0.43 1.01 3.09 0.0074 0.1270 0.0436 3.34

Catchment 7 Damnak Ampil/Candidate projects and climate change


Area (km2): 330.56 Water use
Runoff Rainfall Inflow from Domestic Irrigation Livestock Outflow
m3/s m3/s upstream m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s
jan 0.26 0.36 2.27 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 1.90
feb 0.11 0.48 1.55 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 1.02
mar 0.04 4.20 1.51 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 1.10
apr 0.02 7.91 1.86 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 1.42
may 0.01 15.22 2.74 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 2.28
jun 0.20 13.43 3.88 0.0068 0.4160 0.0359 3.62
jul 3.40 14.15 5.78 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 8.15
aug 9.74 18.46 9.34 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 18.05
sep 13.32 23.98 11.35 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 23.63
oct 9.81 23.02 9.37 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 18.15
nov 2.83 11.27 4.85 0.0068 0.9900 0.0359 6.65
dec 0.77 1.80 3.34 0.0068 0.5900 0.0359 3.48

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 133

Appendix 5: Water quality simulations

A5.1 General
MIKE Basin set-up
A MIKE Basin Water Quality model was setup for the Dauntri study area based on the water balance.
The water balance is based on down stream discharges calculated from the water level measurements
and Q/h relations which are available for 1998 – 2005. Calculated discharges have been translated
into area specific runoffs as input for the MIKE Basin model.

Water quality settings


For water quality simulations the following input is needed apart from catchment associated pollutant
sources described earlier:
• Pollutant residence time in river reaches calculated using Mannings equation
• Water quality rate constants
• Temperature in river water
• Concentration of pollutants in base-flow
• Pollutant residence time
• Pollutant residence time in river reaches is calculated as a function of river discharge using
Mannings equation:
• River width: 10 m - applied for all branches
• River Slope: calculated average from digital elevation model
• Manning number: 25
• River discharge: from MIKE Basin water balance calculation

Water quality rate constants


The following standard decay process rates were applied:
BOD decay 0.1 day-1
Denitrification 0.2 day-1
Nitrification 0.2 day-1
P retention 0.1 day-1
N/BOD 0.1

A constant water temperature of 27 degrees Celsius was applied to correct for temperature dependent
processes.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 134

Base-flow concentrations
Base-flow concentrations are most often significanty lower than concentration of pollutants in surface
or drainage runoff due to much longer residence time in the groundwater and a significant retention of
pollutants. The base-flow concentrations applied were:
BOD: 0.1 mg/l
NO3: 0.5 mg/l
NH4 0.05 mg/l
TP: 0.01 mg/l
Ecoli: 0

Preliminary calibration
Targets (= average concentration levels) for simulated concentrations of water quality components:
BOD 1 mg/l
NO3 0.5 – 1 mg/l
NH4 0.1 – 0.5 mg/l
TP 0.01-0.05
Ecoli (no target available)

Results are shown below before and after the planned irrigation development.

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 135

A5.2 Present conditions


Figure A5.1: Average concentration of BOD for 2000 and 2001

Figure A5.2: Maximum concentration of BOD for 2000 and 2001

Please note: Not same scale as the above figure

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 136

Figure A5.3: Average concentrations of NH4 for 2000 and 2001

Figure A5.4: Maximum concentrations of NH4 for 2000 and 2001

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 137

Figure A5.5: Average concentrations of NO3 for 2000 and 2001

Figure A5.6: Maximum concentrations of NO3 for 2000 and 2001

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 138

Figure A5.7: Average concentrations of Total-phosphorus for 2000 and 2001

Figure A5.8: Maximum concentrations of Total-phosphorus for 2000 and 2001

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 139

A5.3 Implications of irrigation development


Below is shown the simulated concentrations of BOD, ammonium, nitrate and total
phosphorus in the different stretches of the rivers in the catchment.

Figure A5.9: Average concentration of BOD for the candidate sub-projects

Figure A5.10: Maximum concentration of BOD for the candidate sub-projects

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 140

Please note: Not same scale as the above figure

Figure A5.11: Difference in BOD concentrations between the candidate sub-projects


and the present situation

Figure A5.12: Average concentrations of NH4 for the candidate sub-projects

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 141

Figure A5.13: Maximum concentrations of NH4 for the candidate sub-projects

Figure A5.14: Difference in NH4 concentrations between the candidate sub-projects


and the present situation

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 142

Figure A5.15: Average concentrations of NO3 for the candidate sub-projects

Figure A5.16: Maximum concentrations of NO3 for the candidate sub-projects

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 143

Figure A5.17: Difference in NO3 concentrations between the candidate sub-projects


and the present situation

Figure A5.18: Average concentrations of total-phosphorus for the candidate sub-


projects

Version 2
North West Irrigation Sector Project
River basin and water use studies, Package 2 144

Figure A5.19: Maximum concentrations of total-phosphorus for the candidate sub-


projects

Figure A5.20: Difference in total-phosphorus concentrations between the candidate


sub-projects and the present situation

Version 2
Project Working Team of River Basin Study-Package 2
Dr. Tue Kell Nielsen Team Leader
Mr. Toch Sophon Co Team Leader
Mr. Henrik Garsdal Hydrology Expert
Mr. Jens Erik Lyngby Water Quality Expert
Mr. Teang Sokhom GIS and Remote Sensing Specialist
Mr. Prum Peurn Water Use and Water Balance Specialist
Ms. Petrina Rowcroft Environmental Economic Expert
Ms. Sorn Somoline Socio-Economic Specialist
Mr. Nay Sophon Community Development Specialist

You might also like